No Marathon yet wrote:
Walmsley has not yet run a marathon yet.
His 100k run was a disaster. 55 minutes slower than announced.
Let's hope he is able to run a sub 2:30 Marathon.
Sets 50 mile world record, gets trash talked when the wheels come off.... "Are you not entertained!?" - Gladiator
ZZZZ: More ignorance on understanding Strava. 'Estimated best effort' is not a reflection of actual splits. It is calculated.
He may have had a 2:29-2:28:40 marathon in there somewhere. He also had 62.7 miles for "100km." You don't go by GPS data you go by the measurements of the wheeled course. Nobody runs perfect tangents on a marathon course.
At the end of the day he broke a 'world best' by a 2:17 marathoner at a distance only US and UK runners seem to care about. It is a bit of stretch to say he could even sniff a 2:11:30 time in Atlanta.
Rew wrote:
ZZZZ: More ignorance on understanding Strava. 'Estimated best effort' is not a reflection of actual splits. It is calculated.
He may have had a 2:29-2:28:40 marathon in there somewhere. He also had 62.7 miles for "100km." You don't go by GPS data you go by the measurements of the wheeled course. Nobody runs perfect tangents on a marathon course.
At the end of the day he broke a 'world best' by a 2:17 marathoner at a distance only US and UK runners seem to care about. It is a bit of stretch to say he could even sniff a 2:11:30 time in Atlanta.
I'm not ignorant of the difference, I just wanted to point out not to look at just zero to 26.2. For informal times, I'm OK with measured track vs. imperfect tangents. That's what everyone with a GPS watch uses for training on the roads or trails.
You concede that he had faster than 2:29:45 in there, I'll concede that around 68 seconds could be added to the Strava best effort for the marathon based on 62.66 miles GPS vs 100.1 km Jones counter biked route. Makes no difference except to the nerds.
Makes no difference even to the nerds, I should say, as a nerd who doesn't give a flip about 2:27 vs 2:28 split.
BergLaufer wrote:
Official race splits:
39.3 km in 2:20:25
And 46.9 km in 2:46:45
That means he had to go through the marathon split in about 2:28 or so.
https://track.rtrt.me/e/CRRM-HOKA100K-2019#/leaderboard/top-men-100k-route_1/FINISH-B
You are not good at math. Even pace from 39.3km to 46.9km with those splits would've been 2:30, so he didn't "have to" go through in 2:28.
Rew wrote:
ZZZZ: More ignorance on understanding Strava. 'Estimated best effort' is not a reflection of actual splits. It is calculated.
He may have had a 2:29-2:28:40 marathon in there somewhere. He also had 62.7 miles for "100km." You don't go by GPS data you go by the measurements of the wheeled course. Nobody runs perfect tangents on a marathon course.
At the end of the day he broke a 'world best' by a 2:17 marathoner at a distance only US and UK runners seem to care about. It is a bit of stretch to say he could even sniff a 2:11:30 time in Atlanta.
Yeah his recent half-marathon time (64 flat) is probably worth about a 2:14 (maybe 2:13 given he clearly excels at longer distances). So it wouldn't be a stretch to think he'd be able to get into the high 2:12 range, but sub 2:11:30 is pushing it. Also the marathon trials course is not conducive to fast times.