Are you guys on crack wrote:
He genetic build is phenomenal for endurance sports and 2:15
what about his environment build? you're a dummy.
Are you guys on crack wrote:
He genetic build is phenomenal for endurance sports and 2:15
what about his environment build? you're a dummy.
you're an idiot. It is not that hard to break 2:30 let alone 3 hours. High school kids can do that and you have to believe Lance could beat just about any high school kid. The guy won a 2000+ mile bike race 7 freaking times!!! Sure running and cycling are different, but not like baseball vs. basketball for Jordan. Give him a few months to get used to running and a few more to do marathon training and he will be knocking on 2:20 for sure if not 2:15 or even the world standard.
Also, whoever said the US has no one who can beat the best woman in the world consistantly: Meb won the silver at Athens and Culpepper's PR is 2:09. Both are way better than Paula. That's not even talking about Browne, Sell, Veran, Briney, Shay etc. who have all run considerably faster.
And seriously, who voted for '3 hours or more' on the poll???
it's funny how a 2:30 is suddenly great in this context but when, say, Pete Gilmore runs 2:14 or something, he's a bag of suck.
only on Letsrun...
Lance is hoping, you dont forget about him. Nice job.
IP Freely you said it perfectly. Suddenly Lets run has vaulted 2:15 to this unreachable goal but if any elite guy in the US fails to run under 2:15 losers.
God this site is funny sometimes. Its funny how runners feel almost threatened by an elite cyclist coming to their world and kicking their ass.
And someone in a recent post said he can have all the VO2 Max in the world but he wouldnt be efficient as a runner? WHY? The guy was clearly an efficient runner during his tri days. He hasn't forgotten how to run and he has all the genetic and physiological tools to be a great runner. The legs will naturally lose a lot of weight by not biking as much. This will come naturally. He will thin down guaranteed.
Anyone ranting about how Armstrong won that little Duathlon a while back should look at his times. According this article he ran 18:57 for the first 3 miles(not 5K, but 3 miles) and I remember reading another article stating he ran about 20 flat for the last 3. I seriously doubt the worlds greatest cyclist had to save that much energy for such a short(relative for him) bike ride of 12 miles, only to run a relatively slow time. Also, he was 30 seconds back off the run, and had to catch a different guy off the bike, so he couldnt have been cruising the whole time(though the guy he passed at the end was apparently walking). See link
http://www.runnertriathletenews.com/features/dirtydu_jan2003.html
Hey Retard it was trail running with major climbing. It wasnt a flat course on the pavement!
maybe could have but did not. ran like 37-38 for 10k.
I was well aware it was a hilly trail run. Still, even if thats the TOUGHEST 3 mile course in the world, runs of 19, and 20 minutes roughly, cannot be considered to be worth any better than runs of 15:30 and 16:30 on the flatest hardest pavement on earth(again for 3 miles, and thats being REALLY generous, in reality more like 16:30 and 17:30). If you think that this doesnt cast serious doubt on a retired, semi-serious, old Armstrong running a 2:15 marathon or even 2:30, you are the retard, not I.
putting down the money wrote:
This is just too good to pass up!!
I used to race bikes and now I run marathons. I'm way better marathoner than I was a bike rider. I was just to small for the bike in the flats, 5'3". Lance is the perfect height for either. The biggest differences are:
Running= height to weight ratio and having a huge VO2
Cycling= power to weight ratio and having a huge vo2
Those two statements are not equal. Lance would need to loose a bunch of weight, mostly off the legs, to get down under 2:20. He'd need to get down under 136 lbs minimum.
I'm sure 2:30 with training would be cake for him if his leges could take the pounding and he didn't develop any knee problems,etc.. with the training since running pounds the body vs. cycling.
If he lost the weight, was biomechanically efficient running which it sounds like he was in his youth, 2:15 isn't out of the question either.
I said he would never win the tour...then he got Cancer...changed his body profile and look....
-z
Awesome points about height/weight/V02. Check out Tergat--dude's a pair of friggin' killer lungs and a bad-ass heart on a couple of tall sticks.
I would be very surprised with sub-2:20. A 2:20 - 2:30 debate is legitimate. Anyone who doesn't think Lance could break 3:00 (assuming commitment)is uneducated in many areas or just an insecure runner who feels threatened by the fact that Lance might be successful at the marathon.
I am an average athlete who ran 50 miles a week until injured and then rode a stationary bike 4 times a week (max. time =2:15, most at one hour duration)for 4 weeks that resulted in a 3:09 marathon. To think that a committed, trained, proven world champion endurance athlete couldn't break 3:00 is ridiculous.
2:23-2:28 is my guess. But as others have stated, IT ALL COMES DOWN TO LANCE'S COMMITMENTTO THIS IDEA. I would also not be suprised if he never makes this commitment.
In response to a few other ideas, somebody compared Jordan as a basketball player to a baseball player. Also, an uneducated opinion. If Jordan had spent a fraction of the time in his youth and college focused on becoming the best BASEBALL player he could be he surely would have been a much, much better baseball player. Or imagine if he focused that talent on high jumping or long jumping (another thread).
Finally, Lance would do well to consult Mark Allen, who gave a shot at the 2:22 Trials standard one year in Berlin. I don't know the result other than he didn't make it.
Lance has NOTHING TO PROVE TO ANYONE!
2:45, 2:40...doable for Lance. Sub 2:40--doubtful.
People are thinking he cant break 2:40-2:45 is absolutely insane. 100s of guys break 2:45 at Chicago every year. I am pretty sure Lance is a tad more genetically gifted than most of those avg. runners.
I want EVERYONE to remember what a pedestal everyone is putting sub 2:45 on when the next thread is bashing a guy for not breaking 2:14!
You all talk like 2:30 is some cake walk. Somewhere on the board is a list of marathon times for last year or the year before and 2:30 was top 200. I predict a 1:15/1:25 split for a 2:40, maybe a 1:15/1:20 split for a 2:35. That eccentric muscle damage will drop him at around 20 miles.
6, 7, 8, 9, 10 hours of running doesn't present the eccentric muscle damage that 2.5 hours of running will. Cycling is very low impact. He could probably run a decent 5k though, say around 16 flat or even down to 15:30. You give people too much credit to Vo2max. It don't mean shit. My Vo2max is 79.4 and I haven't even broken 15:00 in the 5k.
Alan
People for real? wrote:
People are thinking he cant break 2:40-2:45 is absolutely insane. 100s of guys break 2:45 at Chicago every year. I am pretty sure Lance is a tad more genetically gifted than most of those avg. runners.
I want EVERYONE to remember what a pedestal everyone is putting sub 2:45 on when the next thread is bashing a guy for not breaking 2:14!
seriously, i know guys who didn't run on a d3 varsity team who can run 2:42. if he says 2:30, he means 2:30. i hope it is an american marathon, what a great time that would be!
lance ran 10 flat in high school for 2 miles...there is a reason that he chose triathlons rather than running, then biking rather than triathlons...b/c that is where his talent lies
Id give him a staning o if he ran a 2:45...
Has anyone seen the commercial of him running around town- clunky- if only he were ice smooth on the runs as he is on the bike...his "clunkiness" will hurt him in the 'thon, for sure...
he ran 15:30 in hs and running wasn't even his main sport. 2:30 isn't as tough as some of you make it out to be. shit id go as far as saying that if lance had concentrated on running full time instead of cycling for a career, he'd be the top american (excluding khannouchi and meb).
I concur with many of these posts. 2:40s is medicore at best. Thats an avg. guy from some local running club. I know a ton of guys in NYC running clubs with no college running experience and definitely arent gifted like Lance athletically and run in the 2:30s. So come on.
Doesnt matter wrote:
Hey Retard it was trail running with major climbing. It wasnt a flat course on the pavement!
I just decided to do a little follow-up on the article. I found this describing the course:
The Dirty Duathlon course was completely off-road and very technical. The two runs had several hills and there were lots of rocks. The bike portion was 80 percent single track with some jeep trails mixed in.
Also, from the article, one of the guys Armstrong who was "eating Armstrong's dust" is a 16:15/33:48 guy.
Another observation is the fellow who ran the quickest run splits:
1 Adam Reiser 17:17.90 18:43.20
I did some digging and found that he's run at least 8:23/30:43, so if a mid-14's guy is averaging 18+ for 5k, maybe we should give Lance some credit for his 18:57/20:xx.
Lance is muscular for a runner, 5'10' 150lbs, it would take a lot of time to lose that muscle. He's likely to be clunky and bouncy for quite some time. Effeciency takes time, losing muscle takes time. By the time he becomes effecient and skinny enough to REALLY be competitive he'll be near 40. Saying Lance can easily run 2:30 and can become the top American Marathon is like saying Bekele could compete with the top guys on the TdF. Neither is possible.
Alan