The bigger question is how much juice is this body builder on to run 2:33 marathons? He is huge, doesn’t have a running background and magically improves to 2:33 marathon . If you see his instagram page IRUN26.2__
it’s hard to believe someone this big and body builder type does this without being juiced to the hills.
There is a huge difference between a 17 HS kid who might be getting really bad coaching , and a 22 year old who probably had at least average coaching. 8:40/15:30 screams a guy with speed not doing enough mileage. If he was running 80mpw, he would be running 15:00. If you read the article, the kid started late and had a pretty unsupportive college environment in terms of number of competive seasons. Most people quit running after that. If more people kept going, we would see more of these stories (and the OT time would be 2:15 to keep the field size down).
Think about how many 4:30/10:00 HS guys we have that run 30mpw and take the summer off. If they all went to college and took the sport seriously, we would have a lot more Brian Sell/Pat porter stories .
You offered no evidence Dick Beardsley or Frank Shorter had bad high school coaches. As far as I know neither said they had bad high school coaches.
Feel free to post examples of all the 50+ mpw that they ran..
In the article, it says he went to some joke of a D3 school that only started a track team his junior year, but does anyone know how little he was training in college? How does one improve that much? He was in college in 2020.
His best finish at NCAA D3 xc was only 88th.
How is it possible; he ran a lot for many weeks and … it was CIM (DOWNHILL)
Lenny Leonard wrote: If you can run 15:00 or faster for 5k, you should be able to train to run 2:16 or faster for the marathon.
Some people with that speed might be able to do it but it's VERY, VERY rare.. According to McMillan, 2:16:35 is equivalent to 14:01/29:07 for an "endurance monster." According to Daniels , its 14:13/29:34.
His 8:39 3k is equiavalent to the following:
15:02/31:14/2:24:17 according to Daniels. 15:12/31:33/2:28:03 according to McMillan.
Conclusion: This guy's improvement is wild.
If you run 8:39 off 40mpw and up the mileage to 80, what type of performance improvement would you expect to see? Post the line for the 8:15 guy..... And marathon specialist being a notch or two higher than their 3k time is also standard
Lenny Leonard wrote: If you can run 15:00 or faster for 5k, you should be able to train to run 2:16 or faster for the marathon.
Some people with that speed might be able to do it but it's VERY, VERY rare.. According to McMillan, 2:16:35 is equivalent to 14:01/29:07 for an "endurance monster." According to Daniels , its 14:13/29:34.
His 8:39 3k is equiavalent to the following:
15:02/31:14/2:24:17 according to Daniels. 15:12/31:33/2:28:03 according to McMillan.
Conclusion: This guy's improvement is wild.
If you run 8:39 off 40mpw and up the mileage to 80, what type of performance improvement would you expect to see? Post the line for the 8:15 guy..... And marathon specialist being a notch or two higher than their 3k time is also standard
There is a huge difference between a 17 HS kid who might be getting really bad coaching , and a 22 year old who probably had at least average coaching. 8:40/15:30 screams a guy with speed not doing enough mileage. If he was running 80mpw, he would be running 15:00. If you read the article, the kid started late and had a pretty unsupportive college environment in terms of number of competive seasons. Most people quit running after that. If more people kept going, we would see more of these stories (and the OT time would be 2:15 to keep the field size down).
Think about how many 4:30/10:00 HS guys we have that run 30mpw and take the summer off. If they all went to college and took the sport seriously, we would have a lot more Brian Sell/Pat porter stories .
You offered no evidence Dick Beardsley or Frank Shorter had bad high school coaches. As far as I know neither said they had bad high school coaches.
The era they came up in not many were training well in HS, I read Bill Rodger's book and they would run some intervals and that was it, he ran like 12-13 one time on a whim and that was his longest by a lot. Things were varied back then since there weren't many good resources for training info like today. But good HS training became pretty common as the 70s rolled on.
Pretty easy explanation, he can now focus solely on training without having to worry about anything besides running and work, plus not having to worry about meets and the team
I don’t know the man but I’ve been following along the last few years. He has an amazing work ethic, and set a goal and has worked towards it. He moved to altitude bumped up the training and things went well. Leave the man alone. He deserves this more than anyone
I absolutely am leaving him alone. My point is that it's likely he's just a guy who didn't get really serious about his running until he was done with college which is unusual but possible. On a much less grand scale it's similar to what Shorter and Rodgers did. Neither had a college career that suggested what was coming until in Shorter's case, the '69 NCAA outdoor meet.
Also, the 8:39 is a decent time. I have a friend who did 2:15 long before there were fast shoes and he could only manage a 3,000 in 8:35 or 8:40 or something. And I haven't seen anything about the specifics of the 15:36. Was it an all out effort that he seriously trained for and raced regularly or a time he ran once in college meet to pick up a point or two?
#shoes Let's get some shoes.This is the story about a girl who is going to get what she wants, no matter what. She may not be the prettiest girl on the bloc...
I wouldn’t worry about it too much. 2:16 probably won’t even make top 50 times this year and probably less than .0001% of the US population even gives a crap. Not sure who will win the trials but, no matter who they are, you could go to any large city in the US and ask 1000 strangers (including runners) if they’ve ever heard of them and I would bet my next paycheck that you wouldn’t get a single person who has. 2:16 is just another time and, to the layperson, a 2:16 and 2:59 are the same thing lol! So, just focus on yourself because 20 years from now none of it will even matter - believe me.
There are a ton of highschools that will legit put their guys on like 10MPW with just speed workouts and 2mi jogs or like a “core work” day. I bet this kid’s highschool was one of these, and he still probably managed 4:40s off of this.
Then he got to a college with little-to-no XC team and probably bumped up to 25-35MPW, again of speed work and 3-5 milers and managed to run very solid 3k off that. The guy is clearly very talented, and now that he has put in the requisite training is taking off like a rocketship. Clearly he has the talent of a solid D1 runner, but he never would’ve found it without the immense work ethic he’s been putting in the past few years. Props to this guy. I do think he’s an example of how a very talented guy fell through the cracks with some coaches who didn’t know how to train him, but I’m glad he’s finally found the way.
If you run 8:39 off 40mpw and up the mileage to 80, what type of performance improvement would you expect to see? Post the line for the 8:15 guy..... And marathon specialist being a notch or two higher than their 3k time is also standard
It’s CIM .. it’s not even close to legit….
Wrong. The weather was- again- perfect. It is net “downhill” but it has enough uphill that a perfectly flat course would be faster than the CIM course. You can’t just look at the net change to reach determine the impact on times.
If you run 8:39 off 40mpw and up the mileage to 80, what type of performance improvement would you expect to see? Post the line for the 8:15 guy..... And marathon specialist being a notch or two higher than their 3k time is also standard
It’s CIM .. it’s not even close to legit….
Wrong. The weather was- again- perfect. It is net “downhill” but it has enough uphill that a perfectly flat course would be faster than the CIM course. You can’t just look at the net change to reach determine the impact on times.
Alright im actually friends with jarrod and basically it goes like this, college was a wash, with injuries and not putting in as many miles as he could do. After college he started putting in the work and eventually he ended up running 64 in the half. Also idk why everyone keeps talking about his 15:36 in college when his 5k now is sub 14:30 which he ran last year. He moved out to colorado to get some altitude training in August and his coach wanted him to try out the marathon, to which he ended up running an impressive 2:16. No he’s not doping, no its not the shoes, it’s hard work and dedication to the sport of running.
Alright im actually friends with jarrod and basically it goes like this, college was a wash, with injuries and not putting in as many miles as he could do. After college he started putting in the work and eventually he ended up running 64 in the half. Also idk why everyone keeps talking about his 15:36 in college when his 5k now is sub 14:30 which he ran last year. He moved out to colorado to get some altitude training in August and his coach wanted him to try out the marathon, to which he ended up running an impressive 2:16. No he’s not doping, no its not the shoes, it’s hard work and dedication to the sport of running.
This. Huge Jarrod fan. And he breaths the sport. Congrats to the kid, so well-earned.
I don't get the two extremes "everyone with 8:39 3k is able to run 2:16 with proper training" and "it sounds fishy".
I'd say with 8:39 3k and undertrained it still is a huge difference to run 2:16, but it might be doable for some folks - like this guy here made it!
E.g. I only ran a 15:2x 5k with 18 and later ran a couple times under 2:20 myself, but it was years of hard work and I know many faster guys who never ran up to their theoretical potential in the marathon.
To say that a sub15 collegiate athlete usually is able to run 2:16 is a stretch. Usually the 2:15-20 endurance types are able to run 14-14:30ish, like 14:20-29:45-1:05-2:17. A well trained 14:59 runner (when he maxed out his 5k) usually won't be much quicker than 31:00 - 1:07 - 2:20 at best. It's mathematics.
When people run 2:16 with a 15:00 PR it usually only means they don't care about their 5k PR.
His high school coach is a friend of mine. The kid was a soccer player and only ran a bit in HS.
Ottman also is/was friends with some kids I helped coach. He is a very cocky kid, never lacked confidence. He also showed he had the ability to be a very good runner.
Super shoes may aid his performance but the kid is legit. So I'm complimenting him and he drove me nuts with his cockiness that I witnessed numerous time over his college career.
8:39 is usually good for sub 15, especially if one is a distance/marathon type. Now with supershoes (that proportionally aid far more in the marathon) there are probably quite a few women around/sub 2:20 (not quite 2:16, though) who never ran 8:39 3k.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.