I saw this list before. It doesn't make ANY sense to me. They've got Chicago and Boston virtually tied as slightly quicker than average. Does that make sense to you? No, I didn't think so.
I saw this list before. It doesn't make ANY sense to me. They've got Chicago and Boston virtually tied as slightly quicker than average. Does that make sense to you? No, I didn't think so.
The Lausanne marathon has a net drop ...starts on a hill, then drops quickly to lake level and stays at lake level.
Is there an acceptable net drop that qualifies such courses as certifiable for WRs, etc.?
Atlas Yawned wrote:
Don't know, I'd never go to Texas.
I might go to Austin, but I would never go to Texas ;)
Pete wrote:
I saw this list before. It doesn't make ANY sense to me. They've got Chicago and Boston virtually tied as slightly quicker than average. Does that make sense to you? No, I didn't think so.
If you look at the gender breakdown, it sort of makes sense. Boston produces some fast women's times, whatever the reason. On the other hand, Austin looks like a fast men's course.
Berlin, London, Amsterdam, Chicago.
If you throw in the downhill "marathons," like Austin, Steamtown, Tucson, and St. George, then you get a different mix on top. But at the international level, nobody considers those to be legitimate marathons, and they aren't recognized for record purposes.
Definately St.George Utah Marathon.
I should have mentioned Rotterdam also.
One advantage to running the fastest European marathons is that the weather conditions are more predictably favorable than are the conditions elsewhere.
Have run 41 marathons.Paris is fast but try to get acclaiminated to time change.If you want to try a Calif. marathon C.I.M. is the one in Dec.Forget Boston you have to be a real horse and tough as hell to P.R. at Beantown.Duluth in June is quick too.Good Luck
It can't drop more than one metre per kilometre for the overall race average. So from start to finish, it can have no more than a net 42m drop from start to finish in order to count for records purposes. Also, the start and finsih cannot be seperated by more than 30% of the race distance.
The only instance were instant drop vs. overall drop comes into play is in a situacion as in Berlin earlier this fall, when Noguchi's run at Berlin produced intermediate WRs, while Paula's splits from her 2:15 are at points in the race where the drop is too great before that drop is made up in the final stages.
I'm interested in running the Vancouver BC marathon next May, has anyone ran it? The layout looks to be flat except running over a bridge twice. I'm sure the weather will be nice and cool, maybe even a little wet?
I would want to know the size and nature of the sample group and how they derived "expected times" before I put any stock in the list.
Radcliffe ram 2.17 in Chicago - so I really don't know why people are talking about the Berlin time. Would really be surprised if the London times also did not qualify. London is not an easy course.
Thanks Trackhead
Not sure your definition of easy, but London is, most definitely, a flat and fast course. For slower runners crowding and turns may be a factor, but I think a WR course with consistently favorable weather would be at the top of any list.
Grandfather Mountain Marathon
Really its flat (TIC)
according to "running in the usa" the 2 courses with the fastest median times are Cleveland and philly.
both have median times of about 4:04:xx
the 2 slowest are LA and Honolulu with median times of over 5:30:xx. can you imagine a race where HALF the runners take longer than 5 1/2 hours to finish?
from
:
-------------------------------
"Marathons with Fast Median Times
1995 2000 2004
Philadelphia 3:41:47 4:01:19 4:04:38
Cleveland 3:55:51 3:57:04 4:05:47 (chip 4:04)
The City of Los Angeles Marathon has overtaken Honolulu as the marathon with the slowest median time which might also mean it is the 'Most Relaxing'.
Marathons with Slow Median Times
1995 2000 2004
Los Angeles 4:50:30 5:14:33 5:53:01
Honolulu 5:50:19 5:49:23 5:42:41 (chip 5:35)
Overall, 26% of the finishers in 2004 marathons ran under 4 hours. LaSalle Bank Chicago had the most fast finishers and was one of very few events which had more under 4 hour finishers in recent years than 20 to 25 years ago.
Number of <4 hour finishers
1980 1995 1998 2004
Boston 6591 (72%) 6467 (68%) 7390 (72%) 5490 (33%)
Chicago 2256 (62%) 4286 (50%) 6105 (36%) 8868 (27%)
New York 10750 (34%) 7757 (21%)
Cleveland 1142 (77%) 1238 (55%) 781 (57%) 676 (45%)
Honolulu 2256 (62%) 4286 (50%) 2094 (9%)
----------------------------------------
in LA the MEAN time is almost 6 HOURS!
Vegas
I was feeling pretty good about my LA top 100 finish until a few minutes ago.
Many thanks.
Check out Eindhoven, early October, good conditions too