And that's exactly why the men's standard should be 2:20. You'll never hear of a guy picking up the sport really late and running a 2:16.
Yeah I read that story and thought it was really good. But you'd never see that on the men's side. The standard is just too tough for some recreational dude to make the cut.
Ladies be soft wrote:
And that's exactly why the men's standard should be 2:20. You'll never hear of a guy picking up the sport really late and running a 2:16.
Ever hear of Elijah Lagat Doctor told him because he was so fat, he was a high risk for heart Attack, wound up a 2:07 marathoner, I believe he won the Boston Marathon.
Ever hear of Mark Kiptoo started late 20's ran 12:53 for 5000 and 2:06 in his late 30's, wants to run a 2:04 at age 40
Cool, but I was talking about the US Olympic trials.
Ladies be soft wrote:
And that's exactly why the men's standard should be 2:20. You'll never hear of a guy picking up the sport really late and running a 2:16.
isn't that exactly what steve way did? didn't start running until his early 30s and now he's a 2:15 guy
C Parker wrote:
Ladies be soft wrote:And that's exactly why the men's standard should be 2:20. You'll never hear of a guy picking up the sport really late and running a 2:16.
isn't that exactly what steve way did? didn't start running until his early 30s and now he's a 2:15 guy
Yes, but he followed a Lydiard-inspired plan, and too many Americans know that Lydiard training is bogus.
To be precise, Way followed a Pfitzinger plan.
but Americans are smarter wrote:
C Parker wrote:isn't that exactly what steve way did? didn't start running until his early 30s and now he's a 2:15 guy
Yes, but he followed a Lydiard-inspired plan, and too many Americans know that Lydiard training is bogus.
dan robinson as well only started running about 24 and ran 2.17 by 27 eventually running 2.12
nice story. I'm still waiting for a woman to marry and to finance my training.
Why is lydiard bogus?