"The Boston Marathon Was Fixed" thread.

I agree that maintaining 2:08 pace is relatively slow. However, you must give it context. 2:08 is slow for London; not for NYC or Boston.

You can find further context where the separation really started. The difference started right before Wellesley, which is a downhill section of the course.

If you never ran a downhill marathon, trust me, it is easy to let yourself go on the downhills and go faster than you want. If you do, the aggressive contraction of your quad muscles early will make you pay later in the race when it is either flat or uphill. It is a bit of the opposite strategy of xc racing where you only got a 5k or 8k; you should be very aggressive on the downhills. Top elites aren't going to pound themselves on the downhill for Meb. They are waiting for someone else to move.

Furthermore, I would be pretty sure that none of those elites expected Meb to maintain that pace at Newton by himself, which is an uphill portion and features Heartbreak Hill. Meb "moved" by holding the same pace through that section.

Generally, top elites make their move right around Newton. Some gamble before Heartbreak Hill and put some separation (however, many burn out; happened last year in the women's race). Most others wait until after Newton when it is downhill and there are no other uphill portions of the course.

Chrebet's moves to catch Meb are classic Boston strategy to win the race, which included a sub-15:00 portion. However, Chrebet's moves are done either without anyone in front or someone going out in flames. Meb just didn't crash and burn.

you know why people don't think NYC '86, '06 and various OGs were not setups? Because the outcomes were plausible. Low probability, but plausible. And those in the chase group kept hammering the whole way home, unlike Chebet.

Unless the pacing was even, it is difficult to hammer all the way home at Boston. Especially if all your moves featured the entire Newton part of the course.

Given the moves Chrebet made between 30k to 40k, tailing Meb at 4:52-55 pace for the last 2k is hammering. There would be nothing more to give. Granted, it probably would have been different if he kept at the same pace with Meb the whole way and probably could have gone 4:35 pace over the last 2k.

Wait, Wayne Chrebet was running ?

New York Jets Wayne Chrebet ?

Thst perhaps explains why those skinny Africans ran so slowly up those hills? Chrebet kept throwing them some blocks.......

gahuga wrote:

Bastille Day at the TDF wrote:

Today was the equivalent of "it's July 14 so the French guy wins it if he earns it." All it took was a handful of athletes to make that decision and to leave town with their appearance fees fresh for their next race. And with their second and third place prize money.

Everything else is thinking way too hard (or the opposite).

This happens in cycling, where there are what, 15-20 other races for glory and money ("livelihood") in the same stage-race alone?

This doesn't happen in marathoning, where there are what, 1-2 other races for glory and money ("livelihood") in the same calendar year?

I think your statement is true when you say "this happens in cycling" when you add A LOT MORE OFTEN. In other words cycling, because the races are longer and there are more of them and there is more money involved that "fixing" (riding to help certain riders on certain stages) happens all the time (as people who follow cycling know). But in marathoning it does not seem very prevalent but THIS marathon was "special" (the bombing and all that) so they let a "special" person win. But dollars to donuts the next major marathon that comes along the Africans take off and dominate just like usual.

The Meb Experience wrote:

Frightened Inmate # 5 wrote:

Still, what do I know - I'm "a basement dweller", "not very bright", "a troll", "fascile(sic)", I have "asbergers", I "don't have the ability to understand what motivates people", my arguments connote "craziness", I "need to go back to school", I'm a "whack-job", "retarded" I'm writing "obviously ridiculous things", I'm "spouting drivel" etc etc.

That's actually a pretty good summary. I'm nominating it for homepage QOTD.

Aw, Meb, if I make the home page, my life will be complete. I'd snap chat it, I'd post it on my wall, I might even ask you for a friend request. I'm overwhelmed that you'd nominate me.

If you make it happen, I'm in your debt forever.

slopenguinrunner wrote:

you know why people don't think NYC '86, '06 and various OGs were not setups? Because the outcomes were plausible. Low probability, but plausible. And those in the chase group kept hammering the whole way home, unlike Chebet.

Unless the pacing was even, it is difficult to hammer all the way home at Boston. Especially if all your moves featured the entire Newton part of the course.

Given the moves Chrebet made between 30k to 40k, tailing Meb at 4:52-55 pace for the last 2k is hammering. There would be nothing more to give. Granted, it probably would have been different if he kept at the same pace with Meb the whole way and probably could have gone 4:35 pace over the last 2k.

So in all of Chebet's other races, where he was able to close off a much faster pace...at Boston he didn't have it? there is something "super special/magical" about Boston? And it only affected one of the most competitive marathoners in the world, but NOT a guy who is almost 40? a guy who ran 4:50 => 5:01/mile=>2:11 pace for his last 2.2 i.e. he was struggling?

All I know is what I saw, and I saw a guy in the lead struggling, and the person (one of the best in the world) slowdown immediately, not gradually as is usually the case.

Chebet (and possibly others) were sandbagging. We do not know why.

This thread is laughable and fun. Trolls having a field day, now extending through the week.

The conspiracy scenario IS possible, although highly unlikely. The BAA or Sketchers or somebody would have to pay 3-6 of the top runners a decent amount to hold back. What do you think, $50 to $100K each? And then they'd have to have a non-disclosure agreement, speak up and lose your cash.

Once again, if you throw out the hurricain tailwind of 2011, Meb's "pedestrian" run was actually among the top 5 or 6 runners at Boston over the past decade.

Finally, has anyone interviewed the Kenyans, their coaches?

Fox trusts no one wrote:

This thread is laughable and fun. Trolls having a field day, now extending through the week.

The conspiracy scenario IS possible, although highly unlikely. The BAA or Sketchers or somebody would have to pay 3-6 of the top runners a decent amount to hold back. What do you think, $50 to $100K each? And then they'd have to have a non-disclosure agreement, speak up and lose your cash.

Once again, if you throw out the hurricain tailwind of 2011, Meb's "pedestrian" run was actually among the top 5 or 6 runners at Boston over the past decade.

Finally, has anyone interviewed the Kenyans, their coaches?

People who are in on conspiracies are far to smart for all that. I think the Africans KNEW what the deal was without being told!

troofiness wrote:

So in all of Chebet's other races, where he was able to close off a much faster pace...at Boston he didn't have it? there is something "super special/magical" about Boston? And it only affected one of the most competitive marathoners in the world, but NOT a guy who is almost 40? a guy who ran 4:50 => 5:01/mile=>2:11 pace for his last 2.2 i.e. he was struggling?

Yes, there is something "super special/magical" about Boston. It is called hills. Lots of hill running, more to the side of downhill running, and a solid uphill section towards the end. And the hills affected several runners, more so in the women's race (where one could turn on the gas at Newton and no one else could or fizzled out). One of the reasons American's had success at Boston in the 70's and 80's was due to the Boston Track Club (Rogers, Meyers, Salazar. Beardsley was advised by Squires). Bill Squires had his runners run on the course repeatedly to work on specific marathon pace on the hills.

Chebet had several 2:06 marathons or faster before 2012, but he crapped the bed there and ran in 5th in 2:14 (behind Jason Hartman - must have been a fix there to get more prize money to an American). And before anyone complains about the heat in 2012, remember Salazar and Beardsley went 2:08.53 in 1982 in the "Duel in the Sun" (just only slightly slower than Chebet's pace on a closer to ideal day). The course got to him before.

Boston ain't Rotterdam or London or Berlin or Chicago. It is probably the toughest course of any major marathon. Probably NYC is the 2nd toughest.

slopenguinrunner wrote:

Boston ain't Rotterdam or London or Berlin or Chicago. It is probably the toughest course of any major marathon. Probably NYC is the 2nd toughest.

...but it didn't get to Meb...a guy who will be a Masters runner in a little more than 8 months...got it.

GOBsmacked wrote:

apollo creed wrote:

I saw Chebet coming up the hill with 1k to go and he looked like he was on his last legs. It was obviously very unlikely he would have the gear shift needed to catch up. I was surprised to hear that Meb didn't open the gap more (definitely could have if he needed to).

riiiiight.

Seems like people can't agree on whether the race was somehow fixed. But I bet we could all at least agree that several key events all had to occur for Meb to win.

1. The pace had to be conservative enough for Meb, who couldn't have handled the 2010 or 2011 paces.

2. He had to break away early, because he wasn't going to win on a late surge against such a quality field.

3. The Africans had to let him go voluntarily, because no way he was going to simply overpower them all.

4. He had to have some help in his breakaway, because he wasn't going to win by running the whole mid-section alone.

5. The two main chasers had to run out of gas at the end.

6. The 31 year streak of American defeat had to end, coincidentally, on the most hyped up year of the marathon's existence.

dflkjlkjlsdffsdl wrote:

Seems like people can't agree on whether the race was somehow fixed. But I bet we could all at least agree that several key events all had to occur for Meb to win.

1. The pace had to be conservative enough for Meb, who couldn't have handled the 2010 or 2011 paces.

2. He had to break away early, because he wasn't going to win on a late surge against such a quality field.

3. The Africans had to let him go voluntarily, because no way he was going to simply overpower them all.

4. He had to have some help in his breakaway, because he wasn't going to win by running the whole mid-section alone.

5. The two main chasers had to run out of gas at the end.

6. The 31 year streak of American defeat had to end, coincidentally, on the most hyped up year of the marathon's existence.

If you're trying to imply that Meb's win was too good to be true, you don't know anything about marathons. A lot of things have to go right for every marathon winner, every time.

Moreover, your points are not that unusual, even in hindsight. First, Meb's pace was fast by Boston standards. Second, it may be true that he had to break away early, but it makes sense that he went for it. Everybody knows the Americans wanted to win bad this year. Third, the Africans let him go because of a tactical mistake that seemed reasonable at the time. Also, the fact that the Africans didn't chase at mile 8 was not surprising, just normal yo-yo stuff. Fourth, he probably knew that JB would help him through the mid part of the course, but that's not uncommon. Plus, the others likely thought that neither Meb nor JB was a real threat. Fifth, the two main chasers were tired. Of course they ran out of gas. Sixth, the fact that the race was hyped up has nothing to do with this discussion. People have been getting excited for an American to win Boston for years. It had to happen sometime.

And finally, absent clear and concrete evidence to the contrary, we should always assume that sports, politics, business, and every other competitive human endeavor is clean and honest.

HS wrote:

Fifth, the two main chasers were tired. Of course they ran out of gas.

bullshit.

they went from 2:55/km pace to 3:10 just as they hit 40km? two guys who regularly close in 6:30 off of paces that are +3 mins faster at 40k?

And then they just stayed there...exactly 7-10 seconds behind? They didn't blow up, they didn't at least try to close the gap?

It is just not a credible outcome.They eased up. I have no idea why, but they did.

Well, I think everyone agrees it was an incredible outcome.

Meb's win at 2:08:37 is the 5th fastest winning time in the last 14 years of the Boston marathon's history. This includes 2011's wind aided winning time. It is the 10th fastest winning time in the history of the race. Meb ran solo doing all the work from the front. I think he could have won even if the Kenyans or fellow Americans helped with the pacing like JB did for a short time before Meb dropped him. Meb is a smart competitor and there is no doubt in my mind his strategy from NYC 2009 would have worked in Boston too. He ran from the back at the Olympics and came back from 23rd to finish 4th. Yet, you continue to create some illusion that his performances are luck, surprise or fix. Meb would have won that race no matter what the "Big Guns" did, as it was when he won silver at the 2004 Olympics, 2009 NYC Marathon and now Boston!

2000 Elijah Lagat Kenya 2:09:47

2001 Lee Bong-Ju South Korea 2:09:43

2002 Rodgers Rop Kenya 2:09:02

2003 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot Kenya 2:10:11

2004 Timothy Cherigat Kenya 2:10:37

2005 Hailu Negussie Ethiopia 2:11:44

2006 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot Kenya 2:07:14

2007 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot Kenya 2:14:13

2008 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot Kenya 2:07:45

2009 Deriba Merga Ethiopia 2:08:42

2010 Robert Kiprono Cheruiyot Kenya 2:05:52

2011 Geoffrey Mutai Kenya 2:03:02

2012 Wesley Korir Kenya 2:12:40

2013 Lelisa Desisa Benti Ethiopia 2:10:22

2014 Meb Keflezighi United States (CA) 2:08:37

Hey loser. Nearly all of the 500 fastest marathons ever run were within the last five years.

So what's this you mention about that Korean guy who won Boston back in 2001?

What I have learned is NEVER ASSUME ANYTHING!

I haven't read the entire thread but the focus seems to be on guys running hard vs easing up. I happen to personally know a person very highly placed on the BAA and another person high up in the Hancock organization involved with the marathon. Both find the fix theory absolutely laughable. In order to fix you would need to pay off say 5 runners a total of at least 500k. After all a win at boston is worth at least that much to the winner, especially when you consider the BAA will pay just about anything to get the defending champ back. If you think you could get Hancock (which is owned buy a canadian company, Manulife Financial) to sign off on a $500k bribery payoff and risk being exposed and ruining their rep, you know absolutely nothing about business. In theory Adidas could have put up the money but Hancock and the baa would have to be involved.would never happen, ever.

Anyway, if it were fixed it is reasonable to assume it will be exposed eventually. I will put up $1,000 against a fixer-believer, go public with my name, funds to be held by ROJO, who will hold the other $1,000 from another guy; the correct person keeps the $2,000. Time frame of one year.

Any takers? Otherwise, end this thread, it's a brutal insult to a great runner.