Rupp could retire today as one of the top ten best US marathoners ever.

Right, and Rodgers 8, that's 8 victories combined in Boston and New York were weak non-premier marathons:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)

broken arrow wrote:

Shorter is #1, hands down. When he was running it was completely different than now, Fukuoka was the.

premier marathon other than the OG.

The fact that he won the OG twice, and Fukuoka four times makes it a slam dunk.

Of course the Majors are harder to win now than the OG, but the Majors did not exist then.

The big marathons from that era were Fukuoka, Boston, Beppu, Karl Marx Stadt, Kosice.

I'm with you dude, Rodgers had too many important big victories to let the Olympics trump all of those victories. and you're right, he would have won Montreal, no doubt about it.

I didn't say that. The Boston victories were over world class talented fields. I listed Boston as a big marathon. NYC was not loaded with world class talent the first 2-3 versions. Guys like Chris Stewart were not top guys, he beat Shorter in 1976, he beat Drayton, Moore and Kardong in 1977, a little stronger field. He beat Ian Thompson and Jack Foster in 1978. The NYC fields were not loaded at this time, only Boston was.

Yes, and like he said, Bill Rodgers won Boston 4 times. His first victory in 1975 was faster than Frank ever ran in any marathon, look it up. Frank's victories in Fukuoka were not loaded either, that's clearly subjective. His first victory was just skimming under 2:13.

When were all of the great 2:04s and 2:05s many of you are giving Rupp credit for? He is not in the same league as KK or even Hall. GR had the same downhill Boston course RH had. Ritz is better. Beardsley was better. The debate is whether he's above Pfitz or Spence (I'd say he is) You could also put him above guys like Bjorklund and for sure Bob Hodge pretty comfortably. When it comes to Rodgers or Salazar, it's no debate. Rupp is nowhere near.

Billy's 1975 win was wind-aided. His 2:10 at NYC was legit. We were lucky to have the world's best (Frank) followed by his successor (Billy) over the course of an entire decade. Those two guys invented American road running.

Frank Murphy wrote:

Another name to throw out-Steve Spence-bronze in 1991 world championships. Cannot think of anyone else who has a world champs medal. International Championship races have to way heavily on rankings. This is why Shorter is a clear #1

Mark Plaatjes won gold two years later (he became a citizen a couple weeks before). In any event, I would not put Spence in the class of the guys that have been mentioned.

Are you Frank ("A Cold Clear Day") Murphy? I love the Edelen book.

Stop crying Francis. Frank's Fukuoka victories were aided. Rodgers had a better marathoning career, even without the gold medal. Simple logic is not your forte.

Keep taking the Blue Pill wrote:

Billy's 1975 win was wind-aided. His 2:10 at NYC was legit. We were lucky to have the world's best (Frank) followed by his successor (Billy) over the course of an entire decade. Those two guys invented American road running.

Rupp is nowhere near the best US marathoners ever.

Bill Rodgers is by far the best, and not just because I was there (basically). His 2:10 in traffic, literally, on what was a lot like a high school cross country course (stairs on the route, actually) at NYC 1976 was essentially the world record, I'd call it a high 2:08. (Clayton's 2:08 was a mid-2:09 at best, Rodgers was world record holder until Deek.)

Rodgers won essentially everything until Salazar won NYC in 1980. He raced, and won more in every month than Rupp even runs in a year.

Rodgers

Shorter

Edelen

Salazar

Hall

Meb

Ritz

Moore

Rupp

Beardsley

Concerning marathons, Rupp is about equal to Jeff Wells, or John Tuttle. Regardless of the Olympic medal.

So far I've seen a lot of good lists and good discussion on placings, but still no lists with Rupp absent in the top 10. I'm not a Rupp fan or a hater, I just think it's incredible how much marathon credibility he's pulled out of his first three attempts at the distance.

Older runner X wrote:

Rupp is nowhere near the best US marathoners ever.

Bill Rodgers is by far the best, and not just because I was there (basically). His 2:10 in traffic, literally, on what was a lot like a high school cross country course (stairs on the route, actually) at NYC 1976 was essentially the world record, I'd call it a high 2:08. (Clayton's 2:08 was a mid-2:09 at best, Rodgers was world record holder until Deek.)

Rodgers won essentially everything until Salazar won NYC in 1980. He raced, and won more in every month than Rupp even runs in a year.

Rodgers

Shorter

Edelen

Salazar

Hall

Meb

Ritz

Moore

Rupp

Beardsley

Concerning marathons, Rupp is about equal to Jeff Wells, or John Tuttle. Regardless of the Olympic medal.

wtf how are Ritz and Moore better than Rupp?

So how exactly were the performances on this course aided? Maybe with a special typhoon-level tailwind in the 100m separating the start and finish?http://www.fukuoka-marathon.com/en/map.htmlExcuse me in advance if this logic is too simple for you to comprehend.

keep crying baby wa wa wrote:

Stop crying Francis. Frank's Fukuoka victories were aided. Rodgers had a better marathoning career, even without the gold medal. Simple logic is not your forte.

Keep taking the Blue Pill wrote:

Billy's 1975 win was wind-aided. His 2:10 at NYC was legit. We were lucky to have the world's best (Frank) followed by his successor (Billy) over the course of an entire decade. Those two guys invented American road running.

Given how slowly Rupp has run, I actually have a hard time even putting him on this list. Ritz isn't even a "marathoner," and he's run a heck of a lot faster.

Rupp MIGHT get into the 2:07 range on a cool day with a TT course, but not if he fades late like he has all three times.

Moore was a bad-as*, I just see it that way with how he ran in the 60s. Which was a heck of a lot more competitive that anyone thinks it was!

I mean seriously, this topic is "best US marathoners ever," and you guys are mad your 2:10 guy isn't the outright favorite. In 2017. When an aided effort almost had a sub-2 the other week. Rupp is closer to the women's world record than the men's. Sorry, fanboys.

Older runner X wrote:

.. Rupp is closer to the women's world record than the men's.

Ouch. But funny.

Older runner X wrote:

Given how slowly Rupp has run, I actually have a hard time even putting him on this list. Ritz isn't even a "marathoner," and he's run a heck of a lot faster.

Rupp MIGHT get into the 2:07 range on a cool day with a TT course, but not if he fades late like he has all three times.

Moore was a bad-as*, I just see it that way with how he ran in the 60s. Which was a heck of a lot more competitive that anyone thinks it was!

I mean seriously, this topic is "best US marathoners ever," and you guys are mad your 2:10 guy isn't the outright favorite. In 2017. When an aided effort almost had a sub-2 the other week. Rupp is closer to the women's world record than the men's. Sorry, fanboys.

I never said Rupp was "the outright favorite". He's still a long way from guys like Shorter and Rodgers. I'm just baffled as to how Ritz or Moore could be considered better marathoners. Actually your whole list is confusing. You say Ritz is ahead of Rupp because he's run 2:07, but then you have Edelen at 3rd, who's PR was 2:14. Why, because the 2:14 was a WR at the time?

Well then why isn't KK on the list? He ran a 2:05 WR. Also, Hall ahead of Meb? Why, because he has a faster PR? Meb has an Olympic silver and wins at Boston and NYC, Hall has none of those.

But seriously, let's look at Moore vs Rupp. What has Moore done that Rupp hasn't? Rupp has won an Olympic trials, Olympic bronze, finished 2nd at Boston, and run sub 2:10. Moore has done none of those, unless you consider his tying with Shorter at the 72 trials a real win.

So, are we still pretending that Meb's win at Boston was legit? It wasn't.

Rupp has won an Olympic trials. (He ran away from an old guy, and from a guy who finished two spots behind him in the Olympics, who is not the golden child, or trained by Salazar. Okay.)

Olympic bronze. (I know.)

Finished 2nd at Boston, and run sub 2:10. (Faded hard a third time, and ran slower than Rodgers did in 1975. Too bad he didn't go to London, where he would have run 2:05, right?)

Moore has done none of those, unless you consider his tying with Shorter at the 72 trials a real win. (The same reason I put Edelen on the list, you can't compare eras straight across, now is now.)

And 2:09.58 in 2017 is slow as sh*t.)

Give it up, no one is buying your lame excuses at intelligence. Rodgers over Shorter, now shut up already. 4 Japan victories don't top 4 Bostons. Back to your parents basement.

Keep Taking The Blue Pill wrote:

So how exactly were the performances on this course aided? Maybe with a special typhoon-level tailwind in the 100m separating the start and finish?

http://www.fukuoka-marathon.com/en/map.html

Excuse me in advance if this logic is too simple for you to comprehend.

keep crying baby wa wa wrote:

Stop crying Francis. Frank's Fukuoka victories were aided. Rodgers had a better marathoning career, even without the gold medal. Simple logic is not your forte.

You're a moron if you think they LET him win. Stupidest logic I ever heard on these boards. Hall did not LET him win AND the other Americans were NOT taking off to go after him and were stopped by Hall, that is a freaking joke!!!!!! Men won, fair and square. Honestly, you guys are fools!

Fixed Income wrote:

So, are we still pretending that Meb's win at Boston was legit? It wasn't.