Why do we have to pretend a 2:18 male marathon is impressive?

Why do we have to pretend your indoor sub 14 5000 is impressive? It's more than a minute off the WR. You'd get lapped twice by real runners.

Haha I couldn’t run 68’s for 3k/3200 when I was 17. By 21 though, I could for 10k. Dream big, train smart, recover harder, it’ll happen. The “slow” comment was to add to the trolling, intentionally to piss people off (this is the perfect thread to do so). But you got this dude.

A lot of people always fail to remember that everything in this sport is relative to yourself and at the end of the day, it's really yourself you're competing with to get better, unless you're one of the very top athletes in the world. For some people, a 2:18 marathon may be slow, for some, a sub 4 is impressive and something that deserves to be cheered on. End of the day, for all of us, goal is to just beat our past selves and raise the bar, wherever you're at.

Well, it used to be before cheat shoes rendered times irrelevant.

Let me guess, you are not East African and have to console yourself that you will always lose.

I don't anyone thinks 2:18 is all that impressive. Most 14:30 (and many 15:00) runners could run faster if they trained for it. Most people don't train for the marathon because it's boring and they're doing other better things with their life.

Also whoever said it's equivalent to sub 14:00 is delusional.

15:00 5k is equivalent to a 2:24 marathon. so still a couple of km off the pace. 14:30 is probably more or less there but like you say it takes a lot more time every day which is why a 2:18 'thon is more impressive than a 14:30 5k.

why are you even taking this guy seriously? he's either troll or a douche. a have no time for either.

LRC is now a bunch of balding overweight slow pitch softball players getting drunk in a bar while claiming that they could play at the MLB level. "You see that ball I crushed tonight? Mike Trout and Bryce Harper ain't got sh** on me, boys! I can rake!!!"

After four decades of involvement and observation in this sport, 90% of serious male runners are still insecure dweebs desperately seeking validation and clout. I have many friends that are former pros and know a few current elites. They are some of the most emotionally mature and humble people that you could ever meet. I'm even starting to respect shoetubers and social media influencers more because they present a positive image to the world. Sub-elites should drop the act and quit acting like a-holes towards each other.

The main reason is because it is. It still puts you at the very top of all the people who run marathons.

It takes dedication and a lot of training.

It’s all they’ve got.

Nope, they could not.

As you mentioned they would find the training too boring.

Most 14:30 runners seem to not understand that you actually have to race a distance in order to get a PR. Just plucking it into a race calculator does not count.

I think your 90% is high, but I agree with your overall assessment.

And, if the message board wasn't anonymous it would eliminate these people because they're all basically cowards.

just go to your standard 400M track and please rep some 400's at 2:18 marathon pace, or roughly 78 seconds per lap. Give yourself 60 seconds rest between reps. Let's just see how many reps you can maintain at 78 seconds per lap, before you slow down. Easier said than done.

Exactly. I'm not interested enough in this to dig up actual numbers here but I'd bet 2:18 puts a guy at least at the 95th percentile of all marathon times and quite possibly higher. I'd really like it if there was a way we could see what sort of marathon times, if any, people who post here about how weak times like 2:20 or so are. In real life I've never known anyone who's run faster than that would agree with the sort of nonsense the OP put here.

OTQ is not to select "impressive" runners otherwise there would be less than 10 participants. But, if you want a proper race with like between 50 and 100 runners then you need to put the selection time accordingly.

I'm guessing sub-2:18 is more like 99.9 percentile.

I actually feel like OP's premise is backwards. Too many people hate on sub-2:18s around here. I think it's because people can't separate out how no US male is running sub-2:06 with how impressive a 2:17 still is. The 2:17 marathoners are not why the US isn't more competitive in the marathon. That time, on its own, is hugely impressive. It's something not many people can do. Some people have to basically devote their whole lives to hitting it. It's a completely appropriate Trials standard. It helps generate local buzz. It's not holding back the pointy end of the field.

Maybe shoes have something to do with it too. People have convinced themselves that they're worth 5 minutes when they're worth more like 60-90s on a perfect weather day with perfect pacing/fueling. A lot has to go right to run 2:17 & you have to be pretty talented to even think about it. Would rather be happy for someone running an OTQ than instantly comparing them to Kipchoge.

I think it's actually even better than minor league baseball. There are 780 major league baseball players (26-man rosters, 30 teams). Then if you account for injuries and bullpen shuttling between minors majors it's closer to 1,000-1,200 players that play in a major league game in any given season. Less than 200 American men are qualified for OT marathon.

Probably a decent analogy would be MLS in USA. The best players in the world play in European leagues, but the pros in MLS are still pro and pretty good. American runners aren't best in the world, they're more like players in MLS. But being a pro soccer player in MLS is still pretty impressive.

love this! seriously this is so accurate.