Lance's runs a 2'46 marathon?

How is that HGH and steroids have improved his running. They say LA is still doping. Does that really improve his times. Certainly he can train longer with the drugs like he did in the cycling days.

LA is not an elite so he's not tested. LA can keep taking all the drugs he wants and inject himself on the course and no body will care. LA is just a recreational doper and marathoner now.

Brazilian Coelho wrote:

So what? That remindes me a story of a friend of mine, that was regular tenis player back home, a little over weight, had a beer belly, and decided to train for the Rio Marathon, he train for 1 month and finished in 2'44, in a hot and humidity Rio weather,(much worst than New York) never had ran in his life. So, for Lance(one of the greatest cyclist ever)......NO BIG DEAL!If one day he breaks 2'20, ok, I will shake his hand!!

I am not saying what your beer belly tennis player did is impossible, but it is very doubtful. I have been involved in running for nearly 3 decades and have seen all sorts of things. In the mid-70s Houston McTear ran a hand timed 9.0 mark in the 100-yard dash as a high schooler with only one year of training. (Notwithstanding the hand timing, 9.0 yards is equal to 9.9 meters.) Donald Thomas in only his secord year of high jumping jumped 7" 8', he won the WC this year...notthing is impossible.

I for one am impressed by what Lance did, 2:46 for 36 year 173 pound is pretty good. There a lot of guys who are lot lighter, younger and who didn't spend the last 15 years cycling who take a 2:46 marathon. Also, lets not forget, Lance improved his time by 13 minutes.

Why the f*** would Lance keep doping? You think he gives a shit whether he runs 3:00 or 2:30? No, you losers do. That shit is expensive and the activity he is doing now would not pay for the stuff.

K.K. is American, that is true, but he was a Moroccan until adulthood, completing his University in Morocco.

These "passports of convenience" are a delicate matter, and the concept of nationality is very fuzzy now, as people acquire new nationalities rapidly, which means that the original meaning of where someone is from no longer applies. Look at Qatari runners (from Kenya) - are they really Qataris and are they representative of that torrid Oil rich nation? - of course not! and none of the Kenyans actually train in Qatar. And what about drug cheat Mourhit of Belgium, via Morocco - should the Euro. 5000 record really belong to him?

It is different for people like Meb. and Abdi, because they came to the U.S. when they were kids, and are truly representative of the U.S. running scene.

You could debate this question until the cows go home, but never get a conclusive answer. What are the parameters to establish nationality? They are not clear.

Ghost in Korea

Brazileiro. Eu quizer comunicar com voce pra e-mail. Eu tenh o meu mail aqui mesmo.

Eu achou o que voce dizer muito interesante. Agora quizer ter mais informacoeis a proposito do sistema Brazileiro. Voce entender.

Ghost in Korea

No EPO + 2:46 = Not bad

Peter Brady wrote:

KK is originally from Morocco, Einstein. He is a US naturalized citizen. That's how he got to participate in the US Olympic trials.

Hey dumbass, I know that KK was born in Morocco; however, he is an American now and was when he ran 2:05:38. It's what we call a rhetorical question, Einstein.

I agree, sounds like this sport fits Lance's lifestyle now. To be honest, I would be willing to bet my life he has doped fairly successfully in the past. Lance has made his fame and notoriety, he could not be a 2:10 marathoner with or without dope. If he cared to really attempt Kona in the tri, he could likely win. I just don't think the interest is there to train like that right now. Lance can shave another 15 minutes off his time if he cares to run enough and drop his weight down to what he used to cycle at. It is obvious that there will be another marathon, I would bet in the 2:30's. My bet is he will enjoy the next couple of years, ease back into the swimming and we will see him at Kona (certainly by 2011). Money on that one - not that he will win. He'll get bored of the retired shin-dig and have some fun with the tri. If he really wanted the tri he could win it at 40!

The Big S wrote:

His story might be true. Ever heard of Sean Wade? Supposedly he was just some tennis player who took up running as part of a bet. He ended up becoming an Olympic caliber runner. 2:10 PR ran for New Zealand, now a top master.

Often these urban legends are way exaggerated. Wade may have been doing some running to supplement his tennis. Remember, Andy Roddick covers 15 miles during a 5 setter with multiple tie-breaks....he said so himself. Also, for Sean to get a tennis scholarship to Rice he had to have decent athletic ability.

I think it's interesting to see how fast someone like Armstrong runs a marathon, because it's an experiment of sorts to look at factors that go into "talent." EPO or no EPO, he has an incredibly high VO2 max, lactate threshold, heart rate reserve, and a muscle fiber composition well suited to endurance sports. Yet, even if he put all of his efforts into training for the marathon, he would not be world class.

On the other hand, there are, no doubt, numerous people with biomechanics much more suited to running than Armstrong's who would require more effort in training than him to achieve a 2:46. The achievement a particular time represents varies from individual to individual, but I think that in general we should respect those who have run faster times than ourselves.

I have no talent for running, and ran 2:30.41 for the marathon in the early 80's, and the original point made was that someone like Lance, who was a top world rated endurance athlete might have been able tor run faster than 2:46 for the marathon, based on his phenomenal vo2 max, endurance and will power. If an ordinary athlete like me with no leg speed (best 800/2:10, 1500/4:19, 3000/8:57,3 miles/14:42,5000/15:17, 10,000/32:22) can run 2:30, then a world class athlete should be able to cut minutes off that time.

Yes - Lance does not have great biomechanics, and is a bit heavy for running, but other athletes with less than perfect form have done better than that.

Back in the UK days (70's and 80's) when most London clubs had dozens of runners who could run between 2:20-2:40, Lance would not even have ranked as a decent club runner in those days. In the UK in those days, anyone running around 2:30 or slower (as I did) would have been considered an average runner.

Back in the late 70's we had a runner in our club (Maurice Sharp) who ran 32:00 and 2:30, and was basically considered a jogger by people like Bob Holt (2:16), and Dave Clarke (2:13).

When I speak with Kenyans and other elite africans, they find it strange that Americans and non africans spend hours training to run 'slow' times like Lance. But that is their perspective, and I am not dissing Lance or the large percentage of joggers on this site.

Because standards have now dropped considerably, at the sub elite level, people think that 2:46 is a fast time, when in fact it is not. But everything is relative, and credit to Lance for at least running and keeping active.

Ghost in Korea

I am from that era and there is a little bit of exaggeration in your quote, no one has ever considered a 2:30 marathoner "basically a jogger". Btw - Lance is not a developed runner, he only runs one race a year, he is someone who spent his career doing another sport, he decided to take up running mainly for physical conditioning (to stay active), his weight and milege is actually less than your local road racer...all things considered 2:46 is pretty good.

Dope fiends can do miraculous feats. Unfortunately who knows what's groing in Lance Armstrong's brain right now. He may die suddenly at mile 5.