Ryan Hall Interview: "I wouldn't mind putting that time on a flat certified course"

wallet inspector wrote:

(Hall) is without question the best American marathoner ever.

Seriously? You should try to avoid drowning in your own hyperbole like that.

Ryan Hall is a great distance runner, but being the fastest does not make him historically the best. As we have said before, is Wejo better than Zatopek and Nurmi because he has a faster marathon PR? No, of course not.

Until Mr. Hall wins a World Championships and/or Olympics medal, he isn't even in the conversation.

Overall these threads about conjecturing as to how fast Hall really is comes out in my mind to be somewhat silly. No one knows exactly how much force wind was blowing at all times and in what direction of the runners nor account for times when certain runners did not enjoy the tailwind because of runners right behind them. Also for people to try to say that since Muati ran 204 at London and Hall came up two minutes behind in Boston so he is a 206 runner iis like comparing apples to oranges. Different races, different conditions, different mental toughness and preparation. Too many confounding variables to honestly predict where his time would be on other courses.

Overall conditions did favor faster times, but we will never know what extent it was. Overall he ran pretty awesome race beating some amazing athletes and digging in the finish not far off the recent NYC and world cross country champ. He was happy with his time. We should be happy for him. It's not like he is gloating. And I am sure he is not resting on his laurels with where he is at, but it indefinitely a confidence boost.

A most excellent post worth repeating wallet inspector!

FanMan12 wrote:

...Overall conditions did favor faster times, but we will never know what extent it was. Overall he ran pretty awesome race beating some amazing athletes and digging in the finish not far off the recent NYC and world cross country champ. He was happy with his time. We should be happy for him. It's not like he is gloating. And I am sure he is not resting on his laurels with where he is at, but it indefinitely a confidence boost.

I agree with this ^ .

Added Perspective wrote:

wallet inspector wrote:

(Hall) is without question the best American marathoner ever.

Seriously? You should try to avoid drowning in your own hyperbole like that.

Ryan Hall is a great distance runner, but being the fastest does not make him historically the best. As we have said before, is Wejo better than Zatopek and Nurmi because he has a faster marathon PR? No, of course not.

Until Mr. Hall wins a World Championships and/or Olympics medal, he isn't even in the conversation.

Your hyperbole is notable. I'm pretty sure debuting in 2:08 and a minute faster than Alberto Salazar's longstanding debut (equaled by Culpepper) should have started the conversation. And while we're at it, which American marathoners are in the conversation? Shorter? Salazar? Rogers?

You posit a weak "fast time" reference to Wejo, Zatopek, etc. that fails desperately shot of whatever claim you think you're making with it. Running London again in 2:06.17, only 2 seconds behind the Mutai who just ran 2:04.40 in London--and we're talk'n bout the kid from California here--should bring further solidification to the argument to get Hall in the conversation.

Then I'd like to bring up permanence and "staying power". We're only talking the marathon here, as that was my claim. Ryan Hall is at 5 consecutive years of being the top American marathoner. He has done this domestically and internationally. The Olympics marathon second to Ritz is is his only ever American defeat. And, there is "no question" that this is the one blatantly inconsistent race in his resume. But again, let's just merely say this gets him in the conversation.

Lastly, Hall's AR Half, coming off the USXC win and World Road Champs AR is equally adequate in considering him to be worth pondering within the scope of the best American marathoner ever.

And then let's get this conversation framed. The best "American" is a domestic title, not international as you claim. Ryan Hall is the current US Olympic Trials champ by over 2 minutes on Ritz. World and/or International titles are by no means indicative of being the "best" American. Hall's consistent 5 year dominance has been forged competing against the best in the world on a world stage that is physically better and faster than the 70s and 80s.

Hall is the conversation. Best American marathoner ever, hands down. Otherwise, state who else is in your conversation and let's get analytical.

Hall seems to be as fit as he ever has been, and pushed the pace hard, finishing well amongst a strong field.

I think it was a good run, not a record, not the best ever American marathon performance, but solid.

Sometimes I really wish there were a 'like' button on this forum.

I was thinking the same thing the other day about a great response to one of those idiots who thinks the times "don't

count".

In the conversation: Rogers, Shorter, Benoit. Hall should be in the conversation, I agree, but the conversation is not whether he is equal to or better than those three, but rather what he would need to do to match their achievements.

I think we should expect times to be faster now. Of course fields are much more competitive now, much more international, with much more money on the line, and that is a big mark in Hall's favor. You should feel free to 'get analytical' and perhaps I'll change my mind, but my gut feeling (and I admit this is just a feeling) is that Hall is not dominant the way e.g. Rogers was.

Okay, I'll start. I took Rogers' list of marathons from wikipedia and trimmed down the list to include only marathon WINS and ONLY from 1974-1980. Note how low your odds of winning Boston or NYC would have been in this time frame, given that Rogers was in the race.

1974 Philadelphia Marathon (2:21:57) 1st CR

1975 Boston (2:09:55) 1st American Record (AR)

1976 NYC (2:10:10) 1st CR

1976 Sedo Island, Japan (2:08:23) 1st CR (200 meters short)

1976 Maryland (2:14:28) 1st CR

1977 Kyoto, Japan (2:14:25) 1st

1977 Amsterdam, Holland (2:12:46) 1st CR

1977 Waynesboro (2:25:12) 1st

1977 NYC (2:11:28) 1st

1977 Fukuoka (2:10:55) 1st

1978 Boston (2:10:13) 1st

1978 NYC (2:12:12) 1st

1979 Boston (2:09:27) 1st AR

1979 NYC (2:11:42) 1st

1980 Boston (2:12:11) 1st

1980 Toronto (2:14:47) 1st

Rogers was putting up those performances in a relatively uncompetitive time for the marathon. Put him in a major marathon today and he wouldn't be winning. Look at track times -- the East Africans that are winning major marathons have sub 27 10k PRs and 13 flat 5ks and so on, which is much faster than Shorter or Rodgers could ever run.

Rodgers, Shorter, and whoever else you want to say were all very good and shouldn't be played down based on times. But it's foolish to say that Ryan Hall is worse than them because he's not winning marathons in a time when elite marathoning is much more competitive.

bmi overweight wrote:

Okay, I'll start. I took Rogers' list of marathons from wikipedia and trimmed down the list to include only marathon WINS and ONLY from 1974-1980. Note how low your odds of winning Boston or NYC would have been in this time frame, given that Rogers was in the race.

1974 Philadelphia Marathon (2:21:57) 1st CR

1975 Boston (2:09:55) 1st American Record (AR)

1976 NYC (2:10:10) 1st CR

1976 Sedo Island, Japan (2:08:23) 1st CR (200 meters short)

1976 Maryland (2:14:28) 1st CR

1977 Kyoto, Japan (2:14:25) 1st

1977 Amsterdam, Holland (2:12:46) 1st CR

1977 Waynesboro (2:25:12) 1st

1977 NYC (2:11:28) 1st

1977 Fukuoka (2:10:55) 1st

1978 Boston (2:10:13) 1st

1978 NYC (2:12:12) 1st

1979 Boston (2:09:27) 1st AR

1979 NYC (2:11:42) 1st

1980 Boston (2:12:11) 1st

1980 Toronto (2:14:47) 1st

Rodgers is in the conversation. Shorter and Samuelson are the standard. There should be no discussion. Gold medals in the Olympics. Period.

But the Hall v. Rodgers v. Keflezhigi MARATHON argument....

Hall - 1 marathon OVER 2:10

Rodgers - 2 legit marathons UNDER 2:10

Meb - Not sure but he's a gamer (Athens, New York)

Hall and Meb finish top 5-10 in marathons that have much more competitive international fields. Rodgers had tougher American comp.

Rodgers was more prolific. No challenge from Hall or Meb here.

Meb has a medal, Hall has the times and record*, Rodgers has the most wins. Depends on what carries the most weight for you.

Americans moving up to the marathon are f***ing idiots. Hall ran 4:00 in high school and he thinks he's a marathoner. Its not that he can't be good at the marathon, but who knows what kind of 10k he could have put together by now had that been his sole focus.

I think he/everyone trains like retards with all this slow running business. Silly.

Added Perspective wrote:

wallet inspector wrote:

(Hall) is without question the best American marathoner ever.

Seriously? You should try to avoid drowning in your own hyperbole like that.

Ryan Hall is a great distance runner, but being the fastest does not make him historically the best. As we have said before, is Wejo better than Zatopek and Nurmi because he has a faster marathon PR? No, of course not.

Until Mr. Hall wins a World Championships and/or Olympics medal, he isn't even in the conversation.

Hall might not have the most medals, but he lives in a much more competitive time.

4th place against that field is his best performance, ever.

In a single race KK accomplished more than Hall ever will. Won the biggest marathon in the world (London) set a WR and beat the two biggest distance running legends of the decade, Tergat and Geb. That alone makes him the greatest American marathoner in the last 25 years.

The funny thing about reality is that it has a way of being real, despite people talking around it. Davila had a lot more room for improvement going in than Hall did for various reasons, but stating that a performance by runner X somehow has a bearing on the future status of runner Y is colossal fail. Hey, I set an 11-minute PR last week, and no one called it! That means Hall has a 1:56:43 in him, easy!

Records aren't certified, they're ratified. Beyond that, congratulations on understanding what the word "good" means. Hall didn't do anything superhuman by placing right where he has in major marathons in the past. He did nothing to suggest that he is at a new level now.

Hubris duly noted. I also can't help but notice that you choose to define Hall's race on the basis of how one man who had a serious off day finished. You might also consider the fact that Hall finished 62 seconds behind the winner when he ran 2:06:17 and 58 seconds behind the winner when he placed third at Boston in 2009, but was 1:56 behind last week. Does that help in your confirmation-bias-filled, "only human" world?

And a post full of 'tard finishes in a wonderful flourish of hypocrisy: You repeatedly take cracks at people for being "all-knowing," then assert that a veteran marathoner (Boston 2011 was his eighth) who did nothing more remarkable than run up to his established potential on Monday is "just getting started."