Also says he was hoping to run 61 today.
Also says he was hoping to run 61 today.
He is wasting his time if he did this for an appearance fee.
He should be at altitude training, and if he shows up for a tempo run, at his level it should be at least at 4:50 pace.
The only way this was a good run for him, is if he did a 22-25 miler the day before.
Not to disrespect you, but last time people said this he ran 2:04 at Boston. I know that was with a tailwind, but even if there were no wind that would have been around 2:08 or lower on a tough course. Lots of guys self-coach. He will put down at least one more big marathon performance.
Runquick wrote:
Hall needs a real coach. Not to disrespect his faith or anything but God is not a fvcking marathon coach. Hall has no idea what he is doing and his times are only going to be getting worse.
So does Ritz run the marathon if Hall pulls out?
naia champ wrote:
So does Ritz run the marathon if Hall pulls out?
Not sure if you're serious?!?
F5 wrote:
naia champ wrote:So does Ritz run the marathon if Hall pulls out?
Not sure if you're serious?!?
That is correct. Ritz is next in line if anyone pulls out.
Not only is he injured and behind schedule but his fitness has been declining since he started coaching himself. At first he had the base he built up under Mahon to live off of but as that base has deteriorated his performances have started to decline. Not to mention he has neglected his speed for quite some time (even under Mahon) and has refused to race anything under the marathon distance hard. London will not be pretty and may very well be the slowest marathon of his career.
Don Juan wrote:
He said in a flotrack interview that he would be treating this race like a tempo.
A tempo. More than 10s/mile slower than his MARATHON PACE. Interesting definition of tempo.
This and the healthy kidney 30-minute 10k show that Hall is going go get eaten alive in London.
I feel a little bit smarter day by day everytime I read idiotic posts that people are actually serious about or are complete trolls looking for attention. Even if this was a bad tempo run for Hall what if it was just a bad workout? Pretty sure we all had those workouts that didn't turn out too well for us. He's fine, I'll f*cking repeat, HE'S FINE!
hall is a joke, typical in all clowns who flaunt their "faith in the lord" crap. no matter what training he is in the middle of there is absolutely no excuse to run that slow in a 10k and now a half. I ran a PR of 2:19:33 2 years ago and could jog local half marathons in 69 minutes, pathetic.
Watch the Flotrack interview. Hall is injured. He has been injured since November. That's the explanation.
The rest of you are trying to make things more complicated than they really are.
Really? Faster than your marathon pace is jogging? If that is true then your PR should be much faster.
At least Kim smith didn't beat him. Although she is closing the gap.
USA 1 - 0 New Zealand
Yo what about props for Kim Smith.
That San Diego course is far from easy, from 6 - 8 straight uphill, so a 1:08 is damn impressive.
cruTT43 wrote:
hall is a joke, typical in all clowns who flaunt their "faith in the lord" crap. no matter what training he is in the middle of there is absolutely no excuse to run that slow in a 10k and now a half. I ran a PR of 2:19:33 2 years ago and could jog local half marathons in 69 minutes, pathetic.
Ryan Hall and his "'faith in the lord' crap" would hand you and your 2:19:33 your ass, even on an off day.
the village genius wrote:
I feel a little bit smarter day by day everytime I read idiotic posts that people are actually serious about or are complete trolls looking for attention. Even if this was a bad tempo run for Hall what if it was just a bad workout? Pretty sure we all had those workouts that didn't turn out too well for us. He's fine, I'll f*cking repeat, HE'S FINE!
Please help me if I've got this right:
You feel smarter because other people are are using data (Hall's time today vs past races, Hall's increasingly slower splits, etc.) to formulate a hypothesis (that Hall is injured or that Hall treated the race as a mild tempo run).
You, on the other hand, are not an idiot because you are not using data (rather, just your gut feeling) that Hall is fine (and you'll f*cking repeat, HE'S FINE!) and you assume it was just a workout that didn't turn out so well. And, of course, a workout that doesn't turn out so well is just a fluke thing that happens for no reason, never the sign of an injury, poor timing based on the teaching of Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, or anything nefarious.
Is that about right?
The last few years Hall has run like crap at all distances except for the marathon where he has run quite well
Arch Stanton wrote:
the village genius wrote:I feel a little bit smarter day by day everytime I read idiotic posts that people are actually serious about or are complete trolls looking for attention. Even if this was a bad tempo run for Hall what if it was just a bad workout? Pretty sure we all had those workouts that didn't turn out too well for us. He's fine, I'll f*cking repeat, HE'S FINE!
Please help me if I've got this right:
You feel smarter because other people are are using data (Hall's time today vs past races, Hall's increasingly slower splits, etc.) to formulate a hypothesis (that Hall is injured or that Hall treated the race as a mild tempo run).
You, on the other hand, are not an idiot because you are not using data (rather, just your gut feeling) that Hall is fine (and you'll f*cking repeat, HE'S FINE!) and you assume it was just a workout that didn't turn out so well. And, of course, a workout that doesn't turn out so well is just a fluke thing that happens for no reason, never the sign of an injury, poor timing based on the teaching of Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, or anything nefarious.
Is that about right?
Or could it be we are basing it on his history of running poorly at shorter distances and well at the marathon?