Just going on the precedent of my top 20 from 2019, I might only place one women who has only run one marathon in my 20 again.
Nancy Jelagat
Purity Rionoripo
Diane Chemtai
Joan Melly
Ababel Yeshaneh?
I hadn't even considered Jemeli in my 20 but could be convinced. A well-credentialed friend has her in his top ten in place of Ruth. Valary was third in Prague in 2.22.39 then 6th in London in 2.20.35. Ruth won Chicago but not vs any other contender, he said.
Less than five months ago, in a rather fair very public race at the Olympics, I learned who the top 3 were. 1. Peres Jepchirchir; 2. Brigid Kosgei; 3. Molly Seidel. Only one of them makes John Wesley Harding’s “updated top ten.”. That’s a lot of updating in five months. Please explain. Aussiestatman, you’ve also favored non-medalists over the medal winners. Is your explanation different? Thanks.
Don’t the runners very effectively rank themselves when they toe the line together at the Olympics and race to the finish line? Sure, over time others emerge, but a whole host of them in five months? Seems as though you are both preferring less important numbers over more important ones. Am I incorrect?
Less than five months ago, in a rather fair very public race at the Olympics, I learned who the top 3 were. 1. Peres Jepchirchir; 2. Brigid Kosgei; 3. Molly Seidel. Only one of them makes John Wesley Harding’s “updated top ten.”. That’s a lot of updating in five months. Please explain. Aussiestatman, you’ve also favored non-medalists over the medal winners. Is your explanation different? Thanks.
Don’t the runners very effectively rank themselves when they toe the line together at the Olympics and race to the finish line? Sure, over time others emerge, but a whole host of them in five months? Seems as though you are both preferring less important numbers over more important ones. Am I incorrect?
Thanks, JWH's updated ten is from a year ago or more. I can't say that I have seen where his women are ranked now. For me, Seidel had a chance in NY to back up her bronze. I don't see her among the 10 until she has a similar result vs top opposition or gets a quick time on a flat course. Olympics were a great window in to the top of the tree but I think London showed more.
Oh, I was confused by your posting his “updated” ten several separate times in your replies in recent days and weeks. Seemed like with such emphasis and labeling, it was the current discussion. It was my mistake. Appreciate your perspective on which performances need backing up. I find it more intriguing why some apparently faster runners become slower at the Olympics, or absent at the start and/or finish line, thereby falling to “back up” performances recorded with less pressure, less testing, or less competition. If Mr. Harding’s careful list is from within a year preceding the event, and he is a respected analyst of the sport, the fact that only one of his ten named best ten women marathoners finished in the top three in the actual race, is an extraordinary disconnect. I am certainly not an expert, so I don’t know precisely why ardent students of women’s marathoning see it differently than it actually occurs. Few sporting events, even within track and field, unfold that way. Perhaps it’s just easier to keep making predictions on some things than it is to assess them after the facts are known. It’s certainly more fun. Enjoy.
I admire your diligence on race and runner previews. Thank you.
In the men’s, JWH did share his thoughts before Valencia and an online presence like AW will have some year end top ten thoughts from ‘experts’ in this next week.
Oh, I was confused by your posting his “updated” ten several separate times in your replies in recent days and weeks. Seemed like with such emphasis and labeling, it was the current discussion. It was my mistake. Appreciate your perspective on which performances need backing up. I find it more intriguing why some apparently faster runners become slower at the Olympics, or absent at the start and/or finish line, thereby falling to “back up” performances recorded with less pressure, less testing, or less competition. If Mr. Harding’s careful list is from within a year preceding the event, and he is a respected analyst of the sport, the fact that only one of his ten named best ten women marathoners finished in the top three in the actual race, is an extraordinary disconnect. I am certainly not an expert, so I don’t know precisely why ardent students of women’s marathoning see it differently than it actually occurs. Few sporting events, even within track and field, unfold that way. Perhaps it’s just easier to keep making predictions on some things than it is to assess them after the facts are known. It’s certainly more fun. Enjoy.
I admire your diligence on race and runner previews. Thank you.
I don’t think the ‘apparently’ faster runners get slower at the big events because of more testing there. There are a cross section of different rises and falls over courses. Tougher than flat courses not are the only way that athletes can be slowed: weather, either a bit warm or windy seems to affect some runners more than others.
In the men’s, JWH did share his thoughts before Valencia and an online presence like AW will have some year end top ten thoughts from ‘experts’ in this next week.
Women’s merit rankings are up, men’s in a few days
In the men’s, JWH did share his thoughts before Valencia and an online presence like AW will have some year end top ten thoughts from ‘experts’ in this next week.
Women’s merit rankings are up, men’s in a few days
Men’s rankings are quite strange. It was like Amsterdam and Rotterdam were the majors: didn’t matter who you beat. Case in point: Leul G. At 7
I hadn't even considered Jemeli in my 20 but could be convinced. A well-credentialed friend has her in his top ten in place of Ruth. Valary was third in Prague in 2.22.39 then 6th in London in 2.20.35. Ruth won Chicago but not vs any other contender, he said.