Must be tough wrote:
So Nick is posting in letsrun now with his downtime? Sad.
Where have you been? Nick has been posting on Letsrun for years despite his claims.
Must be tough wrote:
So Nick is posting in letsrun now with his downtime? Sad.
Where have you been? Nick has been posting on Letsrun for years despite his claims.
eswallace wrote:
He then says he ran 1:45 clean, which seems a little odd given his 1:42 PR.
He had sex before the 1:42 and didn't have time to shower in between.
That makes sense, but his conclusion goes the opposite direction.
The logical conclusion is that Rudisha, being much more talented for the 800, can easily run more than 2 seconds faster than Symmonds without drugs, and probably 4 seconds faster. Anyone with a brain can see that's the cause.
Therefore, how exactly does he conclude from that premise that some people are dirty, unless he's saying that HE had to be doping, to get that close to Rudisha.
Must be tough wrote:
One of the Greats wrote:Nick Symmonds is one of those athletes that comes along only once a generation. Not for his barn burning speed (though, he is one of the fastest Americans ever), but for the impact he left on the sport. I have friends who know nothing about running, but know who Nick Symmonds is and what he has done for track and field.
If this is, in fact, Nick's last run at the USA championships, I think we should really soak it in and appreciate what a great ambassador for USA running he has been.
So Nick is posting in letsrun now with his downtime? Sad.
Let's not pretend that he doesn't read these boards every day, or that he doesn't monitor the internet for coverage of himself.
This thread will be tweeted about.
You're a bunch of angry losers. I would NEVER post here.
One of the Greats wrote:
I have friends who know nothing about running, but know who Nick Symmonds is and what he has done for track and field.
That's a little hard to believe. Everyone knows letsrun posters don't have any friends.
The argument that "People who don't even care about running know who Symmonds is" is why I think he has to go.
So if they are only aware of Symmond's opinon on teh state of track, they must feel like it is completely pointless to watch, because maybe some percentage of runners is cheating, but it could be that they all are or none are. The important thing is: DON'T WATCH TRACK!
There is so much competitive drama and a truly beautiful sport, but Nick would rather we all go fishing or something.
He comes across as a real bad team mate and major princess in the new WOW and this interview. I was never a fan of NS and the media he's been putting out leading into the trials isn't making him look good.
He's saying that with his non-perfect body type he can run 1:42 clean. Rudisha has a much more perfect body type for the 800, therefor it would make sense that he can run a couple seconds faster than Nick without drugs. However, there are other athletes that don't have the same near-perfect body type that Rudisha has that have run as fast or faster than Nick. He is insinuating that those athletes have doped.
How thick are you guys? It obviously is a typo. Like him, or anybody for that matter, would admit to doping so nonchalantly.
Nick is probably one of the few who has run 1:42 clean. He had a tremendous career and we should be praising him.
So tired of Nick Symmonds. He is doing a great job of keeping his name in the press, but it sure seems like every article I see with his name attached, it's him complaining about something. He's like the Donald Trump of running.
GoAway wrote:
So tired of Nick Symmonds. He is doing a great job of keeping his name in the press, but it sure seems like every article I see with his name attached, it's him complaining about something. He's like the Donald Trump of running.
So few haters, so much posting, trying to make it look like there are so many of you. You are wasting your time trying to influence people- well, if you get paid to do this, I guess it isn't a total waste of your time.
nova wrote:
He's saying that with his non-perfect body type he can run 1:42 clean. Rudisha has a much more perfect body type for the 800, therefor it would make sense that he can run a couple seconds faster than Nick without drugs. However, there are other athletes that don't have the same near-perfect body type that Rudisha has that have run as fast or faster than Nick. He is insinuating that those athletes have doped.
No he isn't...
eswallace wrote:
Its strange to consider how heavy Symmonds is, especially when most elites are doing everything they can to stay as lean as possible. It would be an interesting experiment to see what he could do over a season if he were to drop down to like 145.
Did you not read the above post?
eswallace wrote:
http://running.competitor.com/2016/06/interviews/qa-nick-symmonds-on-the-olympics-doping-parties_152296Read this interview from competitor with Nick Symmonds. Talks about the olympics, doping and the life of elite athletes. He then says he ran 1:45 clean, which seems a little odd given his 1:42 PR.
As usual, the LR crowd, a bunch of no-talents and never-will-be successful toadies are reading too much into a statement from a successful competitor. It would be the same as Rupp stating he's a skinny white kid who managed to run sub 4 clean.
What a pack of idiots.
Good laugh from above wrote:
eswallace wrote:http://running.competitor.com/2016/06/interviews/qa-nick-symmonds-on-the-olympics-doping-parties_152296Read this interview from competitor with Nick Symmonds. Talks about the olympics, doping and the life of elite athletes. He then says he ran 1:45 clean, which seems a little odd given his 1:42 PR.
As usual, the LR crowd, a bunch of no-talents and never-will-be successful toadies are reading too much into a statement from a successful competitor. It would be the same as Rupp stating he's a skinny white kid who managed to run sub 4 clean.
What a pack of idiots.
It's different, because Symmonds is quoted as stating a specific number that is not his PR.
In your example, you said "sub-4," which would be completely accurate if stated by Galen Rupp.
That's why it's different. And the concern by LRC-ers stems from a genuine concern for accuracy, which is an important thing.
Article changed it to 1:43. Still wrong though lol
gdeegz wrote:
Article changed it to 1:43. Still wrong though lol
But I think it does almost certainly prove that it was just a typo.
/thread?
Read this interview from competitor with Nick Symmonds. Talks about the olympics, doping and the life of elite athletes. He then says he ran 1:45 clean, which seems a little odd given his 1:42 PR.
Nick has clarified this was a typo tweeting
This is a typo. I said "1.42.95 clean". Been running pro for 10 yrs, only PED I use is Run Gum. @RunGum#CleanSporthttps://t.co/gqAXTVuCXU
— Nick Symmonds (@NickSymmonds)
June 29, 2016
GoAway wrote:
So tired of Nick Symmonds. He is doing a great job of keeping his name in the press, but it sure seems like every article I see with his name attached, it's him complaining about something. He's like the Donald Trump of running.