Tuohy 2:49.4 1k at ocean breeze

We know she is not an 800 runner. She is best 3000+. The point is that she is racing shorter races, and must be doing some speed work. Which is an important (but sometimes neglected) part of training for distance runners. Nobody thinks she will dominate at 600m or 1000m.

She ran unchallenged, won by 4 seconds and came back in the 600 a few hours later. We don't know what type of training she has been doing in December. This might have been her anaerobic capacity training session for the week.

Words Cant Describe wrote:

My 1600 PR is 4:20. Tuohy's 1k race is equivalent to me running 2:42.5. I never ran that slow. Ever. My worst race was 2:35. My best is 2:30. I really don't see how anyone can spin this to make it look like it was a good race for her.

the key point here is nobody cares what your times are....it doesn't matter.

Tuohy is running these shorter distances obviously to work on her shorter distances. I'm pretty sure she is not looking to compete nationally in an 800m or a 1k race. And what better way to work on shorter distances than to train and race at shorter distances.

It's early season, and she is working on other aspects of her running than the pure distance. Good for her and her coaches.

I'm not sure why this appears to be rocket science to some people.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

On the slow side for a 4:14 1500m runner

So it's this type of comment, and the other boneheaded one before where someone is listing their own 1600 m times, that are simply useless.

No, it's not slow for a 4:14 1500m runner. It's an early season run...what does it matter what her time was. This is not her primary race, nor is it mid season. She ran a good race and is working on peaking at longer distances in late spring.

Are you saying that a 4:14 runner should be running at a 4:14 pace all year long??

Words Cant Describe wrote:

My 1600 PR is 4:20. Tuohy's 1k race is equivalent to me running 2:42.5. I never ran that slow. Ever. My worst race was 2:35. My best is 2:30. I really don't see how anyone can spin this to make it look like it was a good race for her.

It's NOT a bad race taking into consideration her unique muscle fiber setup. She has a VERY high % of ST fibers in her legs, similar to Hasay. These girls don't have wheels (genetically), so running a 1k time that is worse than her 1500 or 5k time is perfectly fine.

For her abilities as a runner, her training and most importantly, genetics/muscle fiber setup it was a good race. That's what people don't understand, they put the best race of a runner into a Daniel's calculator or something and think that all these times need to be hit. Nonsense, no individualization!

Now for you, you seem to be a fast-twitch monster, maybe a 400/800 guy if you can run in the 51-52s range. Your 2:30 1k indicates well below 2 flat for an 800m which is far better than your 4:20. OR it could also be you are just a somewhat talented runner that's aerobically underdeveloped. But please stop criticizing Tuohy for running a great 1k to her unique abilities as runner.

Cain ran in the 53 in the 400 m--Touhy probably around 59/60 range based on 200 m speed

Jedsdead wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

On the slow side for a 4:14 1500m runner

So it's this type of comment, and the other boneheaded one before where someone is listing their own 1600 m times, that are simply useless.

No, it's not slow for a 4:14 1500m runner. It's an early season run...what does it matter what her time was. This is not her primary race, nor is it mid season. She ran a good race and is working on peaking at longer distances in late spring.

Are you saying that a 4:14 runner should be running at a 4:14 pace all year long??

Saying "it doesn't matter what she runs" and "it's slow" are not mutually exclusive.

It was not a good race.

I believe Klosterhalfen showed exceptional progress between 17 and 20 years for 800 m and not the norm. More typically, elite women would shave a few seconds. Mary Decker Slaney was running around 2:01 at 14/15 years and knocking off several seconds at her peak performance level. I would expect Touhy to improve but dropping down from 2:09 to 2:00 or faster seems unlikely.

JustRunBaby wrote:

Jedsdead wrote:

So it's this type of comment, and the other boneheaded one before where someone is listing their own 1600 m times, that are simply useless.

No, it's not slow for a 4:14 1500m runner. It's an early season run...what does it matter what her time was. This is not her primary race, nor is it mid season. She ran a good race and is working on peaking at longer distances in late spring.

Are you saying that a 4:14 runner should be running at a 4:14 pace all year long??

Saying "it doesn't matter what she runs" and "it's slow" are not mutually exclusive.

It was not a good race.

it is the beginning of the Indoor season, she ran a distance NOT her specialty, she won, she set best time in the country to that point....

And your claim is that his was not a good race??

Glad to see that people think that these athletes should be running PR's every race they run.

That is not completely accurate-Kate Murphy from Lake Braddock Virginia also ran faster converted 4:07 in 1500 meters several years ago

Actually the 8:40 3200 m that both Nico Young and Cole Sprout ran --are about as fast as any high school runner as ever run in the US considering they were juniors at the time.

Yeah--I got blasted for suggesting that Starliper and Dudek had a reasonable chance at beating Touhy had she decided to run the most recent Foot Locker. To be sure Touhy is an aerobic workhorse but these other runners seem to have superior speed and turnover to her so it is difficult to predict hypothetical outcomes when there is a lot of uncontrolled variability.

kev2 wrote:

I believe Klosterhalfen showed exceptional progress between 17 and 20 years for 800 m and not the norm. More typically, elite women would shave a few seconds. Mary Decker Slaney was running around 2:01 at 14/15 years and knocking off several seconds at her peak performance level. I would expect Touhy to improve but dropping down from 2:09 to 2:00 or faster seems unlikely.

KoKo at 17 was good, but not exceptional (#3 at 800, #1 at 1500 and #3 at 3000 in that year's national U18 list).

KoKo at 20 was mindblowing (youngest women ever to run sub 2/4/15).

She lowered her PBs by 7.5s (800), 21s (1500) and 70s (3k) in that timespan.

Different trajectories, hard to compare these two.

For Tuohy's 1k performance: If she can close a 3k or even 5k in that time, she'll be a medal contender in Nairobi (if she plans to go to the U20 worlds this year).

211.5 anchoring 4x800 at Millrose trials today with NR losing by 9 seconds (17 seconds down after 3 legs).

I don't know what genius thinks she should be in 4:14 1500 shape in the first week of January.

kev2 wrote:

Yeah--I got blasted for suggesting that Starliper and Dudek had a reasonable chance at beating Touhy had she decided to run the most recent Foot Locker. To be sure Touhy is an aerobic workhorse but these other runners seem to have superior speed and turnover to her so it is difficult to predict hypothetical outcomes when there is a lot of uncontrolled variability.

Curious, why do you say Dudek or Starliper have superior speed or turnover than Tuohy?

Jedsdead wrote:

JustRunBaby wrote:

Saying "it doesn't matter what she runs" and "it's slow" are not mutually exclusive.

It was not a good race.

it is the beginning of the Indoor season, she ran a distance NOT her specialty, she won, she set best time in the country to that point....

And your claim is that his was not a good race??

Glad to see that people think that these athletes should be running PR's every race they run.

Correct. It was not a good race. You fanboys and pollyannas need to justify everything as a good race. It wasn't. Not every race needs to be "good" and this one wasn't, it was crappy. 2:49 converts to 2:09 and 4:51 1600m. Those are crappy times for her.

And yet Tuohy keeps erasing her records. Strange. LOL. And generally without running in pro races. The 2 mile record is one she should gun for.

The stupidity and know-it-all-ism that Tuohy brings out is always entertaining. Especially from the crowd that has been predicting doom since she was a freshman.

JustRunBaby wrote:

Jedsdead wrote:

it is the beginning of the Indoor season, she ran a distance NOT her specialty, she won, she set best time in the country to that point....

And your claim is that his was not a good race??

Glad to see that people think that these athletes should be running PR's every race they run.

Correct. It was not a good race. You fanboys and pollyannas need to justify everything as a good race. It wasn't. Not every race needs to be "good" and this one wasn't, it was crappy. 2:49 converts to 2:09 and 4:51 1600m. Those are crappy times for her.

So here is where I would say that you really don't understand anything about racing. You're saying Tuohys 2:49 1k is not a good first race of the season....because you want to convert this time to an 800m and 1600 m race time instead. First of all, that is a moronic thing to do in the first place. She was running a 1k race...not an 800 m nor a 1600 m race, How do you know how she would have adjusted if she was running a different distance.

Second, even if we take your conversions at face value. Tuohys current PR for 800m indoors is 2:11. So 2:09 is below her PR of 2:12 Indoors. That would make it a very good race for her...wouldn't you say??

Her best time at 1600 is 4:45. Your saying this race would convert to 4:51. So 6 seconds of her best time...and this is a bad race?

Could you please reference any athlete....ANY athlete...who at a 1600m distance, does not run a few races at the beginning of the year that is at least 6sec off their PR. Please, go ahead!!

This has nothing to do with being a fanboy of Tuohy...I follow several other runners much closer than her...but I am amazed when ignorant people feel the need to slam everything she does.

So please, why don't you enlighten the board as to which athletes run EVERY race near their top time. And while your at it, why don't you let us know what times would be acceptable for her.