Paul Ryan's marathon

This drivel makes no sense.

"Elites were running where they could get paid -- which was anywhere but Boston -- and the masses had an increasing number of options. Pittsburgh launched a May marathon in 1985 with $120,000 in prize money, while overseas, London was in the midst of a steady climb toward 20,000 runners. Chicago eclipsed 10,000 entrants for the first time in 1986 -- and threatened to move to the spring. In Boston, entries shrank from 6,924 in 1984 to 4,904 in 1986."

IN 1986, London had 20,000 entrants.

Chicago had over 10,000.

Boston had 7,000 in 1984.

"The Centennial Boston Marathon in 1996 established a record as the world's largest marathon with 38,708 entrants, 36,748 starters, and 35,868 finishers."

In 1996, Boston had 36,000 finishers.....

Ummm, I think you could say everyone was running marathons back then....

I can guarantee that 100% of you are just morons.

My take is this, that while you may not remember your pr

to the second, you surely know where you did it. Maybe

another interviewer will ask that question. That's the

great thing about the NYC marathon. If you pr'd at

Boston, it's hard to prove. If you pr at NYC it's in

the database forever. The length of the Kip thread proves

how much runners of all types hate running liars and cheats.

Let's hope he is not one of those.

dude is a complete douchebag but can't confirm he is lying.

2:5x is simply not fast. I by no means considered myself elite in my track career but as a sprinter merciered similar to a 2:20 marathon.

I respectfully disagree. I think your explanation would be plausible if Ryan brought up the subject himself, but it would not come across as bragging if, as is the case here, he was asked the question directly.

I will preface what I am about to say by admitting I am a solid Obama supporter but the thought I am about to express goes to many politicians of either political party: they seem to have some strange quirks, to say the least. They can't seem to help themselves sometimes. They become accustomed to saying things to get a certain reaction, and they don't know where to stop. It's a personality trait I really don't understand.Sub-three hours doesn't make you a great runner, but it suggests you did some training and took it seriously. If he ran over five hours it might not have mattered enough to recall his time. If he ran anywhere close to three hours, he knows his time.

If he has been out of running for a while, the times and paces wouldn't really connect anymore. I haven't raced in a while due to injury. Even though I ran decent (under 18) 5ks for a female, I couldn't tell you off the top of my head what pace/mile I hit in a race. I ran one half marathon in high school, and I have no idea at all what the time was. My point is, if he stopped caring about running after the marathon, I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility to forget the exact time.

This has been kicked around enough concerning the likelihood of remembering/forgetting. Now it's time to find out the reality of his marathon time. If he did it, great. If he didn't do it, that's interesting too.

Who has an idea? We've done the easy stuff -- athlinks, etc... Is there a marathon archive per se?

My idea is to e-mail political reporters (libs are best bet) in an effort to get them to ask the question of the Romney/Ryan campaign. I'll e-mail a reporter at my local (Boston) paper. Who's up for this?

Just sent the e-mail. Let's see what happens.

Yeah, this is so much different than and not nearly as crazy as the birthers looking for Obama's birth certificate.

Runner's World can't find any result for Ryan. If this gets more exposure he's going to have to provide details

http://news.runnersworld.com/2012/08/31/paul-ryan-says-hes-run-sub-300-marathon/

thedude is back wrote:

2:5x is simply not fast. I by no means considered myself elite in my track career but as a sprinter merciered similar to a 2:20 marathon.

2:5x is fast if running is not your life like it is for most people on these boards. I'm guessing 2:5x is probably in the top 2% of all marathon times for any given year. Granted that's not fast for those who ran collegiately, but imagine if you did a long swim or nordic ski competition and finished with a time in the top 2%. That would seem pretty good, eh?

Wadda Maroon wrote:

Yeah, this is so much different than and not nearly as crazy as the birthers looking for Obama's birth certificate.

When politicians lie, I find the senseless lies a lot more interesting than the ones with a comprehensible rationale. I also find the easily debunked ones interesting.

If Obama lied about his birthplace and forged a birth certificate (something I don't believe he did), he did it because he wouldn't have been able to be president without doing so. If someone lies or fudges a past policy position that's now politically problematic, I don't like it, but I get why it's expedient.

It's the guys who lie about their high school GPA and their military service and their marathon times and their legal-but-questionable college hijinks and that sort of thing that are fascinating to me. Why would you do this, especially in the age of the interwebs? Do you really think it's going to make or break your electability?

RESPECTED??? wrote:

I can guarantee that 100% of you are just morons.

I resemble that remark!

Houston wrote:

Runner's World can't find any result for Ryan. If this gets more exposure he's going to have to provide details

http://news.runnersworld.com/2012/08/31/paul-ryan-says-hes-run-sub-300-marathon/

This is great. A lot more people are seeing this now.

When politicians lie, I find the senseless lies a lot more interesting than the ones with a comprehensible rationale. I also find the easily debunked ones interesting.[/quote]

Yep, pretty dumb to lie about something like this. Makes people question his honesty in general. Sure you can lie on policy stuff as there is often some gray area and get away with it, but if you also lie on objective stuff (espeically since there is no reason to do so) you come across as a COMPULSIVE liar, a tag that is probably not good for a candidate to have.

This is becoming Big News.

I'd agree with you Jobby, nothing is dumber in this day in age than to make up stories of any type of measured athletic achievement that others could be impressed by. People are going to hunt that crap down and call BS on them with ease. I agree it sounds like he ran this alleged race sometime in the mid 90's but even that isn't long enough ago to be "lost to the past". If Romney said he'd run a marathon when he was young, that'd equate to the 1970's and that would be impossible to prove by comparison.

I hope Ryan isn't lying about this, would be disappointing to me since I am a fan of him. Hard to respect anyone all that much once you know they make up lies about completely meaningless things. Sadly, the average politician lives day-to-day with such an inflated ego and skewed sense of reality that I've gotten used to it. That said, by comparison Romney/Ryan are still far more in touch with reality and how the world works than the train-wreck we currently have in the White House. Issues won't change my voting choice.

If someone knows his actual high school or college track times, you can still use the McMillian calculator to see if he was capable of running a marathon in sub 3hrs.

Ryan is a liar. This was the least of a number of his lies. With all the buzz about this lie it would be a simple thing for him just to name the race that he ran.

Ryan is a liar throgh and through.

This guyt has no character or ethics.