Webb, Fernandez, Hasay, and Cain didn't run. I think Hall is next on the list.
[quote]Big Fan wrote:
All this talk about what this means, etc... What's NOT being discussed is:
Why is this a Ryan Hall thread?
Since when is the 9th place finisher the biggest news in any race.
[quote]
I'd say that Hall is in 28:20 10k and 63min HM shape which is not too bad coming off a terrible Boston Marathon. If he can stay healthy I think he can get back into 2:08 marathon territory.
OP here. People here on the whole are more interested in how Hall performed than who won this race, or that Quigley was the top American, for a multitude of reasons that I won't bother to enumerate because if you don't get it you don't get it. That being said, congrats to Sean for a good race.
Big Fan wrote:
All this talk about what this means, etc... What's NOT being discussed is:
Why is this a Ryan Hall thread?
Since when is the 9th place finisher the biggest news in any race.
It seems as though the day of/day after news is usually 'Kenny B wins!' Sometimes everyone is excited about the first American ie 'Desi Second!'
I get it: this IS an American site; a German site praises their local heroes. However, these seem to be A) The First American in the race and B) high places, usually podium.
Sometimes an American actually WINS and the board explodes 'Ben MF True!!'
I get all this. But NOW we will be seeing: 'Billy Bob 23rd place in Turlock Turkey Trot' as the first, and apparently main thread about the race. Hey, I'm a bigger Ryan fan than most. He DOES have an AR. No US citizen, naturalized as an established pro or otherwise has run faster before or since. Not Rupp, not Ritz (he's been close) not Abdi, Meb, or a certain WR holder in the marathon. Hey, I'm a fan.
Nevertheless, this thread is like a Danica Patrick discussion. She, her sponsors, and her publicity team don't want you to realize: Someone actually WINS these races. Every Indy, F1, NASCAR, go-kart race, etc has a winner - and THAT is always bigger news than Danica, Ryan, or whoever scraped into 19th place in whatever competion you might want to look at. Especially when it wasn't even the first American.
Perhaps Hall should take a break from attempts at the marathon until his swan song shot at the Olympics in 2016, and focus on 10/half-marathon. He has a lot of marathons in his legs at this point. Seems wiser to take a low profile for a while, become a presence on the roads, where he still seems to be a draw for organizers. Then ramp up the miles for the a spring 2015 marathon, then the trials. Just my two cents ...
Comical wrote:
Slomper wrote:Some days you have it and some days you don't on that course? Are you kidding? I am a absolute total nobody in running and have run 31:18 on that course. I was not training hard at the time - just decided to do it.
For athletes that are or WERE solid runners those times are horrible.
"absolute total nobody in running", huh? 31:18, huh? "Not even training hard", huh?
Yeah, right.
The "absolute nobody" part is clearly true.
Those that ran this year can confirm this, but in prior years the elite course and the citizen course were not the same. The elite course had a lot of flip backs which made the course a lot slower.
Malmo - Denver/ Boulder had had several consecutive days of major thunderstorms. So it was def humid "for Boulder". Humid for Missouri no...Boulder yes.
Hall's the fastest ever American-born marathoner as well as the American record holder in the half marathon, so what he does is noteworthy.
sgh wrote:
Those that ran this year can confirm this, but in prior years the elite course and the citizen course were not the same. The elite course had a lot of flip backs which made the course a lot slower.
Malmo - Denver/ Boulder had had several consecutive days of major thunderstorms. So it was def humid "for Boulder". Humid for Missouri no...Boulder yes.
.
Still not humid. Boulder is bone dry.
It was a fun day. Sorry George, I didn't see you there? I am sure you were though as you are not normally ignorant enough to make the weather call from 1500 miles away. It is certainly not something you are able to prove by a weather report.
Anonymousinternetliar wrote:
Slomper wrote:Some days you have it and some days you don't on that course? Are you kidding? I am a absolute total nobody in running and have run 31:18 on that course. I was not training hard at the time - just decided to do it.
For athletes that are or WERE solid runners those times are horrible.
And I ran 29 flat on that course - in trainers.
Agreed, it is really not a tough course. I remember running 28 and change (can't remember if it was 17 or 19). And that was during the offseason for me and while pushing a baby stroller.
National Weather Service says 77% relative humidity at 5am. Not, in fact, bone dry.
malmo wrote:
Still not humid. Boulder is bone dry.
Perhaps Hall was assisting Quigley... boxing in the pack, so they wouldn't chase to the American frontrunner.
Here are some top times from back in the day. 1. Frank Shorter 29:292. Mark Scrutton 29:383. Domingo Tibabuiza 29:464. Ric Rojas 30:055. Jon Sinclair 30:2219821. Rodolfo Gomez 28:512. Gabriel Kamu 29:033. Herb Lindsay 29:034. Jose Gomez 29:195. Jon Sinclair 29:2319831. Mark Scrutton 28:512. Rodolfo Gomez 29:143. Kirk Pfeffer 29:354. Gabriel Kamau 29:465. Herb Lindsay 29:5319841. Herb Lindsay 29:092. Gidamis Shahangia 29:153. Jose Gomez 29:174. Martin Pitago 29:235. Joseph Nzau 29:3119851. Paul Davies 29:062. Mauricio Gonzales 29:163. Jesus Herrera 29:184. Pat Porter 29:205. Gimgon Kigen 29:28
Slomper wrote:
Some days you have it and some days you don't on that course? Are you kidding? I am a absolute total nobody in running and have run 31:18 on that course. I was not training hard at the time - just decided to do it.
For athletes that are or WERE solid runners those times are horrible.
sgh wrote:
Those that ran this year can confirm this, but in prior years the elite course and the citizen course were not the same. The elite course had a lot of flip backs which made the course a lot slower.
Malmo - Denver/ Boulder had had several consecutive days of major thunderstorms. So it was def humid "for Boulder". Humid for Missouri no...Boulder yes.
The old course was a "crit" course. The runners started in the stadium, came out and did a loop, and went back into the stadium. They did this loop twice. They dropped this course about 3 or 4 years ago.
I would say the old crit course was slower because of the hairpin turnarounds.
malmo wrote:
sgh wrote:Those that ran this year can confirm this, but in prior years the elite course and the citizen course were not the same. The elite course had a lot of flip backs which made the course a lot slower.
Malmo - Denver/ Boulder had had several consecutive days of major thunderstorms. So it was def humid "for Boulder". Humid for Missouri no...Boulder yes.
.
Still not humid. Boulder is bone dry.
Yeah, just because it rained doesn't mean it's humid and uncomfortable for running. I've lived in the DC area my whole life and took a business trip to Portland, OR one week in the summer. It rained almost every day and as soon as the sun popped up the air was dry and very comfortable for running. Never experienced anything like that before. If it rains in DC in the summer and the sun pops out, it's a freakin sauna.
great race and well run wrote:
It was a fun day. Sorry George, I didn't see you there? I am sure you were though as you are not normally ignorant enough to make the weather call from 1500 miles away. It is certainly not something you are able to prove by a weather report.
It certainly is easy to prove by a weather report from 1500 miles away or even 15,00 miles away. Being there and being ignorant to the conditions around you is quite common, unfortunately.
http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/KBDU/2014/5/26/DailyHistory.htmlLook at the dew points - 46° = bone dry. Great for running.
Er... wrote:
National Weather Service says 77% relative humidity at 5am. Not, in fact, bone dry.
The recorded RH at 5am was 58% which is irrelevant two ways 1) the race wasn't run at 5am and 2) RH is a meaningless ratio. The dew point was 39° which is BONE DRY.
I believe the race was run at 11:30am? We're looking at 68° and a dew point of 46°.
Obviously the two of you failed basic physical science in junior high. The link below does a great job at spaini it for you. Take notes.
http://www.shorstmeyer.com/wxfaqs/humidity/humidity.htmlNot a doper wrote:
Yeah, just because it rained doesn't mean it's humid and uncomfortable for running. I've lived in the DC area my whole life and took a business trip to Portland, OR one week in the summer. It rained almost every day and as soon as the sun popped up the air was dry and very comfortable for running. Never experienced anything like that before. If it rains in DC in the summer and the sun pops out, it's a freakin sauna.
You understand it clearly. Portland, on very rare occasions in August gets as muggy as an average Summer day in DC.
bladerunner wrote:
sgh wrote:Those that ran this year can confirm this, but in prior years the elite course and the citizen course were not the same. The elite course had a lot of flip backs which made the course a lot slower.
Malmo - Denver/ Boulder had had several consecutive days of major thunderstorms. So it was def humid "for Boulder". Humid for Missouri no...Boulder yes.
The old course was a "crit" course. The runners started in the stadium, came out and did a loop, and went back into the stadium. They did this loop twice. They dropped this course about 3 or 4 years ago.
I would say the old crit course was slower because of the hairpin turnarounds.
A little history here:
Through 1985 or 86 everyone ran the same course at the same time, 7 AM start at 30 sec waves.
Then they split the elite and citizen race start times, but still ran the same course. The cit race would start at 7 and when most everyone was done, the elites would go at 10 or 11.
The switched to the criterium course and team format in about 1998.
Went back to the 1986-97 format ca. 2010.
If you knew anything whatsoever about Colorado and altitude you would know that solar radiation and sweat loss are the mitigating factors to performance.
You just don't give up when you're wrong do you? It's simple. It wasn't humid in Boulder. The facts were posted for you. End of story.
Talking about solar radiation and sweat loss is a different matter - something I've brought up many times before, along with Sun altitude - but that's NOT humidity, is it?
FWIW. mitigating isn't the word you're looking for. To mitigate is to lesson or reduce something that is undesirable.