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

It is really strange to me that there is so much praise for a person that just dropped out of a race. I get it that she’s a favorite here on the boards, but wouldn’t literally all fans of hers rather have seen her put up a good time in the event, rather than drop out of it because she is about to lose?

Tune in when she breaks the American record in the 1500 in 3 years.

I have strong arms wrote:

Tune in when she breaks the American record in the 1500 in 3 years.

You are dreaming. No one in history has ever been one of the best in the world at both the 400 and 1500. People's bodies aren't made like that. You believing that Mu will be the first shows that you don't understand that basic fact.

I can run 49 and 3:54. Why can't she? I am nothing special.

She is an 800/1500 runner who has never run more than 25 MPW.

I have strong arms wrote:

I can run 49 and 3:54. Why can't she? I am nothing special.

You are male. It makes all the difference. But let's say you're a 44x guy over 400, you aren't also going to be a 3.32 guy over the 1500.

I have strong arms wrote:

Tune in when she breaks the American record in the 1500 in 3 years.

Agree except it may be 5-7 years but the American Record which is currently 3:54.99 will eventually belong to Athing Mu

I can only hope wrote:

It is really strange to me that there is so much praise for a person that just dropped out of a race. I get it that she’s a favorite here on the boards, but wouldn’t literally all fans of hers rather have seen her put up a good time in the event, rather than drop out of it because she is about to lose?

+1

But I can run 49 and 1:55 and she can run 49 and 1:55. What difference does my sex or race or weight have to do with anything? We both run the same times in 400 and 800. Why would our 1500 times be different? I assume that we would run the same times in the 200 or 1500.

douglas burke wrote:

I have strong arms wrote:

Tune in when she breaks the American record in the 1500 in 3 years.

Agree except it may be 5-7 years but the American Record which is currently 3:54.99 will eventually belong to Athing Mu

She only has to knock off 15-20 secs. That would require the help of certain doctors.

I have strong arms wrote:

But I can run 49 and 1:55 and she can run 49 and 1:55. What difference does my sex or race or weight have to do with anything? We both run the same times in 400 and 800. Why would our 1500 times be different? I assume that we would run the same times in the 200 or 1500.

Because male physiology gives advantages that include greater aerobic capacity, which will be to your advantage over longer events. Also your times do not suggest you are a speed-based athlete, but the same times for a woman put her at the top of that category - like a 44x/1.42xx male. That kind of runner has less aerobic capacity and so we do not see world-class 1500 male runners who are also sub-45 runners over the 400.

I have strong arms wrote:

But I can run 49 and 1:55 and she can run 49 and 1:55. What difference does my sex or race or weight have to do with anything? We both run the same times in 400 and 800. Why would our 1500 times be different? I assume that we would run the same times in the 200 or 1500.

This is the common misunderstanding that many people have. 49, 1:55, 3:54 are world class times for a female, but not anywhere close to world class times for a male.

No person, male or female, can be world class in the 400, 800, and 1500. Two out of those three, yes, but not all three.

A male will never be able to run 44, 1:43, 3:30. And a female will never be able to run 49, 1:55, 3:54.

But I predict that someone will start a "Athing Mu will be a world class 1500 runner soon" thread several times a year for the next decade, because so many people are confused about male vs female times.

One thing I did notice was her 66/64 split to go 2:10 at halfway.

I ran 1:57.xx and 4:20.xx for a mile, generally three steady quarters and a faster last quarter, as I was faster that way than attempting even pace.

If I'd have gone 66/64, I'd have definitely blown up (although not to the extent of not finishing), and with an 8:45 3000m with a 60.xx last 400m, I definitely had a higher aerobic capacity than Mu.

I would say that given the amount of hydrogen ions she would have had flooding her system at 1400m she probably couldn't have gone much further at anything resembling a run.

I would say that she could probably run 3 x 67.0 - so 3:21 at 1200m and probably pick it up over the last 300m to end up with something 4:09 for 1500m, which would be very good for a runner of her speed.

As far as ever being world class at 1500m. No. As others have pointed out, there has never been an athlete capable of making the 400m Olympic final (and probably of winning a medal) and running a world-class 1500m. One could see her winning a 400m and 800m at the Olympics, but not under any circumstance an 800m/1500m.

If one looks at the 100m splits Mu's are between 15.8 and 16.9 which is I think sufficiently even to not be the main problem.

It seems that no matter how one turns it, either have Mu finishing in another agonizing 38-40 lap last saturday or have her running ca. 67 sec. laps and pick up a little at the end, we get to ca. 409/4:29. Which was a common prediction last week and very good for a 400/800 runner, a considerable new PB (I don't think she looked exhausted after that 4:38 solo as someone claimed).

Just no indication for the first person in history to be world class in 400 and 1500m.

And obviously it is also a quality of a miler to be able to run not only perfectly even or ideal splits. Again we have the misapprehension that the faster 800m runner should be more comfortable with an uneven 1500/mile race (cf. the Rio 2016 1500m finales thread) because the slow sections are further away from the pace they are used to. That's just wrong, usually it's the opposite.

zvxcxzcv wrote:

This is the most talented middle distance runner we have had for a long, long time, maybe ever, on the women's side.

I don't think anyone doubts that Mu is (one of) the most talented 400/800m runners in history, not only US. The point of contention is that some think that this is evidence FOR her being also world class at 1500/mile, the other side thinks that it is evidence AGAINST her being extraordinarily good at 1500/mile.

FoghornLonghorn wrote:

Thanks OP, I will definitely tune in for A thing's next 1409m race. She'll win for sure!

Sorry but she got only 6th in the 1409 race although she had the unfair advantage that the ones behind her mistook it for a mile race, otherwise they might have beaten her to the 1409 as Mu was fading on the lap between 1200 and 1409...

To be fair to Mu I will say this: she tried to compete, but she found out the hard way she was out of her league in that event. Best to stick to what she is good at - the 400/800.

Jo72 wrote:

FoghornLonghorn wrote:

Thanks OP, I will definitely tune in for A thing's next 1409m race. She'll win for sure!

Sorry but she got only 6th in the 1409 race although she had the unfair advantage that the ones behind her mistook it for a mile race, otherwise they might have beaten her to the 1409 as Mu was fading on the lap between 1200 and 1409...

Cruel but true.