Galen Rupp PR 90th on 2017 fastest marathons time list

For now... wrote:

So what you're saying is that the world record holder is not a real good runner? Got it.

I'm saying that the world record holder is not a good runner right now, yes.

best American runner ever*

lucky ducky wrote:

Star wrote:

The real good runners don't run Boston and Chicago.

If you want to know how good you are, run London and Berlin.

If he lined up in those races there would be no debate on how good he is on the year compared to the rest of the world.

Abel Kirui was 4th at London this year, just a few seconds behind 3rd placer Bedan Karoki. Considering Rupp beat Kirui by quite a bit at Chicago, I think it's reasonable to suggest that Rupp could have been 3rd at London. Top 3 at London means you are a pretty good runner. Hopefully he actually does run London next year so we'll know for sure.

But Kirui was a full 2 minutes behind the winner at London and ran 2:07 high.

And was 28 seconds behind Rupp.

And even London was weak this year by normal standards.

Rupp may be better than his #90 position but I can't see any argument to think he is top ten.

And he is more than three minutes away from being a top 20 performer.

Time is the only objective comparison when everyone runs a different race.

There were 25 faster marathon winning times than Chicago's winning time this year.

Star wrote:

Well, Rupp didn't medal at the Olympics this year. (Obviously)

And is Chicago still considered a major?

You typically rank marathons by their performances.

And you rank wins based on who you beat.

And you rank who you beat based in how fast they have run or have run recently.

So....

At some point it comes down to running fast.

The only way to rank a hundred marathoners who don't face each other all year is by how fast they ran.

The real good runners don't run Boston and Chicago.

If you want to know how good you are, run London and Berlin.

If he lined up in those races there would be no debate on how good he is on the year compared to the rest of the world.

Corrections applied- If you want to know how FAST you are, run London and Berlin.

If you want to know how GOOD you are, look at the results of the Olympics and WMMs.

There is no way you Rupp haters truly believe he can run no faster that 2:09.

Even if he doesn't his results are among the best our there right now.

Right, I don't think Rupp would have been near the top 2 at London either, but I think he could have been 3rd which was mid-high 2:07.

As an aside, if London was a weak field too (along with Boston and Chicago), then what marathon is legitimate these days?

Rupp is a 2:09 guy, until he runs faster that's the way it is.

I believe Rupp can run under 2:09, I don't think he's good enough now to run much faster than 2:07 under any conditions. Extrapolating another two or three minutes under 2:07 is crazy, given that the Sub-2 effort didn't even do that without magic.

Assume somehow Rupp had run a 2:07.01 at Boston or at Chicago, that means more than 25 guys would still be faster than him during 2017. So yes, Rupp is the best in the US right now. But world-wide, try and put him not just 2:20 faster, but faster again than those 25+ guys.

There's a lot of reaching around here. But, but, but DENNIS!!!

Dennis will be 40 pounds overweight, limping around, and run a 16:45 Turkey Trot, and you guys will be doing backflips screaming SEE! RUPP IS WORLD RECORD HOLDER. Come on.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Beautiful Day wrote:

The following thread is awesome. Someone said if you took six Ryan Halls and six Galen Rupps, the Rupps would all run mid-2:09, and the Halls would finish anywhere from 2:05 to 2:10, with a DNF.

The way I look at it, if you lined up every elite marathoner who competed this year ON THE DAY THEY RACED, and they somehow all raced at once, Galen Rupp might lose to more than 100 guys.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8481435

Nonsese

You don't win Olympic medals by luck.

You guys are to obsessed with time especially if it's someone you don't like.

Rupp is the best American born long distance runner in the last 10 years.

No, you don't win Olympic medals by luck.

But it's a good thing the NBA can't put five teams in the Olympics, or we'd win all the medals. And it's a good thing our top-5 swimmers in each event can't go, or we'd win more medals. And it's a good thing Kenya can't put their top-20 marathoners in there, or it would be hard for anyone else to medal.

Beautiful Day wrote:

Rupp is a 2:09 guy, until he runs faster that's the way it is.

I believe Rupp can run under 2:09, I don't think he's good enough now to run much faster than 2:07 under any conditions. Extrapolating another two or three minutes under 2:07 is crazy, given that the Sub-2 effort didn't even do that without magic.

Well how about that, it looks like you've finally come around. Yes his PR is only 2:09 but he's shown the ability to run faster under better conditions. I think low 2:07 is very realistic since at Chicago he beat 3 guys that ran 2:07:4X earlier this spring. I think we still need some more evidence before we can say he can surely run a low to mid 2:06. Anything under 2:06 is just wishful thinking at this point. It's possible, but we just don't know enough yet.

lucky ducky wrote:

As an aside, if London was a weak field too (along with Boston and Chicago), then what marathon is legitimate these days?

Obviously Berlin.

Amsterdam was a legit deep field this fall, though a Chicago win looks better even though 5 people ran 2:05 at Amsterdam.

Chicago could settle this by going back to having pacers.

Did the lack of pacers cause top runners to stop coming or did they stop having pacers because top runners already were going elsewhere and they could use no pacers as an excuse for slow winning times?

Kipchoge ran 2:04:11 at Chicago in 2014, two weeks after Kimetto ran the current world record in Berlin.

No doubt it's a fast course.

But without pacers and the top runners how can you gauge how good a Chicago win is these days?

Don’t disturb me until Rupp runs sub 2:05. Good night

The only way to rank a hundred marathoners who don't face each other all year is by how fast they ran.

Really? Sure about that?

Someone should tell the WMM that. IIRC, they determine the overall champion by calculating points for victories, second place finishes, etc. Time does not enter into it.

Maybe there *is* another way to rank marathoners.

roadresults-dot-com or crossresults-dot-com

This tracks finishes for bike races based on who beat who and when. It's eerily accurate then, when people who never race one another get together to race. (Dennis' time would be too far out, date-wise to apply at all.)

Beautiful Day wrote:

roadresults-dot-com or crossresults-dot-com

This tracks finishes for bike races based on who beat who and when. It's eerily accurate then, when people who never race one another get together to race. (Dennis' time would be too far out, date-wise to apply at all.)

If historical, time-based data is a strong predictor of finishing place when people do get together and race, that does not mean that outliers don't exist. That is why fans of racing sports (not just running) have terms like 'time-trailer,' 'racer,' 'clutch performer' and 'choker.'

Somebody who is neither a 'time-trailer' nor a 'racer' performs about as expected when you compare time to place and place to time. It appears that Rupp is neither average nor a 'time-trailer,' but is instead a 'racer,' since his performance in races is significantly underestimated by comparison to his marathon time.

The rules of three athletes per country keeps many faster Kenyans and Ethiopians out of the Games.

rojo wrote:

Beautiful Day wrote:

I suspected Rupp's 2:09.20 Chicago win would not be among the best 100 times this year in marathoning. Following Amsterdam, Rupp fell back several more spots, given that a lot of guys finished nearly a mile ahead of his virtual showing.

Does anyone think Rupp will be among the top 100 following Fukuoka?

https://www.iaaf.org/records/toplists/road-running/marathon/outdoor/men/senior/2017

OP,

Can someone tell me where Centro's gold winning time in Rio would rank on the 2016 1500 performance list?

I thought the point of a race for a pro was to win it.

LRC: we love gamers! kids these days don't know how to race 2 win, it's an important skill that should be celebrated.

also LRC: oh they won but the time wasn't fast so meh.

Yes, Rupp is a 2:09 guy and is not a (hypothetical) 2:05/2:04 whatever guy because 2:09 is his PR. Obviously!

But:

1) Time is absolutely NOT an objective basis to compare athletes at different races. This is just plain dumb.

2) A race without pacers will not produce a fast time, unless:

a) There is 1 athlete that is at least an order of magnitude better than everyone else and so the pacing strategy doesn't matter (e.g., Leonard Patrick Komen in Healthy Kidney 2011)

b) There are multiple top athletes that are approximately equal, but at least 1 of these athletes is the type to push the pace without consideration for strategy (e.g., Ryan Hall in Boston 2011/Pre in any race)

3) Rupp absolutely crushed the last 10k at Chicago against top athletes (Kirui, Kipyego, Lemma) and won easily. He is a 2:09 guy, but it's ridiculous to think that an athlete with a 2:09 max potential would be able to do 1:06/1:03 with the last 10k in the 4:30s.

4) Rupp has not had a bad marathon and has thus far only been beaten by Kipchoge, G. Kirui, and Lilesa. At some point, you have to admit that at least some of these 2:04/2:05 guys didn't lose to Rupp by chance.

5) Rupp has fully transitioned away from the track and is now solely focused on the marathon. Expect great things!

6) We don't know how Rupp will do in a rabbited race. He could very well be a guy that performs superbly in championship races, but falls flat in paced races (e.g., Stephen Kiprotich). To be considered a top marathoner, Rupp needs to be successful in both championship and rabbited races.

My question is - why is Chicago considered a world major marathon other than the fact that it is listed as such?

The biggest thing it had going for them was that it historically had fast times and some world records were set there. In the past.

There are two easy ways to tell if a marathon is elite.

There is either very fast times run there, or the competition is deep with runners who have recently run very fast times or have some high accolades, like a recent Olympic medal.

Rupp has a recent Olympic medal so that's one good person in the race.

Abel Kirui has a stellar resume from the past but his PR is 8 years old (hasn't been under 2:07:30 since) and his Olympic medal was 5 years ago. And he won a weak Chicago race last year.

Rupp's appearance and win made Chicago a big deal this year.

But to me, you either have to run fast or beat someone who is fast to make it major.

I think people are exaggerating how weak the Chicago field was. It really was a decent lineup:

Rupp: Olympic Bronze Medalist, 2nd in Boston. Went on to win.

Kirui: Is getting up there in age, but was 1st in Chicago last year and 4th in London in the spring.

Kipyego: 2nd in Tokyo last year and a 2:06 in Amsterdam last year.

Lemma: Ran 2:05 in Dubai last year. I think he ran a 2:07 somewhere earlier in the spring.

Chebii: Ran low 2:06 in Amsterdam last year.

Lilesa: Last year's Tokyo champ and Olympic Silver medalist.

So that's 6 guys who had either recently run 2:05/2:06 or had finished top 3 in a major within the last year. Not the best field, but still acceptable for a major.

Then you had the marathon WR holder Kimmetto, half WR holder Tadase, and 2:03 guy Biwott. Of course, those 3 hadn't done anything recently so adding them didn't really beef up the quality of the field at all.

Luckily for Rupp, the frontrunners at today's Venice Marathon went off course, putting them far outside Rupp's formidable barrier of time. Review of video shows Rupp's time would have nudged even closer to 2:10, so keep this one in mind (so we can see how far he is from attaining top-100 mastery, even considering).