her pr before this season was 2:03.78, now 1:59.99, but clearly she's much faster than that
SHE HAS ALSO TAKEN OFF FOUR SECONDS IN THE 800 THIS YEAR?
AT THE AGE OF 27?
should be noted though Jess has no results in the 800 for 2021-2023. the 2:03.78 was from 2019, a year in which her 1500 PB ended up being 4:01.80
i don't think she ever took the 800s all that seriously given she only ran a few per season and prob viewed it as speedwork. not saying she is or isn't clean based off of this, just that it's not really a fair metric to look at to say she's doping or not since she ran it so sparingly
You unwittingly provide the answer to an interesting question: What what the reaction here be if an elite Kenyan runner suddenly dropped seven seconds in the 1500?
I'd say it's not possible to drop seven seconds in a 1500 when you're a highly experienced athlete already among the top in the world...unless you've had "help". I hope WADA is paying attention.
100% this. Kipyegon might be the best 1,500 meter runner of all time, so breaking her own world record is whatever for me. But Hull? Someone like her doesn’t drop 7 seconds at this age. Just ignore that Nike swoosh on her singlet. I’ll be curious if she can repeat a similar race at the Olympics since testing is much more stringent there. If she can’t go under 3:57 at the Olympics, then you know this was a highly doped up performance.
Poor Linden Hall. She broke the Australian women’s 1500 record last year at Pre, running 3:56.92 and beating Hull. She ran half a second faster today, but this time got dusted by Hull.
I have no doggie in this discussion. i used to compete but now am just an interested bystander. I have seen many stars come and go over the years. All of them elite athletes. I have no idea if any of the were taking PEDs. And I don't know if any of them are taking them now.
my question is not specifically related to PEDs but how things are moderated here. Here is a thread questioning how clean Miss Hull might be due to her surprising results. It's left up. Posters are allowed to debate one way or the other.
In an completely different thread some poster questioned how clean Miss Valby might be due to her surprising results. However, the posts from that poster were deleted - no debate is allowed on that topic for that individual. Seems like a double standard of sorts.
Let me be clear, I do not think either are taking PEDs. I'm just curious as to why one individual is off limits for the implication and another individual isn't.
She's 27. That's at least a decade+ of hard training but in one year drops 7 seconds.
She's had super-spikes for a while now, so it can't be there. She's done altitude training stints prior to 2024 and 2023, so it can't be that. She doesn't look as 'skinny as ever' as a different letsrunner suggests.
Reminds me of the progression of Mo Katir. Sure, we can say double thresholds if you makes you all feel better but Jessica Hull is not a natural 3:50.XX runner in this dimension.
I have no doggie in this discussion. i used to compete but now am just an interested bystander. I have seen many stars come and go over the years. All of them elite athletes. I have no idea if any of the were taking PEDs. And I don't know if any of them are taking them now.
my question is not specifically related to PEDs but how things are moderated here. Here is a thread questioning how clean Miss Hull might be due to her surprising results. It's left up. Posters are allowed to debate one way or the other.
In an completely different thread some poster questioned how clean Miss Valby might be due to her surprising results. However, the posts from that poster were deleted - no debate is allowed on that topic for that individual. Seems like a double standard of sorts.
Let me be clear, I do not think either are taking PEDs. I'm just curious as to why one individual is off limits for the implication and another individual isn't.
1. Valby is Rojo's daughter.
2. Hull is not American and therefore not beyond suspicion.
3. Guilt is decided by skin colour here. The darker the guiltier.
I have no doggie in this discussion. i used to compete but now am just an interested bystander. I have seen many stars come and go over the years. All of them elite athletes. I have no idea if any of the were taking PEDs. And I don't know if any of them are taking them now.
my question is not specifically related to PEDs but how things are moderated here. Here is a thread questioning how clean Miss Hull might be due to her surprising results. It's left up. Posters are allowed to debate one way or the other.
In an completely different thread some poster questioned how clean Miss Valby might be due to her surprising results. However, the posts from that poster were deleted - no debate is allowed on that topic for that individual. Seems like a double standard of sorts.
Let me be clear, I do not think either are taking PEDs. I'm just curious as to why one individual is off limits for the implication and another individual isn't.
It has to do with repetition. There have been LOTS of threads and posts accusing Valby of doping. I think the mods eventually get to a point where enough is enough.
She's 27. That's at least a decade+ of hard training but in one year drops 7 seconds.
She's had super-spikes for a while now, so it can't be there. She's done altitude training stints prior to 2024 and 2023, so it can't be that. She doesn't look as 'skinny as ever' as a different letsrunner suggests.
Reminds me of the progression of Mo Katir. Sure, we can say double thresholds if you makes you all feel better but Jessica Hull is not a natural 3:50.XX runner in this dimension.
Ya'll are so daft.
Super shoes ain't done, yet. The super shoes of 2024 ain't the same ones as 2020.
They didn't stop tweaking the tech 4 years ago, each model's faster and faster.
I have no doggie in this discussion. i used to compete but now am just an interested bystander. I have seen many stars come and go over the years. All of them elite athletes. I have no idea if any of the were taking PEDs. And I don't know if any of them are taking them now.
my question is not specifically related to PEDs but how things are moderated here. Here is a thread questioning how clean Miss Hull might be due to her surprising results. It's left up. Posters are allowed to debate one way or the other.
In an completely different thread some poster questioned how clean Miss Valby might be due to her surprising results. However, the posts from that poster were deleted - no debate is allowed on that topic for that individual. Seems like a double standard of sorts.
Let me be clear, I do not think either are taking PEDs. I'm just curious as to why one individual is off limits for the implication and another individual isn't.
It has to do with repetition. There have been LOTS of threads and posts accusing Valby of doping. I think the mods eventually get to a point where enough is enough.
Really? That's interesting. I guess I don't read this site enough. I actually have not seen anyone questioning Miss Valby's results in that way but thanks for the answer.
I will say that I find if very odd that I received down votes on my question about how things are moderated here. I was pretty clear that I wasn't saying either athlete was on PEDs.
Maybe the down votes are friends or family members of the moderators and they are being protective of them?
She doesn't look as 'skinny as ever' as a different letsrunner suggests.
Hang on there, I’m just now starting to watch a replay of the race, and there is a nice frontal shot of her on the start line before the race, and she definitely looks leaned out.
