A 2:08 American is running New York and he's still unsponsored.... Q&A with Scott Fauble

His PR is deceiving in that he’s a non-factor in every marathon he’s run. A shoe company wouldn’t give a contract for essentially a few seconds of screen time for two marathons a year. He doesn’t race much in-between them either. They’d rather give equipment deals to ten guys and hope for more exposure. I can think of several other men and women in the same position where it just doesn’t make sense to throw contract money for so little brand exposure in return. This especially when you have people in med school and working full-time jobs with essentially the same results.

This is a great point. I'm always surprised when I check results after a race and see he was top American, etc., because I rarely see him on TV coverage mixing it up at the front. Seems like his performances, while very impressive, are rather quiet.

Whereas someone like Parker Stinson blows up and runs 65 minute half...but there's a 5 page thread every time he races. He has a contract.

If you were a shoe company, would you rather invest in CJ Albertson or Scott Fauble?

2:08 is like someone running 13:20 5k and saying show me the money

Several?

My guess is there are other factors. Perhaps his less than upbeat personality? Or people think his 2:08.xx was an one time fluke. But he runs another #1 American sub 2:10 at NYCM, I cannot imagine at least one second tier shoe companies not giving him a call.

To be fair...why would a company want to sponsor someone who even if given a mile head start still couldn't beat the top guys?

He seems to be injured. When you look up other videos of him his running for is MUCH MUCH better.

The comment in the Citius video - "there aren't really many guys in the country at my level who I could train with" - is really telling about his self-absorption and lack of insight. Even if you're a 2:08 guy (generously) you can still benefit from training with 2:15 types as a lot of your training will overlap. Needs to get over himself. Shoe companies don't owe you anything.

A couple people mentioned, but if you haven't watch the video you should at least for a couple minutes. His form makes it look like he is injured right now. He has never had great form compared to some others, but he is almost limping. He has no symmetry right now. If you are betting on the field, this video will shoot Scotts odds way out.

Scott hasn't been close to the win in a major, but what American man has in recent years other than Rupp?

And Fauble was leading Boston up Heartbreak Hill in 2019. He wound up 7th, but he ran 2:09:09 and I'd definitely call him a factor in that race.

letsrun.com

Lawrence Cherono Outkicks Lelisa Desisa to Win 2019 Boston Marathon; Americans Scott Fauble & Jared Ward Run 2:09

LetsRun.com

By LetsRun.com April 15, 2019 BOSTON -- In one of the most thrilling finishes in the 123-year history of the Boston Marathon, Kenya’s Lawrence Cherono,

Open link

What is it with the last piece here? Make up your mind. I feel like ya'll usually like the way non-paced marathon majors play out. We know NYC has a strong field so no matter what time he runs if he's 5th he beat a lot of good runners & is capable of running much faster. How can you say the field quality isn't deep when we know it's deep. Boston/NYC can be challenging & sometimes times aren't fast but you have to have had a good day to place well.

Almost two miles. A 30 year-old with a 2:08 PB in Kenya would be farming.

Still, if someone wants to say they sponsor a US Olympian, then Fauble seems like a good bet for 2024. You'd say Rupp and Mantz will get two spots, then Fauble is probably the best of the rest now that he has decent footwear, unless someone has a great day.

With the exception of the 2019 Boston you referred to, he has been a complete non factor the last two Bostons. Even when he beat CJ for top American last year, we literally never saw Fauble on tv the whole race, where CJ was in the lead pack for 20+ miles (not to mention the year before when he went out like 2 minutes ahead of everyone lol). Shoot even at the Marathon Project, Fauble was a non-factor losing to the likes of Hehir and Droddy even though on paper he still ran a “good race” sub 2:10.

I wonder if his experience switching from Hoka to Nikes is making him want to hold out for better shoes...you gotta think as a pro, is it worth trading 2 minutes off your marathon for $50k from Under Armor? With a decent appearance fee at US marathons I'd think he does OK racing twice a year, but health insurance etc. could be a drag.

How many people actually watch live marathon coverage, and how much product does the live coverage sell? Fauble got a ton of press AFTER the race for being the top American. Unfortunately for Fauble, he probably helped sell a decent amount of lululemon attire because of the after race coverage.

Again with the 'super shoes'... The average and median winning times since super shoes started being worn is 2:08 at New York. The top times have not significantly improved. The course record is still a low 2:05 waaaay before super shoes. The depth has improved, but that's because there is an ever increasing amount of people trying to run fast and doing good training. Also times appear to have gotten faster because everyone is going to the fastest course possible, top people are swinging big at Berlin or Valencia instead of going to New York or other courses that are not typically fast.

Typically at New York only 3-5 people run sub 2:10, the winner a few years ago was only 2:10. Bekele showed up last year after a 2:06 Berlin run and was not very close to running another sub 2:10. Kibiwott Kandie, former half marathon world record holder at 57:30's, only ran like 2:12. If you can run 2:08 at New York you're one of the best in the world.

Realistically the only competitive footwear is Nike Adidas Saucony ASICS and perhaps new balance if your name is Emily Sisson. If you sign with any other brand you are at a competitive disadvantage.

Are we seriously still debating if the shoes make a difference 5 years in?? Have you worn them, they feel like trampolines. Plenty of people have been running Berlin/London/Dubai/Chicago and other marathons before super shoes, fast marathons aren't a new thing. The 100th fastest marathon time in the world dropped immediately by 2 minutes with their introduction. (2:19:59, 2:20:00, 2:20:07, 2:20:14, 2:20:02, 2:17:58). Guess what year they were widely released to the public? Did pro runners just discover they could run on fast courses that year?? 12/13 of the fastest times in history all post carbon plate era.

Also looking at a single marathon as your barometer for the efficacy of shoes is idiotic. The track spikes are a different story, nowhere near the impact in the data.