As opposed to picking a meet where the field would better reflect the reality of his fitness level, rather than drowning in a sea of lactic acid in the wake of far superior runners. That guy he's pictured with looks to be all of maybe 22 at the oldest.
Aim High wrote:
As opposed to picking a meet where the field would better reflect the reality of his fitness level, rather than drowning in a sea of lactic acid in the wake of far superior runners. That guy he's pictured with looks to be all of maybe 22 at the oldest.
you mean he should have run one of those other 10k races around - the ones full of guys running between 27.30 and 28.00 like the one that have at er...
Gouchers time is dissapointing, no doubt, but he had the balls to go for it, which should be commended. It was AR or bust for him, and unfortunately the later happened. Unfortunately I think it was too much time between this and his last race, perhaps some 15's/3ks wouldve sharpened him up. Though he is getting up there in years, hopefully this is a learning experience and next year him and Salazar will ensure a new 10k AR (that is if another runner doesnt get it first)
13:37 was what goucher was running for a flat out 5k a couple of yrs ago...
GO GOUCHER....KEEP IT COMING MAN.....YOU"RE A F***ING BEAST!!!
I was disappointed in his time also, but he seemed to give it 100% and should be commended.
That being said, despite last year's 13:10 and this year's 8:14, I still think he was clearly better in the '98-'99 seasons and would've run 40+ seconds faster in the same race. He's good now, but it was THEN that he was a beast.
Thye official results list Goucher as 27:59.41. So was he 49 or 59?
Track Fan wrote:
Thye official results list Goucher as 27:59.41. So was he 49 or 59?
go back read what you have said - the OFFICIAL results say 59 so what do you think?? Also go back to beginning of thread and see time at 9600m see he did a 67 last lap and do some mental arithmetic.
Ever hear the greater the risk the greater the reward?
He had the guts to roll the dice and next time out going out fast isn't going to be as bad , it's called callousing.
I would love to crash and burn to 27:59
bootsie wrote:
f*ck the haters. he went for it. it was his first world class 10k. he died in the second half and *still* went sub 28 which is a dream for 99.9 percent of us. this has (arguably) been his best professional season and i look forward to the next couple.....
That's right. Goucher is not the kind of guy who is going to sit back. Maybe he is capable of sustaining a pace that would take him to a low 27. He is never going to get there by hanging back trying to run negative splits to impress you idiots. I have much more respect for a guy who tries to take it to them. His first intention was to take some heads, time is secondary. He couldn't let them get to far away. Sometimes you crash and burn in a race and sometimes you don't. The guy has guts. If he was any other way he would be sitting on this message board and posting stupid comments like us losers.
otter wrote:
He couldn't let them get to far away. Sometimes you crash and burn in a race and sometimes you don't.
I remember Goucher getting a lot of hate at the 2001 WC 5K for not going out with the leaders. Guess what, the leaders hit 4:00-4:01 for the 1st mile. The hate will happen no matter what.
There are many track meets in Europe where he could run with competition that would push him better than he was in this race. Just because you haven't heard of them doesn't mean they don't exist, stupid Yank.
Smarty pants wrote:
you mean he should have run one of those other 10k races around - the ones full of guys running between 27.30 and 28.00 like the one that have at er...
Why is this at all about what some shlub letsrun poster would like to achieve for a lifetime best, you would probably be happy to crash and burn to a sub-40, silly rabbit. Your pollyanna perspective is woefully naive. Take your blather about risk and reward to Vegas.
Dear Mr. Aim High,
How anyone can criticize the effort that Goucher made is confusing. He made an effort to run fast and had the guts to finish despite falling off the pace and hurting. He could have dropped out, but was rewarded with a 27:59 debut. Pretty good in 99.9% of letsrun posters opinions.
"Aim high"? I think Goucher did. Imagine if everyone ran their goal time every time out.
Choose to be positive. It makes life a whole lot more enjoyable
Dear Mr. Aim High,
How anyone can criticize the effort that Goucher made is confusing. He made an effort to run fast and had the guts to finish despite falling off the pace and hurting. He could have dropped out, but was rewarded with a 27:59 debut. Pretty good in 99.9% of letsrun posters opinions.
"Aim high"? I think Goucher did. Imagine if everyone ran their goal time every time out.
Choose to be positive. It makes life a whole lot more enjoyable.
funny wrote:
Stop trying to put lipstick on a pig.
Nobody would ever do that, you sick freak.
I just ran a 10k road race today. I'm 43 and in 39 minute shape. I ran the first quarter in 74 seconds as I was really going for a sub-30. Unfortuently I died in the second quarter and finshed in 43 minutes.
Just like Goucher, I really went for it. I'M THE MAN! WHAT A BEAST I AM!!! Doesn't matter I missed my goal by 13 minutes. I imagine all you Goucher supporters will now shower me with accolades for my gutsy performance.
GIB wrote:
How anyone can criticize the effort that Goucher made is confusing.
Okay, thanks for sharing!!!!!!!! (: (: (:
Sure, he has great character and tenacity to "go for it," but don't say he was "forced" to run 64s; he CHOSE to run 64s and should know where he is and what he's getting into. There are other ways.
Mr. Tactics wrote:
I just ran a 10k road race today. I'm 43 and in 39 minute shape. I ran the first quarter in 74 seconds as I was really going for a sub-30. Unfortuently I died in the second quarter and finshed in 43 minutes.
Just like Goucher, I really went for it. I'M THE MAN! WHAT A BEAST I AM!!! Doesn't matter I missed my goal by 13 minutes. I imagine all you Goucher supporters will now shower me with accolades for my gutsy performance.
I'll shower you with the fact that you're an idiot...
And if you finished in 43 minutes with a goal of 39 I'd say that your performance wasn't too gutsy seeing that you only ran one quarter in 74. That means 6 miles in 42 minutes, or 7 minute pace. I'd hardly call that going for it...
DenverRunner wrote:
Mr. Tactics wrote:I just ran a 10k road race today. I'm 43 and in 39 minute shape. I ran the first quarter in 74 seconds as I was really going for a sub-30. Unfortuently I died in the second quarter and finshed in 43 minutes.
Just like Goucher, I really went for it. I'M THE MAN! WHAT A BEAST I AM!!! Doesn't matter I missed my goal by 13 minutes. I imagine all you Goucher supporters will now shower me with accolades for my gutsy performance.
I'll shower you with the fact that you're an idiot...
And if you finished in 43 minutes with a goal of 39 I'd say that your performance wasn't too gutsy seeing that you only ran one quarter in 74. That means 6 miles in 42 minutes, or 7 minute pace. I'd hardly call that going for it...
But my results are exactly the same as Goucher's. I was in way over my head in a fast race with supoerior talent. I went out too fast, died, and limped home with a disappointing time. So what if the clock said 43 minutes. If I lopd a few minutes off the times I have:
First 5k in 13:37
Second 5k in 14:22
Overall 27:59
These are Goucher's times.
What I'm trying to illustrate is a crappy race is a crappy race whether it's 43 minutes or 27:59.
Goucher ran a crappy race, as did I. I was an idiot for what I did and so was Goucher.