How much time trialing did Des do? She ran the NYC Half/NYC Marathon/Boston Marathon a ton throughout her career.
I would say 2018/2019 Des would've had a shot or would have at least gotten close if she ran 2x Berlin/London & went with the 70:00 pace groups. You have to be fit to win Boston, even in trash conditions/with a slow time. You have to be fit to run 2:26/2:27/2:28 in NY. 2:26-flat in Rio. 2:22, 2:23, 2x2:25 in Boston. Her Trials races in 2012/2016/2020 were all great. Let's not act like she was some slouch. Des was a top American marathoner for a decade & mostly raced for place at American majors.
Des is realistic that 2:20 and slower women marathoners are not competitive nowadays and "doesn't put you in the conversation now". Do our younger American women marathoners listen?
This wasn’t a dig; this was an observation of the level of competition as it is today. She includes herself in that statement.
Agreed. If she was 'throwing shade' at anyone, it was herself. She essentially admitted that, even if she was currently in her prime, she wouldn't be even remotely competitive from an international standpoint.
She is strongly opposed to gray area (legal) performance enhancing. She also was on her high horse about super shoes. She then goes to win 2018 Boston in Brooks first super shoe while taking thyroid meds. Nothing illegal just what she speaks out against.
She counts her 2:22 Boston as her PB. She doesn’t count Sara Hall’s 2:25 at Boston as a Master record.
Now that she is no longer a factor to make an Olympic team she will snipe at top Americans.
She is just like Kara in not understanding how they are viewed by those in the trenches. This is why they both have leaned on the hobby jogger crowd.
Des made a couple Olympic Teams....she's obviously great.
As a teammate of her at Hansons when that first happened (and when she got 2nd at Boston),
I would say it is fair to say if we had "super shoes" back in 2011-2012 we probably all would have been 1-3 minutes faster for a marathon. Maybe not 100% as some respond differently, but some super shoes are for sure making people (Even elites!) a few minutes faster. The science is clear on that.
As far as "legal courses" go....well, people like to discredit anyone's PR nowadays if it doesn't show up on their World Athletics Profile. I believe times/performances need to be taken into context:
Following only World Athletics, that basically means none of you can count your PR from a course like CIM, Boston, Grandmas (or in my case Rock n' Rock San Diego) either then.
But the issue with Des is that her fastest time was not so much the net downhill nature of the course (Boston)...it was more the fact that on a point-to point course you have a potential for a massive tailwind. And that's exactly what happened when she ran 2:22 there for 2nd in 2011 (remember Ryan Hall ran 2:04 in that race too?!).
Then of course when she won Boston it was a super headwind day (tough conditions!). So there's that performance also....despite the relatively slow time. It could be argued that she does really well on extreme weather days at Boston.
But I would agree there is nothing from her 5km, 10k, and half marathon PRs to suggest that she actually was a "sub 2:20" kind of runner on a flat course in normal weather conditions....even if she had super shoes back then. However, if she had super shoes on that day at Boston her time very well could have been 2:19:xx....just everyone would have also been faster and she might not have gotten 2nd then!
Our cohort is a tough one to be in though...because I look back at my prime marathon years (circa 2011-2015) and think "if only those super shoes were out back then!"... Runners drop 2:18 like it's nothing now. These are runners that used to run 2:21 before!
Yeah Desi had a monster tailwind at Boston that most thought was worth 2-3 minutes. You are not entirely objective though because you are a 2:18:24 marathoner on a legal course and a 2:16:52 runner on a not legal course. Of course your non legal course was probably not 2-3 minutes fast due to a monster tailwind like Desi had. No doubt you would have run 2-3 minutes faster in the super shoes. I certainly never questioned that.
I'm not "entirely objective"?!
I said: if you don't want to count my marathon PR from San Diego Rock N Roll 2011 (not an World Athletics cert course but certainly an Olympic Trials qualifying course and OTQ performance) then you also can't count anyone's PR on a course like CIM, Grandmas or Boston. How is that not objective and logical?
So yeah, I will say my Marathon PR is 2:16:52 (I also ran a legit 1:04 half PR for the record). It got me my 2nd OTQ qualifier. If a course is US Olympic Trials Qualifying legal then I'm going to count it as my PR. And Des can count Boston too of course...but all I'm saying is it is worth noting the massive tailwind that she (and everyone) had that special day. But it's also not like her half marathon PR was 1:07-1:08 or something...which would show true potential for a sub 2:20 at the time.
But back to Hansons: I'd also say Brian Sell would've been a 2:08 guy easy in today's supershoes.
She is strongly opposed to gray area (legal) performance enhancing. She also was on her high horse about super shoes. She then goes to win 2018 Boston in Brooks first super shoe while taking thyroid meds. Nothing illegal just what she speaks out against.
She counts her 2:22 Boston as her PB. She doesn’t count Sara Hall’s 2:25 at Boston as a Master record.
Now that she is no longer a factor to make an Olympic team she will snipe at top Americans.
She is just like Kara in not understanding how they are viewed by those in the trenches. This is why they both have leaned on the hobby jogger crowd.
Pretty sure she is not against legal supplements that don’t violate anti-doping protocols, and was merely against shoes giving a single brand a huge advantage. So none of that is hypocritical. Nice try with the smear tactic Nike shill.
Des made a couple Olympic Teams....she's obviously great.
As a teammate of her at Hansons when that first happened (and when she got 2nd at Boston),
I would say it is fair to say if we had "super shoes" back in 2011-2012 we probably all would have been 1-3 minutes faster for a marathon. Maybe not 100% as some respond differently, but some super shoes are for sure making people (Even elites!) a few minutes faster. The science is clear on that.
As far as "legal courses" go....well, people like to discredit anyone's PR nowadays if it doesn't show up on their World Athletics Profile. I believe times/performances need to be taken into context:
Following only World Athletics, that basically means none of you can count your PR from a course like CIM, Boston, Grandmas (or in my case Rock n' Rock San Diego) either then.
But the issue with Des is that her fastest time was not so much the net downhill nature of the course (Boston)...it was more the fact that on a point-to point course you have a potential for a massive tailwind. And that's exactly what happened when she ran 2:22 there for 2nd in 2011 (remember Ryan Hall ran 2:04 in that race too?!).
Then of course when she won Boston it was a super headwind day (tough conditions!). So there's that performance also....despite the relatively slow time. It could be argued that she does really well on extreme weather days at Boston.
But I would agree there is nothing from her 5km, 10k, and half marathon PRs to suggest that she actually was a "sub 2:20" kind of runner on a flat course in normal weather conditions....even if she had super shoes back then. However, if she had super shoes on that day at Boston her time very well could have been 2:19:xx....just everyone would have also been faster and she might not have gotten 2nd then!
Our cohort is a tough one to be in though...because I look back at my prime marathon years (circa 2011-2015) and think "if only those super shoes were out back then!"... Runners drop 2:18 like it's nothing now. These are runners that used to run 2:21 before!
RnR SD has changed since your day, still net down hill but you hit a heart break hill at mile 20 now
This wasn’t a dig; this was an observation of the level of competition as it is today. She includes herself in that statement.
Des is indeed throwing "shade". She is implying that the current US women marathoners are all second rate athletes.
If you are the OP your reading comprehension and sense of logic is really bad.
From the article:
"
“I’m glad I’m 40 because the sport when I started? That’s a different sport,” Linden said. “If I had to peak in my career with the super shoes, maybe I’d break 2:20, which doesn’t put you in the conversation now. I don’t mean that as a knock on anyone, but if you want to be competitive, you’re going to have to level up and start believing that 2:14s are in your wheelhouse. So, I’m glad I’m 40.”
"
If you call that "throwing shade" I don't know what it say....
She objectively uses times (2:14) to support her commentary on what is "relevant and competitive" on the world scene (considering the context that the women's WR is now 2:11).
I get it though if you want to start a clickbait thread title that's not factually correct.....smh
If you call that "throwing shade" I don't know what it say....
She objectively uses times (2:14) to support her commentary on what is "relevant and competitive" on the world scene (considering the context that the women's WR is now 2:11).
I get it though if you want to start a clickbait thread title that's not factually correct.....smh
Des knows all the PBs of the "top" current US women marathoners and she knows none of them are remotely in range of a 2:14 let alone a 2:11. Her comments are an implied dig against all the current women US women marathoners that they are not good enough
She ran her masters record in supershoes and barely beat the old non super shoes record so there's that also, is her record not legit then in her righteous mind...
Des made a couple Olympic Teams....she's obviously great.
As a teammate of her at Hansons when that first happened (and when she got 2nd at Boston),
I would say it is fair to say if we had "super shoes" back in 2011-2012 we probably all would have been 1-3 minutes faster for a marathon. Maybe not 100% as some respond differently, but some super shoes are for sure making people (Even elites!) a few minutes faster. The science is clear on that.
As far as "legal courses" go....well, people like to discredit anyone's PR nowadays if it doesn't show up on their World Athletics Profile. I believe times/performances need to be taken into context:
Following only World Athletics, that basically means none of you can count your PR from a course like CIM, Boston, Grandmas (or in my case Rock n' Rock San Diego) either then.
But the issue with Des is that her fastest time was not so much the net downhill nature of the course (Boston)...it was more the fact that on a point-to point course you have a potential for a massive tailwind. And that's exactly what happened when she ran 2:22 there for 2nd in 2011 (remember Ryan Hall ran 2:04 in that race too?!).
Then of course when she won Boston it was a super headwind day (tough conditions!). So there's that performance also....despite the relatively slow time. It could be argued that she does really well on extreme weather days at Boston.
But I would agree there is nothing from her 5km, 10k, and half marathon PRs to suggest that she actually was a "sub 2:20" kind of runner on a flat course in normal weather conditions....even if she had super shoes back then. However, if she had super shoes on that day at Boston her time very well could have been 2:19:xx....just everyone would have also been faster and she might not have gotten 2nd then!
Our cohort is a tough one to be in though...because I look back at my prime marathon years (circa 2011-2015) and think "if only those super shoes were out back then!"... Runners drop 2:18 like it's nothing now. These are runners that used to run 2:21 before!
You're a smart guy Sage, but with her all-time pr on an unaided course and no huge tailwind being 2:25:55,, she would NOT be breaking 2:22 let alone 2:20. Your 1-3 minute range is fair, but she wasn't running 3 minutes faster, no way.
I'm not ripping her or you, just saying she's highly exaggerating what the shoes would have done for her. Some people will constantly try to be relevant at any cost and she is one of them.
As far as "legal courses" go....well, people like to discredit anyone's PR nowadays if it doesn't show up on their World Athletics Profile. I believe times/performances need to be taken into context:
Following only World Athletics, that basically means none of you can count your PR from a course like CIM, Boston, Grandmas (or in my case Rock n' Rock San Diego) either then.
I never understand why people don't run legal certified courses in the first place. I was a lot slower but I always did my research on which race to run to get a legal PR.
If you call that "throwing shade" I don't know what it say....
She objectively uses times (2:14) to support her commentary on what is "relevant and competitive" on the world scene (considering the context that the women's WR is now 2:11).
I get it though if you want to start a clickbait thread title that's not factually correct.....smh
Des knows all the PBs of the "top" current US women marathoners and she knows none of them are remotely in range of a 2:14 let alone a 2:11. Her comments are an implied dig against all the current women US women marathoners that they are not good enough
Anyone who knows how to tell time understands that. There's no need to "imply" something that's a basic fact. She said they're going to have to run faster and she's glad it's not her that has to try. There's nothing controversial here. If anything was actually implied it's that _someone_ at some time can actually do this, otherwise why bring up the need?
Anyone who knows how to tell time understands that. There's no need to "imply" something that's a basic fact. She said they're going to have to run faster and she's glad it's not her that has to try. There's nothing controversial here. If anything was actually implied it's that _someone_ at some time can actually do this, otherwise why bring up the need?
Words, they have meaning.
A "basic fact" that the current American women marathoners are not competitive? You could have fooled me with how much they celebrate their placings far down the results sheets.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.