I'm confused. Wasn't Ryan's last marathon the fastest that any American has EVER run at Boston? Or maybe the problem is that because Boston is a fairly obscure race not many top Americans have run there?
I'm confused. Wasn't Ryan's last marathon the fastest that any American has EVER run at Boston? Or maybe the problem is that because Boston is a fairly obscure race not many top Americans have run there?
i'm sorry if its already been brought up but I dont like his form, especially his arm action. it doesn't look efficient to me and i used to think he had incredible form.
i think he needs to get on the track and try to run fast again.
A few months ago i was at a runners banquet where a really good runner talked about his goal to run a 2:30 marathon. He said he did proper training, and such and felt he was ready. He had a personal best of 2:32. A few weeks before he ran a half marathon and ran it in 1:15. still believed that he could run a 2:30. For his peak marathon he opened up in 1:15 and then proceeded to slow down bad on mile 14 and dropped out at mile 15. If Hall goes out in 64 he will drop out.
stuck with match.com wrote:
A few months ago i was at a runners banquet where a really good runner talked about his goal to run a 2:30 marathon. He said he did proper training, and such and felt he was ready. He had a personal best of 2:32. A few weeks before he ran a half marathon and ran it in 1:15. still believed that he could run a 2:30. For his peak marathon he opened up in 1:15 and then proceeded to slow down bad on mile 14 and dropped out at mile 15. If Hall goes out in 64 he will drop out.
So...based on this one incident you heard about from some mediocre guy...Ryan Hall will DNF if he runs a 64 opening half? even though he's run back to back 63's?
3-4 posts before yours I provided an example of something a bit more...revlevent. Brett gotcher ran a 65:43 half marathon in October, then less than 3 months later he runs a 2:10. Not only that but Chicago is a fast course. I wouldn't be surprised if he went out in 62.high - I think he has potential to run a 2:06 or better at one of the fastest marathon courses in the world.
stuck with match.com wrote:
A few months ago i was at a runners banquet where a really good runner talked about his goal to run a 2:30 marathon. He said he did proper training, and such and felt he was ready. He had a personal best of 2:32. A few weeks before he ran a half marathon and ran it in 1:15. still believed that he could run a 2:30. For his peak marathon he opened up in 1:15 and then proceeded to slow down bad on mile 14 and dropped out at mile 15. If Hall goes out in 64 he will drop out.
You are just showing how inexperienced you are. I'm only even dignifying you with a response because at least you are a full time troll. i.e. you didn't just come up with a new nickname for this thread.
There is zero evidence that there is a limit to the number of hard marathons a person can run. Is there also a limit to the number of half marathon? Is it twice the number of marathons? Is the 10k limit 4x the marathon number? Is the mile number 26 x the marathon number?
Sagarin wrote:
that there is a physiological limit as to the number of hard marathons in the legs. Noakes, et al, have pointed this out, where staleness is the end result.
If Ryan Hall could back up his average half marathon performances with solid marathon marathon performances then I would believe him.
Look at his results
2007 He runs a 59:43 which concerts to a 2:09, this was followed by a 2:09 in NY, he also ran 2:08 in Lodon
2009 He runs a 1:02:xx at the NYC half which converts to a 2:12 and runs a 2:09
2009 later - he runs a 1:01:52 which converts to a 2:11 then runs 2:10 in NY
After every one of these half marathons he claims that he was training through. Well the results show that this partially the case but he will run a few minutes under the conversion.
He will run 2:12 to 2:14
Aghast wrote:
There is no way even if he is past his prime that he will go from 2:08 at Boston to 2:15 at Chicago in less then a year.
Boston last year was wind aided.
Said it before and i'll say it again.
Quit chasing the pay days, and get back on the track. Break 27 for 10k and 13 for 5k.
Balance is crucial. Training for one or two races a year, creates a stale, non improving runner.
Variety and balance in training and racing will bring out the best. Otherwise, this is what he will continue to get.
stuck with match.com wrote:
If Ryan Hall could back up his average half marathon performances with solid marathon marathon performances then I would believe him.
Look at his results
2007 He runs a 59:43 which concerts to a 2:09, this was followed by a 2:09 in NY, he also ran 2:08 in Lodon
2009 He runs a 1:02:xx at the NYC half which converts to a 2:12 and runs a 2:09
2009 later - he runs a 1:01:52 which converts to a 2:11 then runs 2:10 in NY
After every one of these half marathons he claims that he was training through. Well the results show that this partially the case but he will run a few minutes under the conversion.
He will run 2:12 to 2:14
2007 He ran the 2:08 in London as his debut. NY was much later in the year with a separate buildup.
We know Hall has no speed and an absurd natural aerobic capacity, and since his training seems extremely weighted towards aerobic work, his half marathons will convert to better marathons than they would for most people.
stuck with match.com wrote:
If Ryan Hall could back up his average half marathon performances with solid marathon marathon performances then I would believe him.
Look at his results
2007 He runs a 59:43 which concerts to a 2:09, this was followed by a 2:09 in NY, he also ran 2:08 in Lodon
2009 He runs a 1:02:xx at the NYC half which converts to a 2:12 and runs a 2:09
2009 later - he runs a 1:01:52 which converts to a 2:11 then runs 2:10 in NY
After every one of these half marathons he claims that he was training through. Well the results show that this partially the case but he will run a few minutes under the conversion.
He will run 2:12 to 2:14
You should see a doctor about that selective amnesia. In 2010 he ran 64 (65?) in Arizona and then the fastest ever marathon by an American at Boston (2:08).
To the person who said Boston was wind-aided - was it not wind-aided for all the other Americans in the race? What about all the other Americans who have run it over the years?
[quote]Aghast wrote:
? Is the mile number 26 x the marathon number?
[quote]Sagarin wrote:
It's 26.2 x the marathon number. You'll blow up 320 metres into your 27th and last ever mile race. Noakes says. Then you'll die.
Trolling. Hmmm.
Anyway, having a bad race is a pretty normal thing. It might predict another bad race, or not. I have had a bad race before a great race, and so have most of the runners I know of. On the other hand, it can be the result of the wrong training approach, burn out, or other more dismal factors. Race day will clear this up. Many marathoners push to the final week or two, then taper, so I would not normally expect an all out 13.1 3 weeks prior as a smart move. Risks dead legs on marathon day.
If he was running tempo, he is aiming for about 2:07 and change. Pretty quick.
I read the Noakes book cover the cover. One part that didn't make sense to me intuitively was the idea of having a limited number of high-level marathon performances. I can see his logic based on many runners' experience, but it still doesn't make sense. i think most of it is that it's hard to bring everything together (training, nutrition, sleep, mental, weather) on any given day for a full 26.2 miles. So you're going to have days that are better than others, and you will observe such an effect.
Hall appears to have been training well in this marathon buildup. So hopefully his half was a bad day when things went wrong, and Chicago will be the opposite.
But if anything, maybe this half will keep him from talking as boldly as he normally does about trying to win, and he'll go in with a more relaxed attitude.
P.S. It's obviously easy to critique him from afar, but one other thing about his Philly race is that Hall traveled to Phoenix that week before going to Philly. Before Chicago, hopefully he'll stay at elevation until Friday before the race and then take it really easy once he gets there.
there are many examples of runners turning in poor or mediocre performances at half marathon just before running stellar marathons..
he had a bad race. one bad race. im sure nobody else here has ever had a bad race, right?
myo-worker wrote:
there are many examples of runners turning in poor or mediocre performances at half marathon just before running stellar marathons..
And for that many there are 10 times the amount of examples of mediocre perfomances in the half marathon a few weeks prior resulting in mediocre performances in a marathon
Gharib is no spring chicken and he appears to have it figured out, don't start with any stupid EPO comment either. He's been tested enough and has never had to go to B Sample.
While Hall may not be finished, showing up to collect a paycheck for a tempo run seem against his principle. We'll see what happens in Chicago, the same with Geb in NYC. He's run great lead up races and then not finished a race.
Python wrote:
Mahon needs to realise that speed gave a 24-year-old supertalent a 59:43 solo debut and erratically paced 2:06:17.
They both need to realize that those old times came when Ryan was racing instead of time trialing his races. Instead of training to run 4:49 miles, get less specific and just train to get fast. Then go hang on to the lead for as long as you can and make it hurt. Thats what racing is about.