finallyransub17 wrote:
https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=Ryan%20Hall
I don't doubt that most Pros who are past their prime are upset by the Vaporfly (and variants) largely because they didn't get to race in them.
Why are we supposed to care what a professional weightlifter says about running?
Cuckoldistan wrote:
professional weightlifter
This chump benches with his butt off the bench, 0 reps
In unrelated news, Sarah Hall is sponsored by Asics.
I find a 2:06 on a record eligible course more inspiring than a 2:04 on a net downhill wind tunnel course.
Putting this here so I can take note when an American runs a 2:09 again.
(A time that's over 7 minutes slower than the WR.)
brogan1 wrote:
I find a 2:06 on a record eligible course more inspiring than a 2:04 on a net downhill wind tunnel course.
Bet he could have run 2:04 or even 2:03 high that 2:06 day in VFs. He went out in 2:04-low pace through 25k and gradually slowed to his 2:06.
I don't think they care. I get 2016 trials and maybe Olympics were a bit of a thing, but generally pros were competing against people with the same equipment. Only training mattered. If you think they had this much time to waste you don't know what a 'pro' is.
Like Rojo or Wejo says I never remember, what was once considered a 2:12 is now considered a 2:10. If you once valued a 2:09 now you value a 2:07 etc. It's just a linear thing.
Nobody is saying I wish I had better tech so I could have broken all the old records or else you have to say hey if the person 22 years before had today's tech, what would their time be?
You compete against people today, except for a few random instances like 2016.
IAAF should just slide everyone's time up to match VF times.
Roger Bannister was the first person to break 3:52 in the mile.
Anyone who has ever ran in these shoes knows deep down that this is true.
The form and bounce they produce is an absolute joke. Only someone who knows they are benefiting from them would deny it.
I laugh myself to sleep night after night reading posts on this site from people denying that they do anything whilst knowing that run in them regularly (despite them doing nothing!) and have achieved nothing legitimately.
Losers.
This is the same guy who claimed that he was being coached by god, so I'm not putting any stock into anything he says
Says the guy who calls 20458 a pr though it had 25-35 mph winds behind him the entire way on a point to point.
Did he delete the post? Where to find it?
Kenny and Kipchoge both ran less than 1:30 faster post vaporfly than pre vaporfly, and Kipchoge’s run was in a faster course with the vaporfly than without (London vs Berlin). In the same course, Eliud ran not even 30s faster.
I don’t see why someone would rate a marathon 8 minutes slower as the better one, regardless of the shoe used. Although I guess more inspiring doesn’t necessarily mean better, and is subjective.
DietBacon wrote:
Kenny and Kipchoge both ran less than 1:30 faster post vaporfly than pre vaporfly, and Kipchoge’s run was in a faster course with the vaporfly than without (London vs Berlin). In the same course, Eliud ran not even 30s faster.
I don’t see why someone would rate a marathon 8 minutes slower as the better one, regardless of the shoe used. Although I guess more inspiring doesn’t necessarily mean better, and is subjective.
Kipchoge never broke 2:04' until he got Vaporfly prototypes. And, unless I'm mistaken, Bekele never broke 2:05' until he got the shoes too. It doesn't mean the shoes were the sole reason of their improvement, but those are facts.
Wildhorse wrote:
Kipchoge never broke 2:04' until he got Vaporfly prototypes. And, unless I'm mistaken, Bekele never broke 2:05' until he got the shoes too. It doesn't mean the shoes were the sole reason of their improvement, but those are facts.
I see what did there.
Just because he didn’t break 2:04 before the VFs doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have done it without them. Wouldn’t it make sense that as he ran more marathons he would get better at them?
So? wrote:
Just because he didn’t break 2:04 before the VFs doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have done it without them. Wouldn’t it make sense that as he ran more marathons he would get better at them?
I think the more common pattern historically is, when some finally gets to a high level, they kind of top out there, with some performances slower, and some around the same level. They don't continually improve consistently. Look at the marathon lists for people like Bill Rodgers, Yuki Kawauchi, Juma Ikangaa, Joan Benoit, de Castella, etc.
Yeah +1
I'll hold my hands up here. I told friends that i was sure it was just a placebo effect and hard training.
Lies
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Strava thinks the London Marathon times improved 12 minutes last year thanks to supershoes
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
NAU women have no excuse - they should win it all at 2024 NCAA XC
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts