Wow Hobie call, guy from quote of the day 7/10/12, is beyond ignorant

Sp!kes wrote:

I agree. Runners World looks the stupidest in this article. The guy is nuts and believes in himself, so what? His goals are ridiculous, so what? He is definitely a good runner and too good to be talking to those idiots at RW.

The interviewer is a hater.

Letsrun is a place where our dreams become reality, we should embrace this guy and ban the hater interviewer for ever!

I hope to god this is sarcasm.

This guy comes across as one of the most self absorbed people around. The statements about being able to run a 2 hour marathon through weight vest training is but a symptom of massive self-absorption. I am not sure this is so unusual with runners, but the extent of his problem sure appears to be unusual and intense to an extraordinary degree.

hdfhdgfdgfh wrote:

I don't get why Runners World made a point of going after him. There are plenty of crazies out there. They could have stopped after a few questions and made it clear that this guy was nuts, but scott douglass had to go be a jackoff and try to humiliate a talented guy who clearly has some sort of mental issue. Way to go, RW. Crazy as he is, Call runs faster than anybody who writes for RW, that's for sure.

I'm not exactly a huge RW fan, but Amby Burfoot, Kenny Moore, Jeff Galloway, and Ed Eyestone are all on staff there. Hobie Call couldn't carry their jockstraps with a wheelbarrow, with or without a 40-pound vest on. And Scott Douglas wasn't exactly a slouch either, with a 68:40 half marathon best. It wasn't straight downhill like Bryce Canyon, but it still seems pretty solid.

Hobie Call, meet Marshall Burt. You two have a lot to talk about:

http://www.theetgtrackclub.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=training_updates

but he will never get to because he can only do it if he has someone who pays his way. If he doesnt get that someone to pay his way there will always be the excuse he couldnt give it a full effort because he had to work 10-12 hour days.

michiganxcrunner wrote:

I for one hope someone just comes out of the woodwork and gives him some cash. Runners make a pittance as it is, how expensive could it be to support this guy for a year or two? I don't believe there's a chance he could break 2:00, but at the very least this would make for a very entertaining story.

i think someone should support him on the stipulation that if he does not break 2:10 he has to pay it all back.

Belgian Waffle wrote:

Actuary runner wrote:

As a numbers guy, I would have posed the following question to him:

"If you think running a 4:34 mile with a 40 lb vest is enough of an indication for you to hold that pace for 26.2 miles, then isn't your 4:40 mile also an indication you can hold that pace for 26.2 miles? Why not move onto steps 2-4 from your 4:40 mile, smash the 2:03 barrier, make a shitload of money in the process, then disappear for a couple of years and come back and put that record way out of reach?"

As a reality guy, I do not believe there is any way that he ran a 4:40 mile with a 40 pound weight vest. Isn't the rule of thumb 2 seconds per mile per/pound. Subtracting 40 pounds, that would be a 3:20 mile. (And the weight of the vest is not evenly distributed over the entire body).

I would pretty much guarantee the 4:40 weighted mile was run downhill - especially considering his other PR's. Depending on the hill, I would bet that 4:40 with 40 lbs is worth more like 4:20 on flat ground unweighted.

This is not to say that running downhill is a useless training tool, but it is very misleading to claim it as a PR.

113 wrote:

I'm not exactly a huge RW fan, but Amby Burfoot, Kenny Moore, Jeff Galloway, and Ed Eyestone are all on staff there. Hobie Call couldn't carry their jockstraps with a wheelbarrow, with or without a 40-pound vest on. And Scott Douglas wasn't exactly a slouch either, with a 68:40 half marathon best. It wasn't straight downhill like Bryce Canyon, but it still seems pretty solid.

None of those folks can run fast right now.

He could take out a loan and support himself for a few years. The windfall from a WR or tremendous improvement would be enormous-certainly enough to offset 12 months of living expenses on a manual labor job.

Or he could stop installing air conditioners and find a better career. He seems to have enough tenacity to change his financial situation. Heck, I bet he could get plenty of cross fit types to pay to train with him.

In your life, under any circumstances, what's the farthest you've run at the pace needed to run a sub-2:00 marathon?

HC: I know what you're getting at, but you're missing the point. Fosbury was mediocre at best before he came up with the Fosbury Flop. My PRs are:


Mile: 3:57 [Note: Call says this occurred during a “downhill training run.”]


5K: 14:01

10K: 29:0? [Note: Athlinks.com lists Call’s PR as 29:41, set in 2002 at the Deseret Morning News 10K, which has a net elevation drop of 711 feet.]

Half marathon: 1:04:00 [Note: Call ran this time at the 2007 Bryce Canyon Half Marathon, which has a net elevation drop of 1,800 feet.]

Marathon: 2:16:39 [Note: Call ran this time at the 2007 Top of Utah Marathon, which has a net elevation loss of 1,081 feet and an average gradient of -0.4%.]

gfdd ggf wrote:

113 wrote:

I'm not exactly a huge RW fan, but Amby Burfoot, Kenny Moore, Jeff Galloway, and Ed Eyestone are all on staff there. Hobie Call couldn't carry their jockstraps with a wheelbarrow, with or without a 40-pound vest on. And Scott Douglas wasn't exactly a slouch either, with a 68:40 half marathon best. It wasn't straight downhill like Bryce Canyon, but it still seems pretty solid.

None of those folks can run fast right now.

Neither can Hobie Call. All of his PRs are from five years ago. He averages 7:00/mile over these obstacle courses, though.

Belgian Waffle wrote:

Actuary runner wrote:

As a numbers guy, I would have posed the following question to him:

"If you think running a 4:34 mile with a 40 lb vest is enough of an indication for you to hold that pace for 26.2 miles, then isn't your 4:40 mile also an indication you can hold that pace for 26.2 miles? Why not move onto steps 2-4 from your 4:40 mile, smash the 2:03 barrier, make a shitload of money in the process, then disappear for a couple of years and come back and put that record way out of reach?"

As a reality guy, I do not believe there is any way that he ran a 4:40 mile with a 40 pound weight vest. Isn't the rule of thumb 2 seconds per mile per/pound. Subtracting 40 pounds, that would be a 3:20 mile. (And the weight of the vest is not evenly distributed over the entire body).

I don't feel like reading about this guy, but I'll chime in here. How is a 40-pound vest the same thing as 40 pounds of body weight? How does that "rule of thumb" apply here at all? Who has 40 pounds of dead weight on their upper body? Conclusion: the guy is an idiot.

Runner's World was a solid magazine -- in the 1970's. No delusional fluffers back then.

theohiostate wrote:

I'd like to see how much improvement this guy makes with his methods. What if he ends up sub-2:10? Would you still dog the guy?

This guy suggests he can run a marathon about 7 seconds per mile faster than the WR, and about 40 seconds per mile faster than his current (downhill) PR. Anyone who has trained hard for more than a few years understands how delusional it is to say that you are going to knock off 40 seconds per mile, or suddenly and miraculously become 7 seconds a mile faster than Gebresellasie.

If it was as simple as running with weights on, then everyone who lost weight would suddenly become world class. But the data suggest that slow ex-fatties outnumber people who have run 1:59 for the marathon.

So of course he's being called out. Did I mention that I'm going to JUMP OVER MY HOUSE!?!? I'll jump a foot today, with 5 lbs on. Then...

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

I don't feel like reading about this guy, but I'll chime in here. How is a 40-pound vest the same thing as 40 pounds of body weight? How does that "rule of thumb" apply here at all? Who has 40 pounds of dead weight on their upper body? Conclusion: the guy is an idiot.

Indeed, the 'rule of thumb' for body weight isn't directly applicable to external weight (I've had this discussion with fellow runners), since the body weight correlation involves carrying around extra tissue distributed in a certain way that also requires blood supply, oxygen, etc.

I don't think /he/ claimed an exact equivalency to excess body weight, just that it induces more/different stresses while training. Dead weight like that also depends on where it's distributed: along the waist would have less of an impact, whereas 40lbs on the feet would be killer.

Rather than support this guy straight-up, somebody should just make a "bet" where he re-pays lost costs, plus interest, if he's that confident.

I'm willing to give this guy $10,000 with a few conditions. Off the top of my head, I'd have to say that if he does not go under 2:00 in 24 months (as he stated) then he will pay me back $10,000. If he does break 2:00 then I'll get a % (yet undetermined, but ~60-70%) of his income derived from breaking the record (purses, book deals, appearance fees, etc.).

Anyone else in? I think $60K should cover his expenses for the 24 months. I want this guy living, breathing, and thinking about running 24/7. No distractions.

Can he break 2 for the full thon? Maybe he can, maybe he can't. Let's not knock him before he tries. Remember, people said bannister couldn't break 4 in the mile (full).

Preakness wrote:

Can he break 2 for the full thon? Maybe he can, maybe he can't. Let's not knock him before he tries. Remember, people said bannister couldn't break 4 in the mile (full).

Bannister wasn't a 4:45 miler two years before he ran 3:59.

Take him up to a little over 138,000 feet in an airplane and drop him ... he'll break 2 hours.