There is LITERALLY no other 19-year old American woman alive right now who can do what Athing Mu just did today for 1409 meters

I just hope she is healthy and didn’t step off the track for any injury reason. I think like Brazier, she might not say anything about it if she did.

Mu is a national treasure.

high school xc coach wrote:

bakkensdad wrote:

But she did lock up. Her final 100 was 18+ seconds. Her next 100 might have been 20 seconds.

right. which would be 18 seconds for the 90 meters left until 1500.

There is no time for a distance not run. There is only a DNF.

But there is no investment in countless posts trying to depict this failure as some form of success?

Armstronglivs wrote:

high school xc coach wrote:

right. which would be 18 seconds for the 90 meters left until 1500.

There is no time for a distance not run. There is only a DNF.

I don't really care. best information says she is 4:10 or better ABILITY right now. I am not saying something crazy like she can be world class or is anything close to that.

this is the same thing as speculating based on a workout, which is useful, though not exact, for evaluating track and field.

a little too invested wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Not finishing a race like this is what you might expect of a schoolgirl who has badly misjudged the distance. It's lamentable for an Olympic champion and showed she would rather bail than lose badly. So she elected to look like a poor loser.

You might be a little too invested in this if you are driven to a state of lament over someone else's performance in a January indoor meet.

Sports are entertainment. None of this matters. Relax dude, lol.

But there is no investment in threads trying to depict her DNF as some form of success?

high school xc coach wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

There is no time for a distance not run. There is only a DNF.

I don't really care. best information says she is 4:10 or better ABILITY right now. I am not saying something crazy like she can be world class or is anything close to that.

this is the same thing as speculating based on a workout, which is useful, though not exact, for evaluating track and field.

We don't know what she could have run over further distance. She blew up.

Armstronglivs wrote:

The only thing she proved is that she is a quitter.

Agent provocateur

i get it. you do are not a fan of speculating or predicting times based on previous workouts or runs. I am okay with you thinking that she is only able to run a 4:16 or 4:37 right now. I disagree with you.

it is okay.

high school xc coach wrote:

i get it. you do are not a fan of speculating or predicting times based on previous workouts or runs. I am okay with you thinking that she is only able to run a 4:16 or 4:37 right now. I disagree with you.

it is okay.

I said before the race I think she might be capable of a shade better than 4. 30. Her current best is 4.38. Milrose doesn't change my mind. Of course she can run a much faster 1200. But she virtually finished there. I'll speculate on the 1500/mile when she runs it - to the line.

yoyomama wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The only thing she proved is that she is a quitter.

Agent provocateur

What's French for quitter?

pb pb wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The only thing she proved is that she is a quitter.

Ok. Now I know you are either highly emotional over this subject or intentionally trolling.

He is both and it’s not really clear why he posts 100s of times on some of these longer threads (about Mu especially…). He doesn’t appear to actually like or enjoy the sport and thinks that virtually everyone good is doping, yet spends hours upon hours here. Weird and sad.

At any rate, very few are actually really getting the OP, so let me try again.

First, no other American woman who is currently 19 or younger could run 4:22 mile pace for 1409 meters.

That is a fact unless you can identify a counter example.

Note that it will have to be someone with an 800 PB well below 2:10 since an evenly split version of what Mu ran requires running at 2:10.58 pace for the 800 and then 3/4 of another 2:10.58. And I will submit that no one else can do this who is American and 19 or younger.

That seems pretty damn notable and impressive on its own and absent any further speculation regarding a 1500 or mile extrapolation.

Second, this alone blows up the simplistic model of running physiology that Armstronglivs, Jo72, and others are so invested in. According to this model, all runners (relevant for a comparison to Mu) fit into one (and ONLY one) of four categories:

(1) 200/400 Long sprinters

(2) 400/800

(3) 800 specialists

(4) 800/1500

If this model was fully comprehensive and accurate, then in a country with 320 million people, one would surely expect that someone in the 800/1500 category would be the fastest at a distance as long as 1409 meters. After all, it’s nearly 1500 meters long and all three other categories supposedly top out at 800 meters (maybe 1000 max).

The problem for these folks is that they insist that Mu is a 400/800 runner. So it should not be possible on their model for her to be the fastest American 19-year old over a distance as long as 1409 meters.

Moreover, Mu is almost certainly the fastest American 19-year old over 300 meters, which is a distance that should be owned by the 200/400 types. She would have at least ran a 36 for 300 at some point in her 48.32 split in August.

So Mu totally blows up the cherished model they think all reality has to bend to, as she is currently the fastest American 19-year old from at least 300 meters to at least 1409 meters.

If you think any other American woman under 19 could beat Mu at ANY distance between 300 & 1409 meters, provide the name and relevant performance.

I’ll be waiting.

Armstronglivs wrote:

a little too invested wrote:

You might be a little too invested in this if you are driven to a state of lament over someone else's performance in a January indoor meet.

Sports are entertainment. None of this matters. Relax dude, lol.

But there is no investment in threads trying to depict her DNF as some form of success?

It is silly to make the DNF out to be a positive thing. It is also silly to make it out to be a "lamentable" event that revealed some kind of major character flaw. The fact that some other people are making a stupid argument that is different from your own doesn't lend credence to your own argument.

If one person says that 2+2 is 3, and you respond that 2+2 is actually 5, you are both wrong. What you're doing here is declaring that 2+2 equals 5 and then trying to argue that you're right by virtue of the fact that the people claiming that 2+2 equals 3 are wrong.

a little too invested wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

But there is no investment in threads trying to depict her DNF as some form of success?

It is silly to make the DNF out to be a positive thing. It is also silly to make it out to be a "lamentable" event that revealed some kind of major character flaw. The fact that some other people are making a stupid argument that is different from your own doesn't lend credence to your own argument.

If one person says that 2+2 is 3, and you respond that 2+2 is actually 5, you are both wrong. What you're doing here is declaring that 2+2 equals 5 and then trying to argue that you're right by virtue of the fact that the people claiming that 2+2 equals 3 are wrong.

It's not a major character flaw. But she bailed when she likely knew she was going to be thrashed. In sport, that shows lack of 'bottle' and is hardly any form of success.

But what I do find is a character flaw is those posters who try to justify it and create some sort of narrative of triumph to excuse their obviously inflated predictions of what she would achieve, that have been proven well wide of the mark .

Your predictions for what she was going to achieve were shown to be clearly wrong. You said on an earlier thread you would "bow out". Instead you're back to double-down. You should have taken your own earlier advice. But you can't. There's too much ego at stake, isn't there?

Armstronglivs wrote:

In sport, that shows lack of 'bottle'

What does your 10 posts in 24 hours on this thread alone show? 😂

Creeeeeeeeeepin.

Soooo, that’s a hard, HARD pass on defending your simplistic model of runner physiology and citing an American 19-year old that can run faster than Mu at ANY distance between 300 and 1400 meters?

But they can for 1410 meters

Ugly American fanboy behavior....

Take fame from real accomplishments and twist reality into what meets your needs now.

She was approached by her agent to enter the field and recieve financial reward for her appearance and to put butts in the seats with titillatingyou guys. She had no intentions of finishing since that wasnt in the deal. She hung on as long as she could and doesn't worry today about it. She got paid and can support herself for another month.

Along with that reality....what kind of preparations do you really think she was capable of to compete againt the likes of Purrier since the closing ceremonies. Im pretty sure they had very different training experiences since then. Stay in your lane Mu. I can guarantee what she was feeling physically with 400 to go was not fun and didnt help her mentally or emotionally. She would have been better off competing that distance against a better college field but they arent handing out Milrose $$$$.

You are really overanalysing this. I snickered at the DNF because you rabid fans almost deserved this but I was stupid.

It would have been MUCH better if she had ran 4:29 or 4:32 (frankly, after the dnf, I don't believe more than ~4:29 would have been possible even with ideal pacing, so I was also wrong because I would have guessed closer to 4:25-26) because this should have ended speculations and shut you up.

Now you can fantasize and speculate at will because of a fast 1200m + DNF because she could not face getting ca. 8th place in around 4:30 although it would have been a respectable time.

And rehearse for them umpteenth time that there happens to be no good 20 yo US 1500m runner atm. Who cares?

I took it for granted in the whole debate, but apparently was wrong, that when we speak about potential of one of the ALL TIME top 3 female 400+800m runners, we are not bothering with Mu being better than current US sophomores.

And you can easily look up what you (or some other fans) wrote 3 days ago which were FAR more ambitious claims both for the race yesterday and for the near future potential, namely 1000m WR and 1500 AR. Not freaking 4:10/4:29 which was granted by most "naysayers" except for the most sceptical who'd guessed low 4:30s.

Sure, I don't know what might be in two years with different training. Maybe she can get a ca. 4:03-05 1500, like Brazier ran 3:35. But I doubt this because she is FAR better relatively speaking in the 400 than he is, thus more of the 400/800 type (of course I am aware that these types are simplifications, they still fit reasonably well, last night was another data point in favor of this "simplistic" scheme).

And why should she? She can dominate 800m, be very good in 400 and relay, why even bother with being 10th best 1500m in the US?