Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
lamb cannon
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 2:20PM - in reply to hell yeah Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

hell yeah wrote:

The fastest marathon ever run by almost a minute.

Huge tailwind but still 2:03:02!! Mutai should thank Ryan Hall for setting the early pace.

Kenyan XC Champ and Boston marathon champ in the same year.

Name Ctry Time
1. Geoffrey Mutai KEN 2:03:02
2. Moses Mosop KEN 2:03:06
3. Gebregziabher Gebremariam ETH 2:04:53
4. Ryan Hall USA 2:04:58
5. Abreham Cherkos ETH 2:06:13
6. Robert Kiprono Cheruiyot KEN 2:06:43
7. Philip Kimutai Sanga KEN 2:07:10
8. Deressa Chimsa ETH 2:07:39
9. Bekana Daba ETH 2:08:03
10. Juan Carlos R. Cardona, Sr. COL 2:12:17


where does it rank? I think he came 1st didnt he?
Craig Endem
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 2:30PM - in reply to rojo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Nice to know that Mutai can run 421 x 100m (consecutively) faster than I run my 100m strides on a track. Yeah, I'm slow.
Lickety Split
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 2:43PM - in reply to rojo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
ROJO:

Earlier this week/month either you or WOJO noted that true top marathoners today must break 2:05. Given your math, are you stating that Ryan Hall's not there yet?
gorney
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 3:24PM - in reply to Lickety Split Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Congrats to Hall, Daliva, and Goucher.

Goucher running a PR so soon after giving birth is particularly notable.

Maybe all the ghouls on LR will let up on her for a few days.
Rx
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 3:35PM - in reply to hell yeah Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Did anyone see the results of the drug tests yet?
WIND
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 3:55PM - in reply to Rx Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
I don't know why everyone is saying the net downhill is such a big advantage in Boston: it was all about the wind today. That's what made the times so freaking fast. If the net downhill made for a faster course, then why(in every year but this one) are the times at Boston slower than those in the fastest flat marathons?

In a hypothetical scenario, say there's no wind whatsoever; exactly 0 mph for the entire race. Boston would be a slower course than the flat ones like Chicago, London, Berlin. The scattered uphills throughout the Boston course are enough to make it a slightly slower course than a perfectly flat one... assuming no wind on any of the courses. And most years the results reflect that.

Today's ridiculous times were ALL about the WIND.
gonchar
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 3:59PM - in reply to hell yeah Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Ryan Hall-Mindboggling, Spectacular. I bow down to the American king of the roads. IMHO, that performance is even with, if not greater, than Solinsky's 26:59. To blow away all those other elite Kenyans and Ethiopians like that is something never seen before.

Which Mutai is number one now? Can Kenya please send their top 10 marathoners to the next Olympics?
MAKid
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 4:08PM - in reply to Bobby1 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Bobby1 wrote:

I hate to burst your bubble but since wind resistance is exponential you can't use sprint speeds to calculate the difference for marathon speeds.


It's polynomial. The force exerted by the wind is proportional to the square of the runner's velocity.
Les
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 4:12PM - in reply to rojo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
2:05 for Mutai seems about right. And 2:07 for Hall. He's usually 2-3 minutes behind the leader; it was just under 2 minutes for this race. He finished where he usually finishes. Good run for Hall but not really better than London '08.
malmo
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 4:25PM - in reply to rojo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

rojo wrote:
No one in their right mind called it the greatest performance in history as the tail-wind was an ridiculous 5.7 mps (the time converts to 9.93 with no wind or 9.95 dependig on who you are talking to).

Well today let's say the winds were roughly 20 mph (i saw 19 with gusts to 33 mph).

What does a 20 mph wind convert to in mps? 8.9408(20 miles x 1609.344 meters / 3600 seconds) . Nearly twice as much as Thompson's.


If you don't want to believe me, do the following. Go to the wind/conversion site that exists for sprinting.

http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/wind/index.html

Input today's performances. Mutai's marathon time today comes out to him running 17.49496883 per 100 meters.

Input 8.9408 for the wind and input 70 meters for altitude (as the race roughly starts at 70m of altitude and finishes at 0) and you end up with an equivalent time of 17.83 seconds per 100 meters if run with zero wind at sea level.

Multiply that by 421.94988 (there are 421.95 100 meter segments in a marathon)to get the total time for the marathon of 7523.36636 seconds or 2:05:24.



Weldon, Jonas wind calculator only takes into account the effect of air resistance (density) when running with a tailwind. It does not take into account of energy savings that a runner gets with a tailwind in a marathon.

I specualate that it is at lease 3 minutes possibly 4 minutes. Also the runner with the most surface area (Ryan Hall) would get the most benefit from a tailwind.
cc1438
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 4:59PM - in reply to malmo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Ran Boston today...did not have a great run but can tell you that the wind was not constantly at our backs at 18+ mph the whole way. There was a mix of strong tailwinds, crosswinds, a few headwinds and times when it was relatively still. Also, please explain why the women did not seem to benefit to the same extent as the men, and I don't believe it could be entirely because they are generally smaller.
In my book, the races run today were simply awesome and no one will ever be able to exactly quantify how much the wind helped.
malmo
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:03PM - in reply to cc1438 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Why don't you think that the women didn't benefit? Of course they did.
26mi235
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:19PM - in reply to rojo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
rojo, winds measured at 10 meters above the ground (at the airport), not ground level. 19 mph is about 13 at ground level in the city (Logan has 16 mph and 20 gusting to 31, further inland it was 15, 14, even as low as 9, but gusting). An additional factor is that the speed of the wind was not always a 100% tailwind, so there is at least a 10% loss in usefulness for wind assistance (although the cooling was useful; have you have ever run hard on a treadmill with no fans around?). My guess is that the average tailwind at the runners level was about running speed or slightly lower, not 19mph, which means that the power of the wind was only 40% of your cited amount (since the power is quadratic in speed).
Internet Scientist
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:27PM - in reply to 26mi235 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

26mi235 wrote:

rojo, winds measured at 10 meters above the ground (at the airport), not ground level. 19 mph is about 13 at ground level in the city (Logan has 16 mph and 20 gusting to 31, further inland it was 15, 14, even as low as 9, but gusting). An additional factor is that the speed of the wind was not always a 100% tailwind, so there is at least a 10% loss in usefulness for wind assistance (although the cooling was useful; have you have ever run hard on a treadmill with no fans around?). My guess is that the average tailwind at the runners level was about running speed or slightly lower, not 19mph, which means that the power of the wind was only 40% of your cited amount (since the power is quadratic in speed).



Actually, this is not always true. In Boston especially with the road going through the city with tall buildings on either side, there is a wind tunnel effect which concentrates and amplifies the wind effect. The 19 mph at 10meters above ground can be as high as 27.8 mph at ground level depending on the density and height of the nearby buildings.
knox harrington
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:31PM - in reply to 26mi235 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

26mi235 wrote: My guess is that the average tailwind at the runners level was about running speed or slightly lower, not 19mph, which means that the power of the wind was only 40% of your cited amount (since the power is quadratic in speed).


Force of wind resistance is a function of the square of relative wind speed, but the power required to overcome it is cubic.
cc1438
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:39PM - in reply to malmo Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
OK, so the men run the two fastest times in history and the women are nearly 7 minutes behind Radcliff's world best. How is the supposed benefit even remotely comparable?
knox harrington
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:55PM - in reply to cc1438 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Mutai's PR going in was 0:56 off the WR. Kilel's was 8:00.


cc1438 wrote:OK, so the men run the two fastest times in history and the women are nearly 7 minutes behind Radcliff's world best. How is the supposed benefit even remotely comparable?
Wharton
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:57PM - in reply to cc1438 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

cc1438 wrote:

OK, so the men run the two fastest times in history and the women are nearly 7 minutes behind Radcliff's world best. How is the supposed benefit even remotely comparable?


Logic fail.
Struck down by lightening
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 5:58PM - in reply to cc1438 Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
Because if Paula had run today in the shape she was in when she ran 2.15 she would have run 2.11 to 2.13
Phenom Man
RE: Geoffrey Mutai 2:03:02!!! in Boston Where Does it Rank? 4/18/2011 6:14PM - in reply to Struck down by lightening Reply | Return to Index | Report Post
If you add 2-3 minutes to Hall's time, it's still a great time for Boston. I think a fair conversion would be to say that Mutai probably would have ended up in the mid 2:05s with Hall in the mid 2:07s, which is still an incredible time for Boston. It will be interesting to see what he can run on a flatter course. Possible sub2:06 in London is an actual possibility now.

What's funny is that everyone thought he was going to choke hardcore because of his lack of coach, bad half, diet, and a bunch of other things, but that didn't happen at all. Hall really came out to run today. He fought hard and did a good job coming back on the pack multiple times. He was a big reason why 2:03:02 was actually set today, and all we talk about is how much the wind helped.
Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |