Until the WMMs do something concrete to prove these fields are clean, I'm not calling them the greatest.
If I owned a prominent running website that purported to be anti doping I would be asking about the number of blood tests thy haw had in the last three months and what the results were before I called a field the 'greatest ever'
wejo wrote:
Dennis Reynolds wrote:London 2002?
I'll have to look that one up but was that Gebrselassie and Tergat and Khannouchi?
That one might win.
That was certainly one that came to my mind. Another was the 1984 Olympic marathon (both men's and women's, in fact). Of course, one can define "best marathon field ever" in a bunch of different ways.
The top end of the London field this year is obviously very fast, but I'm not very excited about the race. Another time trial that seems focused more on the continuing rivalry between Berlin and London (and perhaps a couple of others, like Rotterdam) to see which event can deliver the fastest times. This year, it's especially depressing to me to see Mo Farah acting as a half-marathon show horse for the local fans and Dennis Kimetto, after apparently throwing Berlin last fall in his marathon debut, acting as a domestique once again. (If the latest reports are accurate, Kimetto is already twenty-nine years old, and I have my doubts about whether we'll ever have the chance to see what he could do in a real race against a world-class field.)
To me, there is perhaps no athletic event as exciting as a world-class marathon race, but marathon-distance time trials, with a collection of non-competitor pacemakers in the lead for the first thirty kilometers or so, are an abomination of the sport.
wejo wrote:
And I think we said last year's women's race was the best ever. We've said something might be the best NYC Marathon ever but I don't think we drop "best marathon field ever" all the time.
I think "best marathon field ever?" (with the question mark) has been dropped the last two years' London Marathons. Both times it highly disappointed because there were so many DNSs, DNFs, and sub-par performances, so I'm hoping this one isn't the same.
Avocado's Number wrote:
wejo wrote:I'll have to look that one up but was that Gebrselassie and Tergat and Khannouchi?
That one might win.
That was certainly one that came to my mind. Another was the 1984 Olympic marathon (both men's and women's, in fact). Of course, one can define "best marathon field ever" in a bunch of different ways.
The top end of the London field this year is obviously very fast, but I'm not very excited about the race. Another time trial that seems focused more on the continuing rivalry between Berlin and London (and perhaps a couple of others, like Rotterdam) to see which event can deliver the fastest times. This year, it's especially depressing to me to see Mo Farah acting as a half-marathon show horse for the local fans and Dennis Kimetto, after apparently throwing Berlin last fall in his marathon debut, acting as a domestique once again. (If the latest reports are accurate, Kimetto is already twenty-nine years old, and I have my doubts about whether we'll ever have the chance to see what he could do in a real race against a world-class field.)
To me, there is perhaps no athletic event as exciting as a world-class marathon race, but marathon-distance time trials, with a collection of non-competitor pacemakers in the lead for the first thirty kilometers or so, are an abomination of the sport.
Exactly. It would be awesome if Kimetto drops these guys en route to a win.
Wow what a disappointment....
LetsRun.com wrote:
Our London preview will go live in a few minutes. We're calling it the greatest men's marathon field ever assembled.
The field in London has all the current Major Marathon (Boston, NY, Chicago, Berlin and London) record holders, including the World Record holder (Makau), and fastest marathoner ever (G Mutai) facing the Olympic champ.
If you think there was a better marathon field ever assembled post it here.
Despite all that...
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
I don't get it. First everyone's complaining it's going to be a boring time trial where the whole pack sits behind a rabbit for 30k. Now that the opposite happened - super-aggressive early pace, plenty of surges, chase down for the win in the last 5k - it apparently sucked? This is what you all asked for. They didn't run a fast time. It was an unpredictable race with the runners clearly concerned first and foremost about their competitors and not the time (they went out super-fast and covered several surges). What would have made you guys happy?