Lance Armstrong and the Marathon

just do it wrote:

if lance had concentrated on running full time instead of cycling for a career, he'd be the top american (excluding khannouchi and meb).

So you mean he'd be the THIRD best american?

Actually it will take anyone longer than 30 minutes. There is also a much steeper 1 MILE COURSE called the Incline on which no one has ever broken 18 minutes.

Everyone seems to be missing the most important point.

Given that it is Lance and we know his method of opporation it seems the most important quiestion to be answered for us struggling poor runners is:

How many domestique runners is he going to need and how much is he willing to pay for me to drag him to the 20 mile mark in 1:43.

Hey, now there is a job for Brian Pope.

Have at it...

El G would get smoked in the mountains and wouldn't be able to get out of bed the next day, let alone ride another 125 miles.

[quote]M Warrior wrote:

How many domestique runners is he going to need and how much is he willing to pay for me to drag him to the 20 mile mark in 1:43.

quote]

True. Also, will he be doped up as in the tour?

Lance has VO2 tested through the roof, pumps 9 liters of blood per minute (EL G was tested @ 8.2), and consistently trains at lactate threshold paces rating nearly 200-205 BPM....2:30, without a doubt, 2:15 if he trains seriously....still, he will hampered by his training age and it may come slow. None the less, there was an earlier post stating how great this would be for the sport, and I would have to agree emphatically.

Lance is my hero's post puts all you whiners to bed. This article is proof his genetics DO MAKE A DIFFERENCE in this discussion and that he in a different realm than any of us could ever imagine!

Yeah he's so naturally good that he destroys guys that have been banned fo EPO abuse.

I am simply sick of this CRAP. Instead of speculating that Lance Armstrong can debut in a marathon in a time comprable to freakin Abdi as was pointed out, how about we just wait and see? Could Lance qualify for the olympic trials in swimming? Could Lance hit 250 in the majors? I'm also tired of the response of runners feeling threatend. No one is threatened, they are just tired of people demeaning the accomplishment of running a 2:15 when someone gives the moronic response that Lance Armstrong, again, OLD and RETIRED could do it. And yes I know winning the Tour de France is a greater feat than such marathon time, but that does not mean such a time is likely simply due to that. In short, shut the hell up about Lance running 2:15 untill theres some proof in the form of training, a good time at another distance, or his v02max and some low-level duathlon.

Same scenerio can be applied for any elite runner who is at the top of their game. Come on there has even been some in he track world who definitely believe Lagat is guilty of EPO use too...

Runningart2004 wrote:

Some of you have zero physiological knowledge. It would take him 2-5 years to get down to 2:30. He has the engine, but his muscles need time. Cycling is low impact. The eccentric stress would take time to adapt to. If he decided to jump into some Texas marathon and spits out a sub 2:30 then I'll be proven wrong, but I don't think I will be. Two difference sports people. This argument is pointless since I doubt he be putting the mental effort into training. Now, if this was Lance back in 1998 and he decided to come back as a runner instead of a cyclist and put in a couple years of training then he likely could have went 2:20-2:15, but right now he doesn't have the time nor the motivation. He'll run no faster than 2:35-40, and that's with 6 months to a year of training.

Alan

Alan I have to disagree. I got down to 2:37 3 years after quitting a 15 year smoking habit and being an overweight beer swilling couch potato. Lance could get to 2:30 a lot quicker than that if he put his mind to it. I have neither his genetics nor his work ethic.

OK, lets turn it around to see the true ridiculousness of this: Does anyone here think that Geb, or Bekele (when he's done running) are going to go kick ass in TdF?

Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it.

french fries wrote:

the big question is whether in a few years Lance will look the way LeMond looks now?

In a recent playboy interview he said that unlike other ex-cyclist cough-leMond he was always going to stay fit.

How many people said "Nobody will ever win 7 Tours in a row" only to be proven wrong by one Lance Armstrong? Improbable that he could run 2:15, yes; impossible, no.

Not ridiculous at all. Your comparison is invalid.

The comparison is not LA to elite marathoning (2:10 and under). The question is can he break 2:30, an above average time but far from elite?

Could the very top runners be above average bicyclists. The answer, in my opinion, is yes. Especially mountain climbers. They don't need to be able to do the TDF for the comparison to be valid. I think the very best runners would be very good age groupers at a local bicycle race. Just like Lance would be a very good age grouper at the Chicago Marathon.

A guy in town has proven this. He was a top local runner before becoming a bicyclist. From what I understand, he is among the area's best bicyclists.

No but I bet bekele (not geb) could be a decent Cat 1-2 climber. About the equivelent of a 2:30 marathon. Wilson Kipketer might even be better since cycling takes a little more raw power than running. Certainly Mottram has a lot of potential as a cyclist. And Webb, forget about it. That kid would rock.

fro-dough wrote:

OK, lets turn it around to see the true ridiculousness of this: Does anyone here think that Geb, or Bekele (when he's done running) are going to go kick ass in TdF?

Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it.

Yeah, but they've never cycled before while Lance HAS run, and run well too.

Plus, in your scenario, they'd be doing well in an elite race. Lance hasn't said he'd become an elite runner - he mentioned 2:15 which many of you here think sucks. (I do think 2:15 is a bit optimistic for him though).

Most of us are saying he could run 2:30 but not under 2:20 - seems reasonable to me.

gc wrote:

How many people said "Nobody will ever win 7 Tours in a row" only to be proven wrong by one Lance Armstrong? Improbable that he could run 2:15, yes; impossible, no.

Stupidest post yet, and thats saying something. Just because he did something people thought he couldnt in another sport doesnt mean squat frankly. Whats next? Lance Armstrong scores 70 points in an NBA game? Lance Armstrong takes bronze in 1500 freestyle in 2008 Olympics? Lance Armstrong wins Daytona 500? Lance Armstrong runs 3:30 mile? In short you are an absolute moron for thinking because people counted him out in one thing and are counting him out in another that he will therefore prove them wrong.