| Hats too bee shed |
| ||
Because Mosop isn't running Boston.[/quote] That was obvious. Perhaps he is not such a master after all. |
| MarathonMind |
| ||
The sample of 10,000s is far greater and superior to road 10ks. And though a smaller sample size, the 30,000 should give a greater advantage due to not having a SCPF to any 30k split from any race, excepting Boston 2011. Speaking of Boston, it's interesting that it FINALLY took a massively wind aided race to result in any significant advantage from the net elevation drop. Of course as everyone knows, Boston's net drop looks great on paper only. The accompanying uphills make it a distinctly harder course when there is no wind aid. |
| xmarks |
| ||
Cliff, even if you are a tad abrasive, spot-on analysis. You pretty much nailed it here. |
| pr100 |
| ||
|
Incidentally - I think that Stanley Biwott's 2:05:11 in Paris on the same day is probably a stronger run than any of those in Rotterdam given that it's a more difficult course. |
| Cliff Clavin |
| ||
Cliff, even if you are a tad abrasive, spot-on analysis. You pretty much nailed it here.[/quote] Well, for me it is par for the course. I was only pointing out what was obvious to the intelligent. It is important to point out that Mosop did not have a bad race yesterday, although it may not have been his best either. That is the thing about the marathon, when just one thing is not right, it costs many seconds. 2:05 is still an impressive effort, as the marathon, despite hyperbolic talk of sub 2 hours, is still a distance that should be respected. |