Eddie Owens (m17) 1:07.38

@Local Runner & Patho,

You're absolutely correct, I did not have all the facts about GPC's previous PR being 1:06:02 because it was not a NYRR race and also not listed on Atlinks.com. Even so, to take another approx 75 secs off a recent PR effort, albeit one that was interrupted by asthma, is still sizable. That being said, if he was on 1:05 pace in Houston and subsequently developed an asthma attack at mile 10, I'd wager that the pace he was holding was too much that day (it was after all a PR attempt at the OM Trials Qualifier), hence the spasm developed in the lungs (full disclosure, I am an asthmatic). This goes back to my original point in my original post, that the tailwind that day allowed for faster times, or to put it another way, the tailwind allowed runners to hold given paces for far longer with less fatigue.

But regardless, GPC got his qualifying time that day so that's an awesome achievement !!!

@Conto,

I think you may be misunderstanding me, or at least what my point is...... *everybody* benefitted from a VERY favorable wind on Sunday. Whether they ran a PR, came close but short of their PR, or was over it, their times were considerably faster than what they would have been on that day with a minimal tailwind or any sort of headwind. If they didn't get the PR, maybe they just weren't clicking that day - it happens. I chose to pull the local elites I did because Pete Prince was unconvinced by the statistics - I neither know these people nor wish to slight them, but as local elites they are easier to gather data on..... And in *NO WAY* am I implying that any of them are not the real deal, especially Eddie Owens, they are all far superior to most of the runners around the country.

As a side note, you have a woman on your team that seriously busted out a rock-solid 6 minute PR to under 1:25 (granted the former PR is 2 years old). But based on her recent races (and I have no idea if she trained through them or not), McMillan has her at a 1:29:59. At that pace, the wind (per the formula) is worth a few minutes.

As to Abdi, Meb, & Hall, those guys are definitely more heading out the door than coming in - and Hall has been in a terrible tailspin for some time now.

Just as a final note.... yes I have posted a lot on this thread about the benefits of the Tailwind on Sunday, but go look at other threads and you'll see plenty of comments, especially on the thread devoted to Rupps splits:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3964609&page=1

By Malmo:

So hilly that American runners can run 22:30 for 5 miles on that loop? And everyone and their mother has broken 23:00 on it? Oh my gosh! Little itty bitty Gwyneth Paltrow hills.

It was cold? Brrrrr. You should stay inside.

It's a great course for a half marathon. Just when you need it most (7 miles) you get 2 miles of downhill running. In addition, from 5 miles to the finishline you get a 10 mph steady wind at your backs. That's 4.5mps -- over double the allowable wind in a track event!

It's a great course: a nice early mourning saunter through the park, then open up the throttle as you run trough Time Square, unravel the spinnaker when you hit the river and you're home free.

If they could move the start forward a half mile they could reduce the net elevation drop enough to have a Worlds Championship ready course.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3964609

By Last Chance:

The allowable drop in a HM is 21m. The allowable difference between start/finish 10.54km. The drop at NYCHM is 29m, 8 meters too much drop. As the crow flies the start and finish is 9.65km apart, barely under the legal.

I do agree that the wind did help on Sunday. No doubt about that. Do the degree of 20+ seconds a mile...not a chance. In order to figure out by how much time it actually helps, you would need an insane amount of data, not just a N12 mph wind. That Jack Daniel's site while interesting, is not reliable for this race at all. Maybe it would be if you were running in Kansas on a straight road with no interference from trees, buildings, etc. Also wind measurements are taken at 10 meters off the ground where there is also less interference then 5 feet off the ground...aka the wind speed runners are dealing with is really less than what is reported.

As for the course being short, I really don't think so. Why would you think that? I suppose most of the speculation about so many people PR'ing by a significant amount and accounting it to a tailwind and the course being short is to rile up everyone that ran the race and make them think that their time isn't really valid. Although it didn't work with me, it did with a lot of people, so keep it up!! Trolling in disguise...brilliant.

Buildings don't interfere with the wind, they actually channel the wind via positive/negative pressure creating suction (also known as the wind-tunnel effect). And wind speed, when calculating dynamic lateral forces, are taken at 30', however all calculations use that same speed for anything below 30' (a 5' high person, per your example).

M.D. wrote:

As a side note, you have a woman on your team that seriously busted out a rock-solid 6 minute PR to under 1:25 (granted the former PR is 2 years old). But based on her recent races (and I have no idea if she trained through them or not), McMillan has her at a 1:29:59. At that pace, the wind (per the formula) is worth a few minutes.

Sorry, meant to write 1:28:59

She ran 3:01 in Philly and is just beginning to tap into her potential.

She's run 2 marathons... Philly 2009, Philly 2010. She went from 3:10 to 3:01, and I would put a large sum of money on her running under 2:58 this spring.

So plug 3hrs into McMillan and tell me what you get.

(also, her PR is not from a NYRR race... though you are right, it was a significant PR. However, it just aligns her half with her marathon... nothing more special then what she has currently run in other distances... which you are failing to consider across the board)...

I'm with you M.D.

I take nothing away from how fast the top guys and local elites (AND EDDIE) are, but as soon as I saw the results, I felt something was off. I perosonally know two people who both PRed BIG. With nothing indicating such a big improvement in the half based on races in the last month.

Also, here's a random pick:

Ciro Pacio - 1:16:11 on Sunday.....Now look at his latest race results before the HM:

http://www.athlinks.com/myresults.aspx?rid=78274583

1)Coogan's Salsa Blues and Shamrocks 5k 2011 - 17:27

2)NYYR Gridiron Classic 4Mi 2011 - 22:51

3)NYRR Manhattan Half-Marathon 2011 1:20:19

He drops 22 seconds per mile in 2 months....YEA RITE

That 1:20:19 is not necessarily indicative of his fitness - as many posters have noted, the Manhattan half was a HM in which to train through. And Ciro Pacio has run a 1:18:57 in the past so it's not like he hasn't gone under 1:20, but it is a sizable jump to 1:16:11 based on comparable performances extrapolated from his 5k and 4M races.

You can just easily pick another person and get data that contradicts this. Kelly Chin's pr was 1:19 going in and, guess what she ran? 1:19. Lindsey Scherf ran 1:13 in Houston in January but ran 1:17 on Sunday. Based on this robust sampling, I hereby conclude that the course must have been long and there must have been a headwind.

are you kidding?

think about how much easier it is to throw in the towel than to kill yourself out there. They may have bonked. I would hardly call this evidence to the contrary

No one ever said those guys didn't work hard for their times. I'm sure many pushed themselves to the limits. But I'm leaning towards the fact that the course/nature gave a good boost to those times.

It's clearly a very fast course, but I don't believe for a second that you can attribute that to the wind, or to the course being short. I say that because it's not just the last 7 miles that are fast. For the last two years, I've run faster over the first 10k of the half than I have for 10k races in the park, and they're basically the same course.

The only difference I can think of between the NYC Half course and most other NYRR races in Central Park is that you run in the road for the half, not the pedestrian lane, which means you can cut off more distance on the tangents. My guess (and this is pure speculation) is that NYRR measures all of its races as if you can use the whole road, but that you end up running slightly longer for most NYRR races because you're confined to the pedestrian lane.

wow, you have got to stop using prior NYRR performances as your "proof." Do you realize how often local runners jump in NYRR races in Central Park merely because they live 2 blocks away from the course? If you are going to have any credibility, you need to do some research into the actual personal bests of these athletes that you are attempting to slam.

Yes, I was kidding. They may have bonked but for the fact that their splits indicate otherwise:

Chin Kelly F30 124 HHRT Brooklyn NY USA 193 27 8 1:19:17 0:18:43 0:37:41 0:56:34 1:15:13 06:04 1:19:16 35 83.06

Scherf Lindsey F24 116 Mill Valley CA USA 150 24 4 1:17:38 0:17:34 0:36:22 0:54:48 1:13:45 05:56 1:17:38 29 84.81

Do you have any more highly scientific arguments?

Yes, I do in fact have more scientific evidence....

Here's a link to a google doc where I list my findings:

http://tinyurl.com/23ezz2d

OK, this thread, with the exception of a few posts, has actually been a serious discussion w/o flaming. Why not keep it at that?!?

Somebody mentioned/questioned earlier about how the race is measured, and it seems the certification at USATF has it as being in the actual car lanes and not the pedestrian lanes.

http://www.usatf.org/events/courses/search/searchResults.asp?courseID=&distance=13.1&distanceUnits=mi&distanceComparison=%3D&city=new+york&state=NY&courseName=&courseStatus=A&courseType=R&drop=&dropComparison=&separation=&separationComparison=&certificationYear=&lastName=&queryType=basic&format=view&submit=Search

Top (first) link - Course NY10002DK New York City Half Marathon

The link is in Java, so you'll have to click on if from their webpage.

On another note, which relates back to Coach Busch's claim that Eddie broke the American 17 yo record, the same webpage clearly states that the course is *NOT* record eligible. So maybe he ran faster than whatever the record is, but the question is moot because USATF will not ratify it.