True? Radcliffe says she ran all of her marathons "flat out", says Kipchoge hasn't done that so his career will be longer

Radcliffe is an insecure narcissist? Who knew?

The doping cheater radcliffe needs to be in prison.

She is right in a way, his win percentage is so much higher than hers was so in a lot of those wins maybe he only ended up running at 98-99% of max ability. Not his fault that he's better than she was. Also, his form from a bio-mechanical standpoint has got to be considered vastly superior to Paula's form. That would help a lot as far as prolonging his career on the roads.

40 seems to be a good age estimate. Now way an "18-year-old" runs down el mf'ing G in the home stretch of a fast 5000. Also, just look at the dude. Lifefuel for master's runners.

Kipchoge has bouncy clown shoes and he's been surrounded by the typical European sketchballs his entire career. You'd have to be extremely naive to think he's clean. 2:08 PR for an all-natural Asics-wearing Kipchoge.

You can go away now, Paula. In fact, take your husband with you. Your cards have been overplayed, and the ruse is up.

another perspective wrote:

She is right in a way, his win percentage is so much higher than hers was so in a lot of those wins maybe he only ended up running at 98-99% of max ability. Not his fault that he's better than she was. Also, his form from a bio-mechanical standpoint has got to be considered vastly superior to Paula's form. That would help a lot as far as prolonging his career on the roads.

Ha, true.

Screw Paula.

Expiration date wrote:

You can go away now, Paula. In fact, take your husband with you. Your cards have been overplayed, and the ruse is up.

Bingo.

e.g.

In conclusion:

1) Lady Paula is really boring... again.

2) Go Bre!!!!!!!!!!!!! . . . Again!!! . . .

Or, more likely, she got off the source after 2005, when she was caught for the 2nd time, and that's why she ran 7 minutes slower post-2005.

"I don't know how old he genuinely is."

Isn't this an extremely rude and disrespectful comment? He's 34.

No doorbell wrote:

Or, more likely, she got off the source after 2005, when she was caught for the 2nd time, and that's why she ran 7 minutes slower post-2005.

Very intriguing:

2015 2:36:55 London (GBR) 26 APR 2015

2011 2:23:46 Berlin (GER) 25 SEP 2011

2009 2:29:27 New York, NY (USA) 01 NOV 2009

2008 2:23:56 New York, NY (USA) 02 NOV 2008

2007 2:23:09 New York, NY (USA) 04 NOV 2007

2005 2:17:42 London (GBR) 17 APR 2005

2004 2:23:10 New York, NY (USA) 07 NOV 2004

2003 2:15:25 London (GBR) 13 APR 2003

2002 2:17:18 Chicago, IL (USA) 13 OCT 2002

I look at this posts out of morbid curiosity, and I continue to be genuinely surprised by the sinister, malicious comments of IP-address cowards, who are in all likelihood far too slow; too bitter; too partisan; and too narcissistic to realise how those outside your small fraternity read you.

Have you really nothing interesting to contribute? No fibre of intellect and reasoned comment to share? You think you are autonomous, free-thinking commenters, when you're really duped into peddling the discourse of doping that was created by the media and pundits to make their contributions 'valid'. You, not the few, who have actually been caught ruin the sport.

This should be a sticky.

LDoc wrote:

I look at this posts out of morbid curiosity, and I continue to be genuinely surprised by the sinister, malicious comments of IP-address cowards, who are in all likelihood far too slow; too bitter; too partisan; and too narcissistic to realise how those outside your small fraternity read you.

Have you really nothing interesting to contribute? No fibre of intellect and reasoned comment to share? You think you are autonomous, free-thinking commenters, when you're really duped into peddling the discourse of doping that was created by the media and pundits to make their contributions 'valid'. You, not the few, who have actually been caught ruin the sport.

This should be a sticky.

LDoc wrote:

I look at this posts out of morbid curiosity, and I continue to be genuinely surprised by the sinister, malicious comments of IP-address cowards, who are in all likelihood far too slow; too bitter; too partisan; and too narcissistic to realise how those outside your small fraternity read you.

Have you really nothing interesting to contribute? No fibre of intellect and reasoned comment to share? You think you are autonomous, free-thinking commenters, when you're really duped into peddling the discourse of doping that was created by the media and pundits to make their contributions 'valid'. You, not the few, who have actually been caught ruin the sport.

This should be a sticky.

And your IP address is...?

london ftw... wrote:

"I don't know how old he genuinely is."

Isn't this an extremely rude and disrespectful comment? He's 34.

Paula's eating crow this morning. Buying into the meme, rumour that Kipchoge is not the age he claims. He's 34. How could he be so consistent and good if he were 40!!! Course record! We've got many more years of Kipchoge dominance.

Too juiced to lose wrote:

No doorbell wrote:

Or, more likely, she got off the source after 2005, when she was caught for the 2nd time, and that's why she ran 7 minutes slower post-2005.

Very intriguing:

2015 2:36:55 London (GBR) 26 APR 2015

2011 2:23:46 Berlin (GER) 25 SEP 2011

2009 2:29:27 New York, NY (USA) 01 NOV 2009

2008 2:23:56 New York, NY (USA) 02 NOV 2008

2007 2:23:09 New York, NY (USA) 04 NOV 2007

2005 2:17:42 London (GBR) 17 APR 2005

2004 2:23:10 New York, NY (USA) 07 NOV 2004

2003 2:15:25 London (GBR) 13 APR 2003

2002 2:17:18 Chicago, IL (USA) 13 OCT 2002

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/great-britain-ni/paula-radcliffe-62914

Lol - that usually gets deleted by you-know-who when I post that.

london ftw... wrote:

"I don't know how old he genuinely is."

Isn't this an extremely rude and disrespectful comment? He's 34.

He’s definitely not 34, probably closer to 40.