I ran the 2005 Vermont City Marathon where he did the same thing. He was crushing the entire field, then had to walk/jog it in the last couple of miles.
Seems like he needs some good coaching or direction...
I ran the 2005 Vermont City Marathon where he did the same thing. He was crushing the entire field, then had to walk/jog it in the last couple of miles.
Seems like he needs some good coaching or direction...
oh yeah, and how did you do exactly??
I bet I beat you at VCM in 2005.
The kid runs hard from the get go. He will hang with any pace until his legs drop off. I kinda like his style.
I disagree.
Cicero once said, "Fortune favors the brave." I'd say Moulton will again put it all together, as he did in Houston, for an even faster time.
Bill Rodgers used to say that the key to his success was "well, you gotta' go crazy in a race."
The caveat to all this of course is that Moulton is brave, not reckless, and crazy, but not stupid. Crossing those lines is very easy.
Sounds like the Kenyan way of thinking.
See question/answer #5 on the Chasing Kimbia site.
Check this out...
http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17302104&BRD=2185&
;amp;amp;PAG=461&dept_id=416049&rfi=6
Wrong wrote:
The kid runs hard from the get go. He will hang with any pace until his legs drop off. I kinda like his style.
Based on that logic, someone could sprint for a block, then walk it in and be considered great.
hansel wrote:
oh yeah, and how did you do exactly??
He beat Moulton.
post his name then if you aren't lying.
My mistake. I assumed he meant Moulton DNFed at Vermont, in which case he would have beaten him. No disrespect to Moulton, just being a LR smartass.
I appreciate his style...I just think he needs to chose his races better. Going all out at a major marathon is one thing, but a small, low-key one without a serious contender. Why assume he?
history repeating wrote:
I appreciate his style...I just think he needs to chose his races better. Going all out at a major marathon is one thing, but a small, low-key one without a serious contender. Why assume he?
Why NOT go out hard at such a marathon? He said he thought it was a faster course so he was going for a faster time. He was intentionally rolling the dice to see what he could do. Just because they came up snake eyes doesn't make it a bad plan.
4:58 at the first mile it says in the article. Seems a little fast but I don't know him as a runner at all, so I am speculating. I would say though that workouts and races done prior to his marathon should have given him some indication of what he could run and to go out at 2:11 pace in the first mile seems like he does not have a clue.
There was a runner in town here who would train for the marathon by running all out for two hours. Race day came and he was good for two hours and the struggled into the finish. I don't believe he ever qualified for the trials despite his times being indicative of someone who had the ability.
He ran 2:12 and change recently at a toughter course so it is YOU that does not have a clue.
Casey did run a 2:15 at Austin this past February, so going out as hard as he did wasn't way out of his reach. He blew up at VCM a few years ago and learned a lot there. He went on to run around 2:20 at Chicago last year IRC. Then he cut off another 5 minutes at Austin. 2:11 is obviously a big step, but I wouldn't put it past him to run that fast in time.
Why NOT go out hard at such a marathon? He said he thought it was a faster course so he was going for a faster time. He was intentionally rolling the dice to see what he could do. Just because they came up snake eyes doesn't make it a bad plan.
Because even if he does have a great time, no one will respect it since it wasn't against any competition.
4:58 at the first mile it says in the article. Seems a little fast...
The 1st mile at Steamtown drops 140' total, and about 80' of that occurs in just 300 meters after about a half mile. 4:58 would be a very controlled abd sensible start for that 1st mile. Having just run this course for the first time myself, I can say almost authoritatively that this is a positive split course, not unlike Boston.
Read here for more about the course from veterans of it:
http://www.steamtownmarathon.com/training_tips_main.php2:15 at Austin is about a minute pr from his 2:20 at Chicago. Austin was about 4 minutes fast this past year.
Some of you really need to run the course before running your mouth. I ran the race too hoping the downhill would make it fast. I kept my HR low the first half and was never working, yet my legs were trashed just like his by halfway through. Casey went out for even splits, which is conservative considering the 800+ ft drop in the first half of the race. A few people handled it well enough to finish well; a few of us blew up from it. A moderate amount of downhill may be helpful but I could run a lot faster on a flatter course as I'd still have quads left for the second half.