Hall is NOT a 2:04:58 guy. Quit saying otherwise.

dear god, thank you. I almost blow a gasket every single time i hear ppl refer to "2:04".

first of all, it's :02 seconds away from being 2:05, and 58 seconds away from being an actual 2:04:zerozero. secondly, see the post above. complete and utter bullshnikes to claim, it's as if somebody like E Cheseret ran that mile in new hampshire and claimed they were a 3:51 miler. gimme a break! dude, we all know you're good, 2:06 is the best an american has done in eons, but don't try to call yourself a 2:04 guy, and please correct others when they try to as well.

Hall IS a 2:04:58 guy.

Cubato wrote:

Hall IS a 2:04:58 guy.

Exactly. While it's fun to argue what Hall's 2:04 is 'worth' on a different course or under different conditions, unless you want to argue that Hall cut the course, or there was clock malfunction, Hall ran 2:04 on a certified marathon course. And not just certified by guys with a wheel and tape. It's been certified by hundreds of thousands of runners and almost 120 years of history.

Do you really want to argue that Bill Rodgers was not a 2L09 guy? That Salazar and Beardsley and Kempainen didn't run 2:08?

Sure Hall benefitted from favoarable conditions and (maybe...) the course. But it's lunacy to deny him his time. Where is the cutoff? Why is it what it is (and remember that the marathon has no 'world record' for precisely these kinds of reasons..) Once you start down this road - no pun intended - you have to impose the same sorts of analysis to what should really count in track records. (In fact we do with wind speed and pacers but that's a whole other debate)

The point is this: Running is not gymnastics, or diving or ballet. We measure a runner's career first in wins and losses and second, sometimes, in PRs.

I think, after drugs, the most corrosive force in our sport has been this obsessoin with times and records. When you measure an event's success first by whether a record was set, then most events are going to be failures. When you measure it by the quality of the racing and the resolution of rivalry, then every event can be a success.

Let's get back to fundamentals. There's a well understood starting line and finshing line and course in between. The starter fires the gun and the first guy across the line is celebrated as the champion and everyone else can spend the period before their next race figuring out how to win it. Then they all go at it again. Golf and Nascar and, hell, WWF still bring in lots of spectators and sponshorship money using this precise formula (every golf tournament is not hyped as a 'record' attempt)

\rant (I know the OP was probably a troll, but these things are worth saying. regardless)

Cubato wrote:

Hall IS a 2:04:58 guy.

So if I jump out of an airplane while moving my arms and legs like I am running, do I get credit for running the mile in under a minute?

Airplane runner wrote:

Cubato wrote:

Hall IS a 2:04:58 guy.

So if I jump out of an airplane while moving my arms and legs like I am running, do I get credit for running the mile in under a minute?

Please try this and report back to us tomorrow. Thanks.

Hall is a 2:04:58 guy. He is also a 59:43 guy. Try taking that away from him.

If he had to run INTO the 25 mph wind for the last 13.1 of that wind aided day

hed be a 2:10 guy.

Winners closed in 4:20 come on.

3:28 miler Mike Boit

2011 called...

...it wants its thread topic back

Ok, sure. Maybe everyone can stop calling him a 2:04:58 guy when they stop calling those several Kenyan/Ethiopian guys 2:03/2:04 guys when they are not, since all of those times were set using pacers. Those guys may not have run below 2:05 at any point without pacers. We still call them 2:03/2:04 guys though....

Dude. No shit.

Most people don't even consider Ryan Hall to be a runner anymore, much less a 2:04:58 marathoner.

like a fart in the wind wrote:

Dude. No shit.

Most people don't even consider Ryan Hall to be a runner anymore, much less a 2:04:58 marathoner.

From how he sounds lately I'd go with hobbyjogger

Ryan covered 2:04:58 on foot for 26.2 miles. The wind and the difficulty of the course cancel out so it was as fast as Berlin. Ryan and the top 3 finishers all had great days out there. Some days you're just on and the race is in perfect conditions.

Boston is a net down hill course, but it is a very difficult course because of the early downhill miles beating up your legs then having the hills later on.

The man ran 2:04. An American born white male ran 2:04. That's some special and to be proud of. So embrace it rather than deny you morons. When people perform so well be proud instead of making excuses to try and diminish its validity.

Airplane runner wrote:

So if I jump out of an airplane while moving my arms and legs like I am running, do I get credit for running the mile in under a minute?

Yep. Go for it, and have your mom and dad let us know your time. Thanks!

like a fart in the wind wrote:

Dude. No shit.

Most people don't even consider Ryan Hall to be a runner anymore, much less a 2:04:58 marathoner.

Said the guy who Ryan Hall could beat running backwards.

Mr. Mellotron wrote:

Airplane runner wrote:

So if I jump out of an airplane while moving my arms and legs like I am running, do I get credit for running the mile in under a minute?

Please try this and report back to us tomorrow. Thanks.

Please let us know how you solved the tricky part of using a measuring wheel to measure air, and how you were able to get an air distance measurement certified.

said the guy... wrote:

like a fart in the wind wrote:

Dude. No shit.

Most people don't even consider Ryan Hall to be a runner anymore, much less a 2:04:58 marathoner.

Said the guy who Ryan Hall could beat running backwards.

The world record for the backwards marathon is 3:42:41.

So ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...no.

What kind of time has two colons in it? Oh, I see now, your nic is colon-based one.

agc5k wrote:

The wind and the difficulty of the course cancel out

lol