Newport Richie wrote:
No, as a matter of fact, I don't. If you don't think that someone who can run in the 4:30's for a mile is incapable of a 17:20 5K, even with a relatively steep performance curve, then you are deluded. You are clearly operating from a position of having decided your conclusion in advance (Cuffe is a better distance runner than Cain) and scrambling to come up with evidence to support this. This is not making you look very smart.
Cuffe is clearly a better distance runner and I don't see how you can argue that Cain is better. Cuffe has destroyed Cain in XC and has a far greater 3000 PR. And as for my method of arguing, I first looked at the evidence, made my conclusion, and cited evidence to support my conclusion. If that's not a good method for arguing, then sorry. However, the fact is that Cain clearly has more speed than endurance. This is evidenced by her 2:03r 800, and her 9:28 3000. By your logic, if someone can run 4:30's for a mile, they should easily be running 9:15 for 3000. However, she ran 9:28, not 9:15. This shows that she doesn't have tremendous endurance. I agree that she can run 17:20 for a 5k NEXT YEAR, after she builds up some endurance over the summer along with her new speed. However, as of right now, Cain can't run anywhere near that for a 5k, meaning Cuffe has greater endurance, meaning that if Cuffe can barely break 10, then Cain probably can't.