Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
Some people on this list need to lighten up. Some people are way too stuffy and proper. Even serious media outlets sometimes fail to provide anying new or interesting as they rehash old stories and ideas. Stop pretending the list is god. Alan _ Add MSN 8 Internet Software to your current Internet access and enjoy patented spam control and more. Get two months FREE! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa
Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
Now, I'm confused In a message dated 10/19/2003 10:28:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Even serious media outlets sometimes fail to provide anying new or interesting as they rehash old stories and ideas. Stop pretending the list is god. Alan
Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
Alans emails are repetitive and boring and are quite simply annoying. It brings no new info to the debate or to the list. Who cares what you think..you have no inside info nor even do you have the nuts to name names and stick to itwhy even bother..yeah we all think/know that there are SOME druggies on this planet..BIG DEAL. bob From: "Christopher Goss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Alan, you were born in 1978 and have never run in a world class competition. How do you KNOW all of these things? Send instant messages to anyone on your contact list with MSN Messenger 6.0. Try it now FREE!
Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
I could as easily believe there's widespread drug use by marathoners as the next guy, but does it not seem to you that some of today's really fast 10K runners have moved up to try 42K--and that could explain the fast times? Marathoners of the past were not typically competitive at 10K. (Zatopek was, Shorter was, and others you could name.) Maybe enduring speed, the way Coe did in the 800 meters, is an idea that's moving up to marathon running. Plodders (relatively speaking--no slur intended) may be uncompetitive at this point. Mitch
RE: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
This is not 1954. HUGE difference in training between now and then. HUGE difference in tracks between now and then. HUGE difference between mindset between now and then. Alan From: vincent duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: vincent duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'John Molvar' [EMAIL PROTECTED],'Send t-and-f' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 23:03:00 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc11-f20.hotmail.com ([65.54.167.27]) by mc11-s3.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:25:11 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc11-f20.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:21:41 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9G33AJf027201for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id h9G33A80027190for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:03:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.5.70])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id h9G338Jf026967for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:03:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vincentmckzfad (ool-182e44a9.dyn.optonline.net [24.46.68.169]) by mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.16 (built May 14 2003)) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Oct 2003 23:03:08 -0400 (EDT) X-Message-Info: x4V9WGjv0S/xICzPJbUig7zE7gJSP8O2kiFPYQiLZGk= In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2003 03:21:44.0238 (UTC) FILETIME=[9FD364E0:01C39394] I ask you kindly to look at the mile record after the first sub four by the good Doctor..was that drugs.or a new mind set. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Molvar Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 6:35 PM To: Send t-and-f Subject: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 Alan wrote: It's not just running near a WR that implies drug use. It's when numerous people run near a WR that bothers me. It's when a marathon VIRGIN runs near a WR that bothers me. If KK runs a WR it wouldn't strike me as mysterious at all. He's been in the game for a while. He didn't debut at 2:05. The problem I have is that 7 of the top 10 marathon times in HISTORY have been run in 2002 or 2003. From 1988 to 1998 no one went under Dinsamo's record. Since then there's been 25 performances by 21 runners under that record. You will not find such a statistic during any other past decade. When records (be it WR or debut WR which was just broken in Paris by Wilson Onsare before Rutto did his Chicago dance) are broken every year in the same event then I question every one of those results. The state of the sport leads to such uncredibility. Come on Alan, Didn't you hear what the man said? These guys have discovered hard training. That is why 7 of the 10 best times have been run in the 2 years. Marathoners before 2002 didn't know about hard training, basically they were all lazy, Krispy Kreme eating computer game players. The new wave Alan is to train hard and if you don't jump on the train hard bandwagon you are going to be left behind. I predict that more and more are going to discover this train hard and you are going to see even more record breaking times. Actually this train hard thing was secretly tried by chain smoking coach MA in the Mid 90s in China. That secret train hard formula combined with what Rich McCann would characterize as weak records in the women's distance events explains that record breaking surge. So you see Alan, you just don't get it, so stop trampling on our Yellow Brick Road. __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com _ Page a contacts mobile phone with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
We're starting to retread the same ground. I previously made the same point about 10k runners moving up in an earlier post. Molvar obviously had missed much of this discussion when he tritely tried to sum up the arguments. As for 1954, the point is that Bannister's mark unleashed a sudden burst of record breaking in such a short period of time that simply attributing it only to changes in training is not adequate. It's obvious that it was a change in mindset where running 4 60 second laps in a row didn't seem so arduous. Any of us who have raced have experienced that type of breakthrough--suddenly a performance that we never thought possible becomes commonplace, even easy. Much of performance improvement comes from mental outlook as much as physical. To be honest, there are many runners today who train as much as Paavo Nurmi, yet can run a minute faster over 10k. And think of all the high school runners who train like Nurmi but with less experience who can break the equivalent of 3:52 for 1500m. That difference cannot be explained solely by training or physical attributes--it's about expectations and how they limit us. RMc At 11:16 AM 10/16/2003 -0700, t-and-f-digest wrote: Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 12:19:14 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 I could as easily believe there's widespread drug use by marathoners as the next guy, but does it not seem to you that some of today's really fast 10K runners have moved up to try 42K--and that could explain the fast times? Marathoners of the past were not typically competitive at 10K. (Zatopek was, Shorter was, and others you could name.) Maybe enduring speed, the way Coe did in the 800 meters, is an idea that's moving up to marathon running. Plodders (relatively speaking--no slur intended) may be uncompetitive at this point. Mitch -- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 16:43:48 + From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 This is not 1954. HUGE difference in training between now and then. HUGE difference in tracks between now and then. HUGE difference between mindset between now and then. Alan
Re: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
Alan, you were born in 1978 and have never run in a world class competition. How do you KNOW all of these things? This is what I think hurts the list and cause it to die back from time to time -- too many softball players telling us what it is like in the major leagues. We saw this when Dwight left, as well as others. Is it OK for track fans to have opinions? Of course. Is it OK to share those opinions publicly? Sure. Is it OK to jump on the reply button to share that opinion when the subject comes up on this list? On occasion when you have something particularly insightful to add. Is it OK to share the same opinion (everything was better in the good old days when runners weren't cheating or similar) day after day with a group of folks that are generally much more experienced and knowledgeable? No. I know that you mean well, Alan. I just don't need to sift through seven or eight of your messages each day. As in real life, I also think the constant chatter (of which you are not the only guilty party) discourages input from some of the very sharp folks sitting in the corners. christopher - Original Message - From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:43 am Subject: RE: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 This is not 1954. HUGE difference in training between now and then. HUGE difference in tracks between now and then. HUGE difference between mindset between now and then. Alan
RE: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002
I ask you kindly to look at the mile record after the first sub four by the good Doctor..was that drugs.or a new mind set. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Molvar Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 6:35 PM To: Send t-and-f Subject: t-and-f: Lazy Marathoners Before 2002 Alan wrote: It's not just running near a WR that implies drug use. It's when numerous people run near a WR that bothers me. It's when a marathon VIRGIN runs near a WR that bothers me. If KK runs a WR it wouldn't strike me as mysterious at all. He's been in the game for a while. He didn't debut at 2:05. The problem I have is that 7 of the top 10 marathon times in HISTORY have been run in 2002 or 2003. From 1988 to 1998 no one went under Dinsamo's record. Since then there's been 25 performances by 21 runners under that record. You will not find such a statistic during any other past decade. When records (be it WR or debut WR which was just broken in Paris by Wilson Onsare before Rutto did his Chicago dance) are broken every year in the same event then I question every one of those results. The state of the sport leads to such uncredibility. Come on Alan, Didn't you hear what the man said? These guys have discovered hard training. That is why 7 of the 10 best times have been run in the 2 years. Marathoners before 2002 didn't know about hard training, basically they were all lazy, Krispy Kreme eating computer game players. The new wave Alan is to train hard and if you don't jump on the train hard bandwagon you are going to be left behind. I predict that more and more are going to discover this train hard and you are going to see even more record breaking times. Actually this train hard thing was secretly tried by chain smoking coach MA in the Mid 90s in China. That secret train hard formula combined with what Rich McCann would characterize as weak records in the women's distance events explains that record breaking surge. So you see Alan, you just don't get it, so stop trampling on our Yellow Brick Road. __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
