oh no - Look Who's Running Boston marathon

also brett gotcher of japan running news announced today yurika nakamura and kiyoko shimihara have announced they will run boston on april 19th, so the women for boston are starting to be announced, bertinelli representing the USA, nakamura and shimhara representing japan.

Brett Gotcher is not behind Japan Running News, crackhead Doug. Brett Larner would be the name you swung wildly at and missed by a country mile.

Tom Derderian is awesome

and im guessing the 2:26 guy is a guy coached by Tom, if im guessing his identity correctly, but not sure i want to shout out his name, did he get in? damn. he's a cool guy too

shame on BAA/JohnHancockkss' corruption

douglas burke wrote:

i am going to call it right now, IF worknesh kidane and/or meseret defar decides to run the boston marathon she will beat bertinelli by OVER 5 minutes, in fact i think if belainesh gebre and/or teyba naser run boston they will also beat bertinelli. and those are fare races as none of the women mentioned have any marathon experience yet.

darkwave wrote:

It's not a fair race unless they all get to start at the same time. If Valerie Bertinelli doesn't get to start with elites, it's not a fair race.

I dunno - I think it is a fare race - she is running for cash after all.

We should have never let them Vote least of all run

Marathon's.

You reap what you sow.

whoawhoawhoa wrote:

Brett Gotcher is not behind Japan Running News, crackhead Doug. Brett Larner would be the name you swung wildly at and missed by a country mile.

yes, it really ruined his serious post too. relax, Adolph.

just axin wrote:

If this were the Valerie Bertinelli of thirty years ago, nobody would be complaining.

She looks good for 50.

Wendell Gee wrote:

whoawhoawhoa wrote:

Brett Gotcher is not behind Japan Running News, crackhead Doug. Brett Larner would be the name you swung wildly at and missed by a country mile.

yes, it really ruined his serious post too. relax, Adolph.

If it was meant to be humorous then it also ruined that, Wendy.

unintended consequences wrote:

Why are we researching cancer? Curing cancer would just enable weak physiologies to stay in the gene pool.

Most people don't get cancer until after they have had children (their genes are still in the gene pool) so your logic only works for little kids and teenagers.

What type of sicko wants to let a cute little kid die from something that can be cured?? If your mom or dad end up getting cancer at an old age I suggest you don't procreate and instead eat a bullet.

Overly emotional breeders like you are why humans stopped evolving and are now going in the other direction. Humans want to think that everything can be cured without giving any thought to the real benefits to the species that come from whether a cure can be found. Animals in the wild deal with their loved ones dying all the time because they're weak and old and susceptible to disease that helps to prune their genetic tree and keep the strongest genes going. We aren't helping ourselves at all by enabling weak genetics to get passed along.

Yeah but they aren't being passed along in the vast majority of cases....guess you didn't actually read what I wrote.

Realist Man wrote:

Well, I am glad my 2:26 spot is going to someone as important as Valerie.

At least she is raising money for cancer...

I find it hard to believe that if you wrote to BAA and could verify to them your 2:26 that they would not give you a spot. Have you tried that? Sure, the registration closed, but don't be so tentative. Give it a shot. I bet they let you in.

Ever get a vaccination? Emergency surgery? Medication? Maybe you shouldn't have. Is it really that different?

unintended consequences wrote:

Doesn't matter what you wrote, if we weren't so goofy on finding a cure we'd realize that, like a lot of other genetic markers people have valued in finding a mate, cancer in the family is a red flag and the genetic markers for it should be identified and those who have those markers should be dissuaded from procreating. Notice how we don't let the mentally handicapped reproduce.

If anyone doesn't deserve to reproduce, it is your sorry, depressed ass.

Go choke on a cock.

Glad I could bring the worst out of you, you insecure tools are so easily trolled.

whoawhoawhoa wrote:

Brett Gotcher is not behind Japan Running News, crackhead Doug. Brett Larner would be the name you swung wildly at and missed by a country mile.[/quote]

Exactly, what is a country mile? Is it similar to a metric mile, or something completely different?

unintended consequences wrote:

Notice how we don't let the mentally handicapped reproduce.

I'm sure I'm feeding a troll but mentally handicapped people do have children.

Country Mile wrote:

whoawhoawhoa wrote:

Brett Gotcher is not behind Japan Running News, crackhead Doug. Brett Larner would be the name you swung wildly at and missed by a country mile.

Exactly, what is a country mile? Is it similar to a metric mile, or something completely different?[/quote]

A country mile is, colloquially, a distance that is much farther than an imperial mile.