This morning they did a short training on the track. A warm-up 10K in 31 minutes, after that, Kipchoge ran another 5K in 2:51 2:49 2:50 2:51 2:43 (1:58 pace). All shaping up nicely..
This morning they did a short training on the track. A warm-up 10K in 31 minutes, after that, Kipchoge ran another 5K in 2:51 2:49 2:50 2:51 2:43 (1:58 pace). All shaping up nicely..
Another nutjob poster. Care to place a wager Ryan76? No one will break 2 hours, even in your sad lifetime.
Ryan76 wrote:
This morning they did a short training on the track. A warm-up 10K in 31 minutes, after that, Kipchoge ran another 5K in 2:51 2:49 2:50 2:51 2:43 (1:58 pace). All shaping up nicely..
It's definitely not going to happen for a long, long time. Most people don't realize what dropping 8 seconds per mile means when you are already going all out and 2:03 (give or take a few) is the best so far. Honestly, Kipchoge has no chance but he's surely getting compensated quite a bit to promote it and run in it having bypassed some serious cash this Spring.
Las Vegas Oddsmaker wrote:
No, it's not a guess. "Your" prediction would be a guess. I am quite confident that my words are fact, are you? If so, put some denaro down on it. That's what I thought, all talk. "Your" prediction (zack92039u) is merely a guess and a bad one at that.
zack92039u wrote:Your prediction of what the time will be is absolutely a guess.
I don't think you understand what a fact is. You can be as confident as you want about what you believe, but that doesn't make it a fact. A fact is an objectively observable truth. There is no way the finishing time of this race is, on May 3, a fact.
Look, we can get into Aristotle and discussions of sea battles and the law of excluded middle if you want. But let's just jump to the conclusion: true statements about future events are true, but they are contingent truths. Because they are contingent upon future events, they cannot be facts.
I never pretended that my prediction was a fact, so of course I'm not going to bet on what I think the finish time will be. I am just guessing, as are you.
What has so far been neglected is that Berlin, London, Rome etc. Have to have 1% (?) Tolerance in their measurements.
Does Nike?
If so, they're saving about 420 metres or 1 minute just by making it an ineligible but precisely measured course.
2:00:51
(was going to say :57 but someone already said it on the first page so I'll take :51)
but I just want the nonsense to be over so they never try it again, so if they barely break 2 or even just touch it I am fine with that, why would they even bother to attempt it again which would be lovely
air-resistance is kind of a huge factor they are eliminating with so many pacers and the car, more so than a real marathon
with more women marathon runners than men, you'd think marketing would be more clever and just have them break 2:15 with women - oh gawd did I just give them ideas for a "round-two" I hope not
No, I don't think you understand what it would take to run 2:00:00 for a marathon. It's a FACT that they won't do it. I'll say it a bit more slowly for you, it's a FAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCTTTTTT that they won't do it. You're just guessing, I'm stating a FACT. p.s. We can look into Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Aquinas, etc...anyone you care to discuss. Email me anytime or better yet, call me. I graduated 3 years from a little school called Yale, ever hear of it? I can handle anything that you throw at me simpleton.
zack92039u wrote:
Las Vegas Oddsmaker wrote:No, it's not a guess. "Your" prediction would be a guess. I am quite confident that my words are fact, are you? If so, put some denaro down on it. That's what I thought, all talk. "Your" prediction (zack92039u) is merely a guess and a bad one at that.
I don't think you understand what a fact is. You can be as confident as you want about what you believe, but that doesn't make it a fact. A fact is an objectively observable truth. There is no way the finishing time of this race is, on May 3, a fact.
Look, we can get into Aristotle and discussions of sea battles and the law of excluded middle if you want. But let's just jump to the conclusion: true statements about future events are true, but they are contingent truths. Because they are contingent upon future events, they cannot be facts.
I never pretended that my prediction was a fact, so of course I'm not going to bet on what I think the finish time will be. I am just guessing, as are you.
Yeah, it's not going to happen. I too am shocked how many people think that they'll run 1:30 faster for each half marathon, regardless of perfect condition or someone breaking the breeze (if it's windy they won't race). I agree, it's pretty much a fact that it's not going to happen---unless someone is on drugs of some sorts---and I'm not saying they are, just saying without artificial help, they are not running a 2 hour flat marathon or faster. Yeah, it's a fact indeed.
My prediction is 1:59:54, unless Nike marketing decides that it's better to run 2:01 and crack 2hrs at a later date to maximize the hype, or if it is too hot.
They'll go out in 59:45-60:30 and then blow up around mile 19-22 and suffer through to a 2:04-2:05 or DNF.
If they went out at 61:00-62:00 they could probably get the WR by a decent amount (not that it would count..), but that's not their plan so it won't happen.
No, if they went out in 61 they'd have to come back in 58:59. The 1/2 world record is 58:32 so they'd be only 27 slower than that record, after running a 61 half.No, if they went out in 62 they'd have to come back in 57:59, breaking the 1/2 world record by 33 seconds after running a 62.I hope most of guys are trolls or just dumb high school runners. Only a few posters seem to actually get it. It's almost 3 minutes faster than the world record. I thought this forum was full of real runners for the most part. Yes, I'm fairly new here, about 6 months, but geez guys, please get real.
goouttoofastnigzz wrote:
They'll go out in 59:45-60:30 and then blow up around mile 19-22 and suffer through to a 2:04-2:05 or DNF.
If they went out at 61:00-62:00 they could probably get the WR by a decent amount (not that it would count..), but that's not their plan so it won't happen.
Your prediction will be way off and you surely can't be a Guru of running.
The Guru Matt James wrote:
My prediction is 1:59:54, unless Nike marketing decides that it's better to run 2:01 and crack 2hrs at a later date to maximize the hype, or if it is too hot.
They are going to go out too hard and end up like Joshua Cheptegei at World XC this year.
they go through in 60 and tie up in 2:04:12
Seems like the mods are deleting just about every other post on this thread.
You mad bros?
5 quarterback wrote:
agreed totally hyped up the pace is one that they won't be able to maintain. game over 2:03:41 still can't believe real runners believe they'll break 2 hours.
nickellerbacker wrote:they won't break 2:03, wait for it.
2:02:04
because some of the people posting are mods and if you don't agree with them...
I am seriously cramping wrote:
Seems like the mods are deleting just about every other post on this thread.
You mad bros?
Las Vegas Oddsmaker wrote:
No, I don't think you understand what it would take to run 2:00:00 for a marathon. It's a FACT that they won't do it. I'll say it a bit more slowly for you, it's a FAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCTTTTTT that they won't do it.
You're just guessing, I'm stating a FACT.
p.s. We can look into Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Aquinas, etc...anyone you care to discuss. Email me anytime or better yet, call me. I graduated 3 years from a little school called Yale, ever hear of it? I can handle anything that you throw at me simpleton.
zack92039u wrote:I don't think you understand what a fact is. You can be as confident as you want about what you believe, but that doesn't make it a fact. A fact is an objectively observable truth. There is no way the finishing time of this race is, on May 3, a fact.
Look, we can get into Aristotle and discussions of sea battles and the law of excluded middle if you want. But let's just jump to the conclusion: true statements about future events are true, but they are contingent truths. Because they are contingent upon future events, they cannot be facts.
I never pretended that my prediction was a fact, so of course I'm not going to bet on what I think the finish time will be. I am just guessing, as are you.
I never said they would break 2:00:00. In fact, I don't think they will. But the question here is not simply whether they will break 2:00:00. It is what the best time will be, and any response to that is absolutely not a fact.
Btw, I still don't agree that it is a fact that they won't break 2:00:00. That simply isn't what a fact is. Surely you agree that one of them has a better chance of breaking 2:00:00 than I would of winning a major Powerball lottery. It seems highly counter intuitive that anyone could say it is a fact that a given Powerball ticket won't win. Sure, it is extremely unlikely that it will win, but it isn't a fact. If it is possible that it could win, yet we also maintained it was a fact that it wouldn't win, we would be in the impossible situation of saying "It's a fact that the ticket is a loser, but it's possible it's a winner." Ergo, it isn't a fact that a given Powerball ticket is a loser, and because a sub 2:00:00 marathon is more likely than a Powerball win, it certainly isn't a fact that no one will break 2:00:00 in this race.
I think you missed the point of my Aristotle reference. I'm not trying to play swords with you. Aristotle is famous for his discussion about the contingency of true propositions about future events as they relate to necessity. But for what it's worth, I have been published in some highly-respected, peer-reviewed philosophy journals, so the mere fact that you went to Yale is not impressive to me in the slightest.
zack92039u wrote:
Las Vegas Oddsmaker wrote:No, I don't think you understand what it would take to run 2:00:00 for a marathon. It's a FACT that they won't do it. I'll say it a bit more slowly for you, it's a FAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCTTTTTT that they won't do it.
You're just guessing, I'm stating a FACT.
...
...
Btw, I still don't agree that it is a fact that they won't break 2:00:00. That simply isn't what a fact is. Surely you agree that one of them has a better chance of breaking 2:00:00 than I would of winning a major Powerball lottery. It seems highly counter intuitive that anyone could say it is a fact that a given Powerball ticket won't win. Sure, it is extremely unlikely that it will win, but it isn't a fact. If it is possible that it could win, yet we also maintained it was a fact that it wouldn't win, we would be in the impossible situation of saying "It's a fact that the ticket is a loser, but it's possible it's a winner." Ergo, it isn't a fact that a given Powerball ticket is a loser, and because a sub 2:00:00 marathon is more likely than a Powerball win, it certainly isn't a fact that no one will break 2:00:00 in this race.
I think you missed the point of my Aristotle reference. I'm not trying to play swords with you. Aristotle is famous for his discussion about the contingency of true propositions about future events as they relate to necessity. But for what it's worth, I have been published in some highly-respected, peer-reviewed philosophy journals, so the mere fact that you went to Yale is not impressive to me in the slightest.
That that dummy went to Yale is only proof that Yale can't teach everyone basic science.
they will not make it. it is a pity that all those great runners take part in an event that has no traffic with sports in the proper meaning of the word. just my two cents.