gabe jennings 219

Peter were you the guy in the RUN LA singlet?

Miguel Nuci was interviewed after the race and said he was closing in on the two leaders and thought he could take the win until the wheels fell off the last couple of miles....woulda been nice if the TV coverage could have given us some idea of how the race was unfolding....seems like it was a pretty good rabbit and hare duel. There were no splits, very few camera shots other than the helicopter...even though they had a motorcycle camera on Gabe the whole way...and no updates or insight from the commentators.

Gabe looked pretty efficient and I wouldn't bet against him running a lot faster than 2:19.

In addition to Rodgers' debut time which Tom mentioned, Shorter's first complete narathon was 2:17, Ron Hill's was 2:24, Derek Clayton's was 2:21, JAck Foster's was 2:27 (or thereabouts.) Yes, people have run some very spectacular times in first marathons, but 2:19 is definitely decent, regardless of what the best woman's time is.

No, I did not say his 2:19 was the same/equivalent to a 4:00 1500 meters. I just said "to put it in perspective". I have run a few marathons and know that it is a lot different from the perspective that you cannot go run them often and that there is a lot of time for things to go wrong, an d that a good time is a truer test of an athlete than a time at a shorter distance that is a given percentage above the WR. Posts after my "perspective" comment have added information that adds informations that further informs us of the quality of the effort (it is better in light of that information).

However, what I see is another entry into Gabe's list of good background marks that will mean more if they end up as prelude to his return towards the very high standard he established early on (starting in HS when I saw him, and then at Stanford).

He is a relatively unique individual in our sport and he may or may not be interested in doing the very difficult work of returning to his top level; he owes us nothing in that regard, we get what he gives us. I hope that he does find success in his return. I have little doubt about his ability to succeed in things he works hard at; this guy is no piker and I hope that I did not give the impression that I think that he is.

No, that wasn't me.

I think that may have been Mark Pilja in the Run LA singlet (at least I know he runs on that team and was listed in the elite field). I expected him to be up ahead of me. I ran in a four-man group for the first 10 miles (Miguel Nuci, Dave Jackson, Michael Bartosczak). Miguel was definitely the strongest of our group and he dragged me along until pulling away at 14 miles. I told him he would catch those guys and I am glad he stayed strong. I tried in vain to latch onto the back of his footsteps, even apologizing for not helping more. Then Dave pulled up next to me at 15 miles and we ran stride-for-stride until 22 miles (at ~5:30 pace), which worked great for both of us. I think we were the only ones at that point who had someone to run with. Unfortunately, he got cramps/stiches at 22 and I pulled away, but not fast enough as Chris Zeiman caught me after 24 miles. He was the only one who actually ran similar splits, a smart race. I tried to catch him at the finish, but stupidly left it too late and could only get back to 7 seconds difference for the $1K prize (I may have blown up though if I had gone sooner).

From the sounds of things, Gabe ran a great race actually. He may have crashed a bit, but all the leaders (exc. Zieman) ran slower in the second half. The 2nd half is actually easier on the legs, but the hills in the 1st half take their toll even as you are mostly moving fast through them. Little things like blisters, dehydration, cramps and dull leg pain start catching up with you! Welcome to the marathon.

Well-organized event, kind of like Freescale in that the competitive side of the marathon is really featured.

Nice splits for Zieman... 1:10:54 and 1:10:55, so I guess actually he DID run the 2nd half slower.

Is 30's for the temperature in marathon worse than say a 10K? I've never ran a marathon but personally I don't consider 35 or so to be "very cold" for a race. Definately not ideal, but I consider ideal around 50-55 probably. The marathon obviously has many issues with the body that shorter races don't so I just wondered if the cold gets harder to take the longer the race? Side note, I'm from Missouri and not from California so I probably have a little different perspective on what is cold for a race.

Good point on the guy who mentioned the fact that most of the way he was on 2:15 pace and leading in the second half by himself. Its hard for me not to believe with warmer weather and better competition, he could have run 2:16 or 2:17 at least. Who wouldn't want a return to form for Gabe? We could have a great character that tv likes racing consistently against now world-class and former high school hero Alan Webb. Sounds good for better track tv coverage in the future.

Yeah, I liked the weather as I was down from Boulder to run the race. We have been training the mornings in clear, crisp 20-30's weather for the last 3-4 weeks. But for many, I guess low 30's is a bit uncomfortable. Even being used to the colder temps, I still wore long sleeves, gloves and a winter hat. The muscles definitely feel stiffer in that weather and the pounding of ups/downs right away hurt a bit I suppose.

For shorter races, I guess we all do extended warmups and easy jogging, but of course you don't warmup for 4-5 miles prior to a marathon.

Thanks for the response. That's probably about the same gear I'd run in, might have to throw off the hat at some point though. I should have thought of the warm up factor. Jogging for 15 minutes, starting a race warm and then racing for 5K or 10K, does sound much more comfortable now that I think about it. 35 degrees can't really do much to you in 30 minutes but that would suck to be cold at 5 miles knowing you have 21 to go and not 1 like in a 10K.

Nice post! Very well said.

I may regret asking this, given some of the answers likely to come up, but how is Gabe supporting himself these days. He doesn't have a shoe deal, right?

your attempt to profile the poster is as lame...yet following in your footsteps, i will say that it is a pretty typical argument for many here ("get away from the computer and go train!", "you can't say anything because your PR's suck!"). regardless of whether or not someone approaches gabe's "status", they still have the right to say whatever they want about his performance.

that being said, i like gabe and wish him well. however, i am not impressed by his 2:19*. a runner of his talent should be able to run much faster. true, he led a lot of the race, and true, it was not as deep as the major marathons, but i was expecting him to run faster. however, since i don't know him, i have no idea what his training was like leading up to the race (although i know he ran 1:05).

*gabe's 1500, 5k, & 10k PR's are much better than mine...

[/quote]

What that other guy said

"I posted elsewhere that to put things in perspective, 2:19 is a top woman's time, although well above the WR pace of 2:15. In other events would we be thinking he is really ready to roll of he did a top woman's time, such as 4:00 for 1500, 14:30 for 5000, 30:20 for 10,000? I still think these comparisons tell us something"[/quote]

Yeah, but a 14:30 5k, 30:20 10k and 4:00 1500 don't qualify you for the Olympic Trials. A 2:19 marathon does get you into the Trials. Comparing a 1500, 5k, or even 10k to a marathon is not a very good argument.

It surprises me that so many people are bashing a OT qualifier and questioning his ability and training. Just pretty dumb.

Last time I check a guy named Snell seemed to run pretty well in the 800/1500 after training like a marathoner during his base phase (many 22+ mile runs).

If Gabe peaks well I am sure that he will run pr's from the 800-5000 this coming year.

hahah so true so true