CANOVA WAS RIGHT, FOOLS! 2:03:02 SHOULD BE WR!!!

Canova is always right, just ahve a look at Kiplagat:

First full marathon run to the end and sub 2:20 = similar to best German MEN this day!!

Does this mean Mosop could have run under Geb's WR time as well?

And... does this mean Hall could have done a sub 2:06??!!!!!

ronololno wrote:

Does this mean Mosop could have run under Geb's WR time as well?

And... does this mean Hall could have done a sub 2:06??!!!!!

Yep

I means Boston times are legit. They always were- it's just when a bunch of anonymous losers come on a message board and question it that they come into question.

The WR is 2:03:02. End of story.

Mutai lost twice to Makau last year. What does that mean?

What it means is that today he ran a 2:03.38 on a different course under different conditions, and in no way indicates that the time he ran in Boston is something he was capable of at any point in time without the 'aid' of the wind, etc.

He may have only been in 2:05 shape that day, and ran 2:03.02.

This time he ran today doesn't mean that he could have run faster last year under the same conditions.

no! ah! wrote:

What it means is that today he ran a 2:03.38 on a different course under different conditions, and in no way indicates that the time he ran in Boston is something he was capable of at any point in time without the 'aid' of the wind, etc.

He may have only been in 2:05 shape that day, and ran 2:03.02.

This time he ran today doesn't mean that he could have run faster last year under the same conditions.

And that a reasonable calculation of the effect of the wind was in the 'double digit' range of 30-90 seconds. As is well known, Boston's net downhill is countered by the difficulty of running the hills. So, in a good year, Boston can be aided, but not by too much.

runn wrote:

The WR is 2:03:02. End of story.

No, it isn't. End of story.

Given that Makau has edged G. Mutai two times (Berlin, Rotterdam), the interesting question is: how fast would Makau have run in Boston 2011?

runn wrote:

The WR is 2:03:02. End of story.

No, Ryan. It's not.

runerrre wrote:

Given that Makau has edged G. Mutai two times (Berlin, Rotterdam), the interesting question is: how fast would Makau have run in Boston 2011?

I think you answered your own question. Certainly 2h02m, maybe faster. That was a once in a lifetime opportunity. I wouldn't even have ruled out a sub2 with the right pacing.

Canova estimated the net adjusted time for Mutai in Boston of 2:03:40-ish, putting him with, but not necessarily ahead, of Makau (esp. considering that Mutai had Mosop on his heels).

Looks like there are at least three Kenyans under 2:04 right now.

Im sorry to say I lost track which Kenyan Canova is training, was it Mutai, Makau or Mosop? Or all 3?

I knew he coached Shaheen in the past.

Canova is coaching Mosop, while Mutai is self-coached. Don't know much about Makau..

The best runners might very well have loop-course 2:03-flat efforts in them and we may see times like that before long. But it's not very likely those efforts came in Boston. It's much more plausible the tailwind offset the course difficulty by a minute or more.

The wind and net drop in boston negated the difficult hills. The times are legit and have always been legit, and today just proves that.

Canova said the wind didn't matter, hence it must be true.

someone had to do it wrote:

The wind and net drop in boston negated the difficult hills. The times are legit and have always been legit, and today just proves that.

You have a very loose definition of "prove". If Ocsar Pistorius runs 42.06 seconds for the 400, and then LaShawn Merritt comes out and runs 42.31, does that "prove" that Pistorius's blades don't provide an advantage? Because that's basically your logic.

of course not! it just proves white guys are slower than black guys!