Sabrina Moran: savior of USA ultra-distance or headed for burn out?

Keith Stone wrote:

Now there aren't a hundred women capable of sub-6 in the marathon much less a 50K, so unless you add a minute to your previous sub-6 and sub-7 comments they have no basis in fact.

Where are you getting your information? Have you looked at how many women around the world have run under 6-minute pace for a marathon? We're talking about 2:37 marathoners, not world-class athletes.

Keith Stone wrote:

FYI, Anne Riddle Lundblad is the 2004 50K champion so you have no idea what you're talking about.

Her PR for the distance is 3:39:58. Draw your own conclusions.

Hey Haas, What are your PR's?

Avocado's Number wrote:

Where are you getting your information? Have you looked at how many women around the world have run under 6-minute pace for a marathon? We're talking about 2:37 marathoners, not world-class athletes.

Right where you said I should. Look at any major marathon in the world less than a dozen run sub-6 pace. Look at any minor marathon there are 0. Look at the rankings lists, just over 300 female sub-6 performances in 2006, take out the dups, you have less than 100 women. I'll grant you hundreds of marathoners without the duplicates, but again how many of those as you say could do that for another 8k?

Let's look at reality (for a change). A 3:00 50K equates to about a 2:30 marathon. There were less that 100 (dups and all) 2:30 and below marathons by women in 2006. You have absolutely no basis for your "hundreds of women who can run sub-6:00 for 31 miles" statement. You can't have looked anywhere but the back of your eyelids.

bulldog35 wrote:

Hey Haas, What are your PR's?

I have no idea who Haas is.

Keith Stone wrote:

A 3:00 50K equates to about a 2:30 marathon. There were less that 100 (dups and all) 2:30 and below marathons by women in 2006. You have absolutely no basis for your "hundreds of women who can run sub-6:00 for 31 miles" statement.

I didn't say that there are hundreds of women who can run under 3:00 for 50K. I said that hundreds can run sub-6 pace for 31 miles.

Look at all-time lists for female marathoners. Over one hunded different women have run under 2:26 for the marathon. A 2:37 marathon (sub-6 pace) probably wouldn't put a woman in the top thousand.

Haas is a brand name of Avocado's, Now just curious what are your PR's Avocado's Number?

Avocado's Number wrote:

I didn't say that there are hundreds of women who can run under 3:00 for 50K. I said that hundreds can run sub-6 pace for 31 miles.

I know you did, and you have no factual basis for it. You're pulling it out of your ass and you know it. The fact that you said a recent national champion and world class ultra runner "wasn't much of a 50K runner" pretty much nails the fact you have no idea what you're talking about.

Look at all-time lists for female marathoners. Over one hunded different women have run under 2:26 for the marathon. A 2:37 marathon (sub-6 pace) probably wouldn't put a woman in the top thousand.

Oh please. You realize how stupid that sounds? Are you really saying that since the beginning of time because over 100 women have run a sub 2:26 there are "hundreds" that can can do that at any point in time? Geez, get over it. That's like adding up the births since Christ to get the current world population.

Even using the all time lists, saying that because someone can run 2:37 for a marathon doesn't mean they can do that pace for a 50K. Even using your convoluted logic there are maybe 500 women's performances OF ALL TIME that equate to a 6 minute pace for a 50K. Granted that's hundreds, but you really have to stretch the numbers to do that.

Go back to school Grasshopper, you have flunked this grade.

Keith Stone, I can only assume that you know Anne Riddle Lundblad personally. And she is a very accomplished runner no matter how you slice it. This is just a hunch but something is coloring your every comment, and as a result you are not making much sense.

Let's assume a 2:30 marathon (5:43 pace) is required in order to run under 6:00 pace for 50K. Fair? 2:32 is probably more like it, but whatever.

Are you disputing that there have not been a couple of hundred different women who have not run under 2:30? Because I think we can put the lie to that one pretty quickly. Pick a time frame but my guess is that there are in fact a couple of hundred women who could run <3:06 for a 50K right now. Remember, we are talking world wide. Shoot there may be close to 100 just in Kenya and Ethiopia alone. It is not unreasonable to project from a marathon to a 50K time the way it often is to go from 10K to a marathon.

All your talk about the low % of people who can do this or that doesn't add anything because Avocado's Number was only talking about absolute numbers. At least he didn't say 6.02 * 10^23 women could do it...

bulldog35 wrote:

Haas is a brand name of Avocado's, Now just curious what are your PR's Avocado's Number?

I'm not sure why my PRs are relevant to this discussion. I've run sub-2:20 marathons on certified, record-quality, loop courses. I guess if these women are "world-class" runners, and one of them is the possible "savior" of U.S. ultramarathoning, then I suppose that would make me (and thousands of others) super-duper-world-class runners and candidates for the Second Coming, but I'm not claiming that.

Keith Stone wrote:

Are you really saying that since the beginning of time because over 100 women have run a sub 2:26 there are "hundreds" that can can do that at any point in time?

Of course not. But there ARE hundreds of women who can, at this point in time, run sub-6 pace for 50K. Anyone who knows the quality of women's running around the world would realize that. The fact that you believe that a 3:40 50K runner is "world class" suggests that you don't know much about the world scene.

All of this discussion is, of course, a distraction from the absurd suggestion that a woman who runs 50K in over four hours is going to save ultramarathoning in the U.S.

I dont see how marathoning is factoring into this equation. I mean if you are assuming that all elite female marathoners decide they want to take up ultra running then maybe you have an argument. I dont really see that as a possiblity though. Eiether way I think it was a good first showing for moran, who is only 20 and in a league of many more experienced runners.

bulldog35 wrote: Haas is a brand name of Avocado's

Bulldog, congrats on a pretty good showing at your first marathon recently, and also on much progress cutting down on the gratuitous capitalizations.

However, I think you'll agree that:

- There's probably no reason to capitalize the green unctuous fruit above, although I understand you're trying to tie it in with the pseudonym "Avocado's Number."

- More egregiously: apostrophes are not used in forming plurals. What'd you do, cut and paste from his handle?

- On a factual note, Haas is a variety of avocado, not a brand name.

FWIW I think the usually reasonable Avocado's Number is off base on this thread. Though, it must be said, by a factor much smaller than 6.02e23.

grammar grandma wrote:

FWIW I think the usually reasonable Avocado's Number is off base on this thread. Though, it must be said, by a factor much smaller than 6.02e23.

Well, thanks for calling me "usually reasonable." I'm not sure why you think I'm off base in this thread, since I doubt that you disagree with any of the statements I've made. Perhaps I seem off base because I appear to be belittling some women who haven't done anything to offend anyone here. And that does bother me, since they're not the ones -- at least, in this forum -- who are making crazy assertions about their purported status as world class athletes and saviours of U.S. ultramarathoning.

In any event, I don't think it's belittling someone to say that she isn't a world class runner. I don't consider myself to be a world class runner, and it doesn't cause me any great shame to acknowledge that fact.

Mountain Mazungo wrote:

4:08 ~ 3:20/3:30 marathon. I can see why she considers Dean and not Deena a role model.

:)

Avocado's Number wrote: In any event, I don't think it's belittling someone to say that she isn't a world class runner.

Agreed, and the individual in question ain't, yet.

But you're off base in positing these thousands of would-be fast ultra chicks, and implying that the standard of excellence ought to be the hypothetical times we think they'd run, if only they chose to, not the times which real people run in actual races.

Sorry dude, but to determine who's a "world class 50k runner" or whatever, you start with the top N times real people have run in actual races. You don't project from marathon times or 5000m or whatever. Just like you win a race by beating everyone else who shows up, not by running fast enough to satisfy critics on letsrun.

If you want to claim there's orders of magnitude less talent in the ultra ranks, that the records are softer, et cetera, you'll get no argument from me.

Yeah, but you're counting all the fat wasters who walk round in your stats. 8 minute miles are nothing special for 10 miles, 20 miles or 30 miles. If people train, they can do this, it's not difficult.

grammar grandma wrote:

Sorry dude, but to determine who's a "world class 50k runner" or whatever, you start with the top N times real people have run in actual races. You don't project from marathon times or 5000m or whatever. Just like you win a race by beating everyone else who shows up, not by running fast enough to satisfy critics on letsrun.

I'm sensitive to your point, but I think it has its limits. For example, if I run 26.5 miles in 2:20, or 50K in 2:45, I don't think it's reasonable for me to declare myself "world class" at 26.5 miles or 50K simply because almost all of the better runners stop at 26.2 miles.

Races over 26.2 miles, 26.5 miles, and 50K are all pretty similar. (I know I'll get arguments from some ultra guys about that, but it's true, especially for well-trained marathoners.) The difference between a 10,000-meter track race and a 15,000-meter track race is probably greater than the difference between a marathon and a 50K, but I wouldn't declare myself to be a world-class 15,000-meter runner merely because no good 10,000-meter runners bother to show up for 15,000-meter track races.

pics?

I tried to Google her and the first image that came up was for a porn star, albeit a hot one.