Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Jacksf » Wed May 16, 2012 4:11 pm

26mi235,
Again!
You are making the argument that Laura cannot be world class in the 400m.
The thread topic is which is Laura's best event, the 800m or the 400m! not whether she can be an Olympic medalist in the the 400m.
What is your argument that she is better at 800m than at 400m?
That she can't run as fast as SRR?!
Gimme a break! By that yardstick there should only be about 10 or 15 women in the entire world running the 400, and the rest should move up to the 800m????!!!!

And just for the record, blazing short sprint speed is not a pre-requiste to a fast 400m.
Case in point, Jeremy Wariner.
He is certainly not a short sprint blazer, but he is certainly a great 400m runner.
And by the way, 9th fastest HSer in the country is well beyond 'ordinary' speed in the 400m.
But I know, you never said her speed was 'ordinary' ....again! ;p
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Jacksf » Wed May 16, 2012 4:16 pm

gh wrote:
Blues wrote:[...
And since you mentioned Laura's high school 11.90, at the North Dakota State Meet in 2008, Laura ran her 11.90 in the prelims, with the benefit of a +6.1 tailwind. She then won the finals in 12.07, with a +3.2 tailwind. ...


So in other words, her quoted 11.9 speed is (well, was) more like 12.2.


For the record, her HS bests were 11.97 (1.5w) and 24.01 (nwi) and 24.51 (0.5w) and 400m 53.25
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Jacksf » Wed May 16, 2012 4:25 pm

26mi235 wrote:... can you tell me why her rather high-level coaches see her one way and you seemingly know better? You seem to know a lot about her and be sure about what you say is her training history but I feel like I am not getting any insight to why these knowledgeable coaches, with detailed knowledge of her workouts and how she responds to them, are getting this wrong.


Why do you think they are right?
You haven't given any arguments to support your position.
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby 26mi235 » Wed May 16, 2012 6:08 pm

Jacksf wrote:Why do you think they are right?
You haven't given any arguments to support your position.


In this corner we have experts that are winning multiple national championships and who are pretty high up the pay-grade structure for the sport. They see these athletes for many, many hours and their reputations depend on how well they do their job.

In this other corner we have some unknown internet posters who don't have a nickle in the game, do not have close personal knowledge of the athlete and the training and who think that an athlete that is much further up the rankings in event A should be in event B, which she is also pretty good at (it is the next event on the distance progression, so no surprise there), where if she had only been trained in that area as her primary area would be at a higher national ranking. And she ran those events enough to win a dozen gold medals.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby 26mi235 » Wed May 16, 2012 6:10 pm

Part II

I do not have to produce the arguments, that is up to you to swim against the tide of the facts of the case and, while a number of points have indeed been made, I do not find them convincing (I do think that there is as much as a 25% chance that she could be better at the 400 [not quite what I have been painted as asserting] but virtually zero likelihood at anything shorter, but in most of those 'outcomes' the implications are that she is not so very good at the 800 rather than she is spectacularly successful at the 400, in which it is sort of a moot point in terms of being an athlete of world interest.

[Furthermore, citing a PR of 11.90 without stating it was 6.1mps wind (and at medium, Lausanne-like altitude) makes it seem like facts are being used rather loosely.]
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Jacksf » Wed May 16, 2012 7:01 pm

400m
55.76 ('08)
55.10 ('09)
53.25/52.2r ('10)
51.45r ('11)
52.8r ('12)

800m
2:03.08 ('08)
2:06.20 ('09)
2:04.34 ('10)
2:03.12 ('11)
2:05.13 ('12)
Last edited by Jacksf on Wed May 16, 2012 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby tandfman » Wed May 16, 2012 7:08 pm

She ran 2:03.12 in 2011 in the NCAA West Regional.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Wed May 16, 2012 9:24 pm

Jacksf wrote:
For the record, her HS bests were 11.97 (1.5w) and 24.01 (nwi) and 24.51 (0.5w) and 400m 53.25


Yes, those marks were run when she was 18 1/2 at the end of her senior year. But Preston on several occasions used 11.90, 24.30, and 53.25 as evidence in his argument that Laura had more speed at age 16 than Ashley Spencer and most other elite US sprinters. Two of the marks he used as proof were heavily wind aided, and the third mark (53.25) wasn't accomplished until Laura was well over 18, so to be fair I felt that his quotes below required clarification.
.
.

"Show me where spencer had 11.90/24.30/53.25 "wheels" at age 16?"

and:

"Would you say that shorter sprints were too fast for her at age 16 when she ran 11.90, 24.30 and 53.25?"
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Jacksf » Thu May 17, 2012 4:32 am

The University of Oregon official athletics website lists some of those marks as her bests (see below). So I'm sure he would assume they were legal marks. I did.
Anyway, the point he was making is that she is fast. Whereas, mr. marathon says she is not.


"A four-time All-American as a freshman, including anchoring the record-setting 4x400 meter relay team at the NCAA Outdoor Championships (3:28.18). ......

Personal: Major is psychology. Last name is pronounced RACE-ler

Personal Bests
100 Meters - 11.90,
North Dakota State Meet,
Bismark, N.D., 5/23/08
200 Meters - 24.01,
BCS/CHS Invite,
Bismark, N.D., 4/23/10
400 Meters - 53.25,
North Dakota State Meet,
Bismark, N.D., 5/29/10
800 Meters - 2:03.08,
Jim Bush Invitational,
Los Angeles, Calif., 6/7/08"
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby 26mi235 » Thu May 17, 2012 7:14 am

Jacksf and Preston seem to consistently misread parts of my posts. I did not say that she is not fast. I said she is not fast for a sprinter (she gets more 'ordinary' as the distance gets shorter, being best at 400). She has very good speed for an 800 runner, like Jelimo and Vessey. Calling a 24.2/11.2 sprinter "fast" seems to me to be stretching the term a bit.

I gave an indication using the NCAA list (which unfortunately is overly affected by including athletes fastest mark, whether wind-aided or not) and where her 'basic' times fall in that listing (under rates her because her times are at basic but not those on the list, however, essentially all the athletes listed well above her, e.g. the top 300+ for the 100, would have 'basic' times that are ahead of hers, so would still be ahead of her marks on the list).
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby 26mi235 » Thu May 17, 2012 7:16 am

[Part II hitting a limit of 1000 characters]

What I saw was the her 100 times was > 500th, the 200 mark, much higher (~325?), the 400 time around 50th and the 800 mark about 11th (or 3rd?). Clearly, she moved up the list systematically until the 800. Sure, training has something to do with that, but the gradient is so steep that it seems unlikely that she should be in the sprinter category, with the possible exception of the 400.

However, I also indicated that if it is "true" that the 400 is her 'best' distance, it is as much because her 800 did not have as much upside and so she was not a world-class athlete. Conversely, the 75% that I attached to her likelihood of being better included some non-trivial likelihood of being pretty good.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby gh » Thu May 17, 2012 7:27 am

Jacksf wrote:The University of Oregon official athletics website lists some of those marks as her bests (see below). So I'm sure he would assume they were legal marks. I did....


Having nothing to do with the current debate, but allow me to issue a blanket warning that trusting any "official" school site (even one has high-end as Oregon's) will more often than not lead you down a rosy path.

These sites are not put together/maintained by anybody with any statistical expertise in the sport and things like wind readings basically don't exist to SIDs (particularly now that the NCAA itself is so laissez-faire in that department when it comes to Q marks).
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 7:48 am

I quoted 11.90 and 24.01 and both are wind-aided. But that's IRRELEVANT! Most high school times are not IAAF official; it would STILL put Roesler in the top percentile. Let's deal with the 24.30 (or the 11.97) and compare it against other sophomore sprinters who stayed on the sprint path.

-Ashton Purvis, soph '08. 11.89 and 24.31 (NOW: 11.17/22.90)
-Briana Nelson, soph '08. 12.24/24.44 (NOW: 23.63/52.38)
-Brianna Frazier, soph '08. 24.46 (NOW: 52.25)
-Amber Purvis, soph '06, 24.48 (NOW:11.21/22.74/52.80)
-Candace McGrone, soph '06, 11.95/24.36 (NOW: 11.08/22.81)
-Marlena Wesh, soph '07. 12.04/24.26 (NOW: 11.70/23.06/51.43)
-Stacey Ann Smith, senr '08. 11.91/24.12 (NOW: 23.27/52.83)

Hopefully this ENDS the ridiculously illigitimate contention about windy times her sophomore year; suggesting that she wasn't fast enough to be trained as a sprinter! It's not just a red-herring, it's bullshit! She stacks up favorably against her peers at the same relative age!
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 7:53 am

26, you don't know the difference between "speed work" and "sprint training". Look through all my posts and you will see either "trained like a sprinter" or "sprint training"; until you understand the difference YOU WILL ALWAYS BE WRONG and it will be impossible to prove our point to you. (I've always allowed that she could be an 800m runner; you've never allowed that she could have been a sprinter. That's arrogant and foolish!). One other thing: tone down your rhetorical flourishes and you might actually type (even with one arm) what you mean to say.

26mi235 wrote:In this corner we have experts that are winning multiple national championships and who are pretty high up the pay-grade structure for the sport. They see these athletes for many, many hours and their reputations depend on how well they do their job ...

How many NCAA Champs finals has Roesler been eligible for? How many NCAA finals has she qualified for? How many has she won? I'm not trying to shit on UO coaches here; I'm just saying, and have been saying from the beginning, that if she had begun sprint training she could have been as good as her sprint peers. UO is doing a good job -I've never said they weren't- but this idea that she is DEFINITELY an 800m runner has been a product of the athlete from before she arrived at UO. By comparison, but for conventional wisdom, Usain Bolt would be running some half-hearted 400's right now and the sports attention would be in freefall. SOMETIMES THE BEST COACHES SEE WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE! Roesler IS an 800m runner and that's not difficult to see, and she will eventually run faster, the question will be how much faster for a girl who ran 2:03.08 at age 16! (last year she ran 2:03.12)
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby 26mi235 » Thu May 17, 2012 9:12 am

preston wrote:26,... (I've always allowed that she could be an 800m runner; you've never allowed that she could have been a sprinter. That's arrogant and foolish!).



[26mi235: (I do think that there is as much as a 25% chance that she could be better at the 400 [not quite what I have been painted as asserting] but virtually zero likelihood at anything shorter,...


I should note that you had not been as cavalier on the sprint mark as I ascribed.

Finally, citing athletes that had good but not great sprint marks at 16 but strong marks now is not necessarily relevant to LR. She was posting good times across the board from the time she was in middle school and was a very early developer, not one on a 'normal' schedule.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 9:39 am

26mi235 wrote:... but virtually zero likelihood at anything shorter,...


When she was a sophomore in high school what would have told you that she had "ZERO LIKELIHOOD AT ANYTHING SHORTER"? I already showed where both Purvis' and McGrone ran under 23 or 11.20. Is that not successful? They're all A-standard marks!

50% of todays' women 400m runners and 400h who can run less than 52 seconds could run 2:08 or better if they trained for it for 2 years and in most cases would pull it off in one - without any material changes in their sprint training. On page 1 of this thread...Monique Hennagan, winner of the 2004 Olympic trials at 400m [she also set the then meet record], won the '96 NCAA 800m in 2:03.27 and got 4th at 400m. Maybe she should have moved up to the 800, but 4th at the Olympic Games and #1 American means that she was damn successful. Her progression below.

100 Metres
(29) - 2005 11.26 0.1
(28) - 2004 11.32 1.1
200 Metres
(29) - 2005 22.87 1.2
(28) - 2004 22.97 0.6
(25) - 2001 23.23 0.0
400 Metres
(29) - 2005 50.24
(28) - 2004 49.56
(27) - 2003 51.46
(26) - 2002 51.04
(25) - 2001 50.98
(24) - 2000 50.82
(23) - 1999 51.05
(22) - 1998 51.11
(18) - 1994 52.25
(16) - 1992 54.19
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 9:45 am

26mi235 wrote:...She was posting good times across the board from the time she was in middle school and was a very early developer, not one on a 'normal' schedule.

That is a reach! You have NO way of knowing if she was an early developer and I never said she was or wasn't. It is VERY possible, if not likely, that all of her mid-distance/distance training actually retarded her sprint development and had she not run the XC, 800, etc that by her senior year she could have run 11.3...just like Jenna Prandini who ran 11.91 as what? wait for it...a little more... just a bit...ok, i promise, right after this...A sophomore in high school!
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby gh » Thu May 17, 2012 10:00 am

the classic three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics. And I've certainly used all three!

Herewith, my bottom-line "analysis" of Roesler, which ignores every number she has ever recorded. While others "see" it differently, based on every race I've ever seen her run in person (starting with the OT in '08, where she blew me away), she has looked like a classic halfmiler to me, not a sprinter, plain and simple.

I'd like to believe that no matter what the training, elemental speed remains in evidence, and I've never seen her produce anything like that. Great wheels for a half miler, but nothing more than that.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby 26mi235 » Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 am

OK, we simply disagree.

My notion is that in order to be a very good short sprinter, you have to have innate sprint ability that shows itself given much chance, while the longer the distance goes [100=>200=>400] the more the training will affect the athletes relative position on the lists. I just think that LRs marks are too far down the lists at the short end for her to have much chance.

You know a lot more about sprint training and are convinced that she 'could have been a contender' at the short sprints and that it took a lot more specific training than she apparently got.

I still think that from the perspective of 2008 or later most people would have thought that her chances of making the OT Finals in the 100 were less than for the 200, which were less than for the 400, which were less than for the 800, which were (much) greater than for the 1500.

We will never know because now there is little chance we will see her focus on the 100 or even the 200. My guess is that you two are in the minority in thinking she has/had her best top-level potential in the shortest sprints.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby gh » Thu May 17, 2012 10:05 am

a ps to my note one above: that's my final word on the subject and I'm now outta this one.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 10:33 am

Chris Brown was an 800m runner in college. His PB is 44.40. Why was he ever running it? Athletes blossom in asymetric ways and early progress doesn't indicate final destination.
26mi235 wrote:My notion is that in order to be a very good short sprinter, you have to have innate sprint ability that shows itself given much chance, while the longer the distance goes [100=>200=>400] the more the training will affect the athletes relative position on the lists. I just think that LRs marks are too far down the lists at the short end for her to have much chance. ...You know a lot more about sprint training and are convinced that she 'could have been a contender' at the short sprints and that it took a lot more specific training than she apparently got.

Don't count on me knowing [that much] more about sprinting than you do. I just have more evidence at the ready that I can use to hold up my arguments. Like gh said, "lies and damn lies". :lol: But seriously, I DON'T think Roesler's marks are too far down the list at all! That's why I showed you so many other athletes who had the "same" marks as Roesler. The only difference is that those athletes weren't off the charts talented at 800m! If they can be successful sprinting, why couldn't she? I know you can't answer that and that's my point: she COULD HAVE BEEN a sprinter. Would you talk Ashton Eaton into giving up the decathlon if you could coach him to run 9.66 or 12.83?
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Thu May 17, 2012 10:59 am

Preston has still not submitted a single valid sophomore performance for Laura to try to prove his point that she was a faster sprinter than most other elite 16 year olds. Even the new marks that he chose after it was pointed out that the 11.90 was accompanied by a +6.1 m/s tailwind are still either wind aided (24.30), or marks recorded when Laura was an 18 year old senior, not a 16 year old (11.96 +1.5/53.25). There are many sophomores and freshmen who had markedly faster legal 100m and 200m times than Laura had in 2008, yet Preston doesn't mention them. Yes Laura was/is an extremely talented all around runner, but to say she was as fast or faster than most other elite short sprinters were at age 16 seems to be a bit of an exaggeration. Only one high school athlete in all of America was faster than Laura at 800m in 2008, only 3 in 2009, and again only one in 2010. And the Oregon coaching staff is crazy for using her as an 800 runner?
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Thu May 17, 2012 11:00 am

Post deleted due to inadvertent duplication
Last edited by Blues on Thu May 17, 2012 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 11:49 am

Dear Blue,
1. I never said that Roesler was the fastest person in her sophomore class.

2. I admitted that I unknowingly used windy marks; however, the marks I have are from becca's site athletic.net. She has a 11.90 that you say is windy and becca also has a 12.07! Where did you get your marks from? And, don't just tell me it was windy, PROVE IT! I want to see the finish lynx info. And, while you're at it, verify the marks of the other girls as well.

3. Maybe you're suffering from dehydration or hypoglycemia but Laura WAS one of the best in her age bracket for the 200. I never said she was the best. You would have to be an idiot to believe that top-10 in an event did not signify that you were among the best! That's right, you don't. :roll:

4. In 2003 Usain Bolt was #2 in the world at 400m, #1 at 200m and wasn't even on any lists in the 100m. Yet Glen Mills hasn't moved him up to the 400m already? (never mind that the 400m was not a priority for Bolt...wait a minute, it wasn't a priority for Roesler either because she was trying to run the fastest 400m that she possibly could because she was trying to get ready for the Olympic trials 800m - which was her goal from the previous year.)

YOU SHOULD LEARN HOW TO READ PROPERLY (You've confused my points and others).
Last edited by preston on Thu May 17, 2012 11:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby tandfman » Thu May 17, 2012 11:55 am

Tilastopaja, which I regard as quite authoritative, says the 11.90 was aided by a +6.1 wind. I'd regard that as good enough evidence unless someone can prove it's wrong.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 12:20 pm

tandfman wrote:Tilastopaja, which I regard as quite authoritative, says the 11.90 was aided by a +6.1 wind. I'd regard that as good enough evidence unless someone can prove it's wrong.

tandman, we've LOOOOOONNNNGGGGG moved on from the 11.90, but thank you very much.
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Thu May 17, 2012 12:42 pm

preston wrote:
tandfman wrote:Tilastopaja, which I regard as quite authoritative, says the 11.90 was aided by a +6.1 wind. I'd regard that as good enough evidence unless someone can prove it's wrong.

tandman, we've LOOOOOONNNNGGGGG moved on from the 11.90, but thank you very much.


What is the matter with you? You question the source and validity of the +6.1 wind reading and then tell tandfman that we've LOOOOOOONNNNGGGG moved on from it when he tries to answer you in the very next post.. :shock: Yikes.... And by the way, if you'd have paid attention, you'd have seen that I linked to the 2008 North Dakota Track and Field Championships results page (complete with wind readings) in the SAME post that I first mentioned that the times you were using as proof of Laura's speed as a 16 year old where significantly aided by strong tailwinds.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 12:56 pm

Blues wrote: What is the matter with you? You question the source and validity of the +6.1 wind reading and then tell tandfman that we've LOOOOOOONNNNGGGG moved on from it when he tries to answer you in the very next post.. :shock: Yikes.... And by the way, if you'd have paid attention, you'd have seen that I linked to the 2010 North Dakota Track and Field Championships results page (complete with wind readings) in the SAME post that I first mentioned that the times you were using as proof of Laura's speed as a 16 year old where significantly aided by strong tailwinds.

No, what is the matter with you? You're trying to say that I have been using info dishonestly when it is YOU that has been doing that. We LOOOOOOONNNNGGG moved away from the 11.90 when it was brought to our attention that it was windy and I pointed out that she also ran 12.07 which is well within the range of the women in her peer group. You quickly pointed out that the 11.90 was windy and provided the link, but we'd moved on from 11.90, but on that VERY SAME page you see that there is a 12.07 but you PURPOSELY don't mention it but want to claim that I'm playing fast and loose with numbers? There is also no wind reading for the 24.30 and until you prove otherwise with a finishlynx verification I can easily go with 12.07/24.30 and my point still holds. Stop being a jackass!
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Thu May 17, 2012 1:03 pm

Blues wrote:
preston wrote:
tandfman wrote:Tilastopaja, which I regard as quite authoritative, says the 11.90 was aided by a +6.1 wind. I'd regard that as good enough evidence unless someone can prove it's wrong.

tandman, we've LOOOOOONNNNGGGGG moved on from the 11.90, but thank you very much.


What is the matter with you? You question the source and validity of the +6.1 wind reading and then tell tandfman that we've LOOOOOOONNNNGGGG moved on from it when he tries to answer you in the very next post.. :shock: Yikes.... And by the way, if you'd have paid attention, you'd have seen that I linked to the 2008 North Dakota Track and Field Championships results page (complete with wind readings) in the SAME post that I first mentioned that the times you were using as proof of Laura's speed as a 16 year old where significantly aided by strong tailwinds.


You've used erroneous data in just about every post you've posted to try to prove that Laura was among the best short sprinters in her age group. Go back and look at my post where I posted that Laura's 11.90 was aided by a +6.1 wind. Did I not also say that her 12.07 in the final of the same meet was also aided by a wind in the vicinity of +3.2 or something? Maybe I deleted that post, but I could swear that's what I wrote.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Thu May 17, 2012 1:12 pm

In the vicinity? In the vicinity? You're lying about honest errors and you have the nerve to say "in the vicinity"? And you swear that you wrote it? Grow up! You're johnny come lately and full of piss and vinegar for no good reason but being a jerk. You either come back with the exact info or as far as I'm concerned both times are NWI at best because the same "authenticated" link that had the 6.1 DOES NOT have the 12.07 or the 24.30 as being illegal and neither does Becca's site. You're the one with obvious a hard-on for me because I dared to question if the girl could have been a sprinter. You're the one with the problem!
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Thu May 17, 2012 1:54 pm

preston wrote:You're lying about honest errors and you have the nerve to say "in the vicinity"? And you swear that you wrote it? Grow up! You're johnny come lately and full of piss and vinegar for no good reason but being a jerk. You either come back with the exact info or as far as I'm concerned both times are NWI at best because the same "authenticated" link that had the 6.1 DOES NOT have the 12.07 or the 24.30 as being illegal and neither does Becca's site. You're the one with obvious a hard-on for me because I dared to question if the girl could have been a sprinter. You're the one with the problem!


WOW!!! LOL. I wrote "in the vicinity" in my last post because I had pick up my friend at work and didn't have time to go back to yesterday's post and look up exact wind info. Now, if you'll chill and go back to page 5 and read what I wrote yesterday and then click on the link from yesterday like you should have done, you'll see this:

"And since you mentioned Laura's high school 11.90, at the North Dakota State Meet in 2008, Laura ran her 11.90 in the prelims, with the benefit of a +6.1 tailwind. She then won the finals in 12.07, with a +3.2 tailwind. Her 24.30 win in the 200 in the same meet was also aided by a +2.3 tailwind. The following year, in 2009, Laura's season bests were 12.41 and 24.66."
.
http://nd.milesplit.com/meets/37218/results/68603/print
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Thu May 17, 2012 2:05 pm

preston wrote:In the vicinity? In the vicinity? You're lying about honest errors and you have the nerve to say "in the vicinity"? And you swear that you wrote it? Grow up! You're johnny come lately and full of piss and vinegar for no good reason but being a jerk. You either come back with the exact info or as far as I'm concerned both times are NWI at best because the same "authenticated" link that had the 6.1 DOES NOT have the 12.07 or the 24.30 as being illegal and neither does Becca's site. You're the one with obvious a hard-on for me because I dared to question if the girl could have been a sprinter. You're the one with the problem!


And I didn't lie about anything. I said you'd been using invalid information to try to prove your point. If it appeared that I was saying that you were purposely distorting the truth, I honestly apologize, because I never meant to imply that it was intentional. Nevertheless, 11.90, 12.07, and 24.30 were all wind aided, and 11.97 +1.5, and 53.25 were run when she was a senior at 18 years of age, not when she was a sophomore at 16.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Jacksf » Thu May 17, 2012 2:28 pm

This thread has gotten WAY off track -
I started this thread because Laura Roesler was running fast times on the 4x400m relay, but not progressing at the 800m. (look at the 1st post)
I asked if the 400m might not be her better event, since her relay times were getting faster, but her 800m times were not.
I did not ask if she could be an Olympian or world class in the 400m (or the 800m).
I did not ask whether she could run the 100m as fast as Sanya Richards.
I simply proposed that I thought she might be a better 400m runner than an 800m.
Speaking about NOW - her collegiate career - she seems to be equal 400m runner as 800m runner.
But she trains for the 800m, and her times haven't improved since high school.
Meanwhile, her 400m relay times have been getting better.
Let's just drop the conversation about her speed, her HS sprint times. I'm talking about what she is doing and has done in college.
Last edited by Jacksf on Thu May 17, 2012 7:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby Blues » Thu May 17, 2012 4:05 pm

Jacksf, sorry that the thread took this course and that I was a part of it. If information is posted that could be misleading though, I'll generally post a clarification, which is initially all I wanted to do.

At this point I think they should give Laura a little more time in the 8 before deciding she should be doing the 4. She had the second fastest 800m split out of all runners in the 4x8 Championship at Penn in less than ideal conditions (second only to Chanelle Price of Tennessee), and I'm looking forward to seeing what her marks will be like at NCAA's. I have the utmost admiration and respect for her as an elite athlete and as an individual, and had she lost PAC-12's with a 2:05 instead of winning with a SB 2:05 I might be more concerned. Just seems to me that the Oregon staff has to give an athlete who was top 2 in the USA at 800m in high school (not just for one year but for both her sophomore and senior years, and top 5 USA in between) a little more of a chance to try to progress in the event. The one athlete who was ranked ahead of Laura in 2010, Ajee Wilson, hasn't come anywhere near the 2:00.59 split she ran as a high school sophomore in 2010, and currently has a season best of 2:05.19, although she did PR at 2:02.64 last summer in Lille. Anyway, I'm betting that Laura will improve her 800 PR significantly before she leaves Oregon and that she'll eventually place at NCAA's if not more, something that I'm not sure she could do if running the 400.
Blues
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby tandfman » Thu May 17, 2012 7:16 pm

Blues wrote:The one athlete who was ranked ahead of Laura in 2010, Ajee Wilson, hasn't come anywhere near the 2:00.59 split she ran as a high school sophomore in 2010, and currently has a season best of 2:05.19, although she did PR at 2:02.64 last summer in Lille.

That's a heckuva "although". I'm much more impressed with a gold medal at the World Youth Championships than I am with a relay split. I have no reason to think her season's best won't improve before the season's over.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby bruce3404 » Thu May 17, 2012 8:11 pm

Having watched Laura run a lot of 800s and 400s (usually as a relay team anchor), I'm still convinced that the 800 is her race; I've just not seen enough 400 speed and as tough a runner as she is, I think her toughness translates better at 800m. Not sure that she's quite ready to break 2:00, but a 2:02 could be in the cards in Des Moines.
bruce3404
 
Posts: 1565
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:00 am
Location: Track Town, USA

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby preston » Fri May 18, 2012 6:53 am

bruce3404 wrote:I've just not seen enough 400 speed and as tough a runner as she is, I think her toughness translates better at 800m.

Why would you be looking for 400 speed in an 800m runner? She's training for the 800m not the 400m - totally different. Some of you just don't get it: the 8 to the 4 is not like the 200 to the 1, they're completely different and there is no way that you're going to see "400 speed" (I assume you mean turnover) when she's training for the 8.

Getting back to jacksf's point:

-if she trained exclusively for the 400m do I think she could win PAC-12? Yes!
-If she trained exclusively for the 400m do I think she could make the NCAA final? Yes!
preston
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:09 pm

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby tandfman » Fri May 18, 2012 7:15 am

preston wrote:-if she trained exclusively for the 400m do I think she could win PAC-12? Yes!
-If she trained exclusively for the 400m do I think she could make the NCAA final? Yes!

That may be, but I still think the 800 is her best event.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby bruce3404 » Fri May 18, 2012 7:39 am

preston wrote:
bruce3404 wrote:I've just not seen enough 400 speed and as tough a runner as she is, I think her toughness translates better at 800m.

Why would you be looking for 400 speed in an 800m runner? She's training for the 800m not the 400m - totally different. Some of you just don't get it: the 8 to the 4 is not like the 200 to the 1, they're completely different and there is no way that you're going to see "400 speed" (I assume you mean turnover) when she's training for the 8.

Getting back to jacksf's point:


Before you start accusing people of not getting it, maybe YOU should read Jacksf's original question: Anybody think she should move down to the 400m?

My reply had nothing to do with whether she's training for an 800, a 400 or a 10,000. I simply stated that I hadn't seen enough speed in her 400 relay legs while also stating that her toughness better translated to an 800. I'm not "looking" for 400 speed, just stating what I've seen. I do agree that the 800 and 400 are completely different races but I doubt that there's anyone on this board with an IQ over 90 who would disagree with that.
bruce3404
 
Posts: 1565
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:00 am
Location: Track Town, USA

Re: Which event for Laura Roesler? [split]

Postby gh » Fri May 18, 2012 7:49 am

preston wrote:
bruce3404 wrote:I've just not seen enough 400 speed and as tough a runner as she is, I think her toughness translates better at 800m.

Why would you be looking for 400 speed in an 800m runner? She's training for the 800m not the 400m - totally different. ....


Oh come now! You don't know how she's training any more than anybody else here.

Given that the Oregon team trains with a team purpose, and that winning first the Pac-12 and next the NCAA is what it's all about, I'd fall over dead if the anchor of the crucial 4x4 isn't training for the 400 as much as the 800. When she leaves Oregon, then she starts training like an 800 runner.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], MSNbot Media, tgs3 and 14 guests