Ryan Hall- New American Record! 59:42

Carnivore 69 wrote:

Now that I think about it, 57:54 will probably remain the official record because there was no chip mat at 20K. Bad break for Ryan, but he will have other chances. I guarantee you future race organizers will have as many chip mats out as they can each time he races on the roads.

I don't believe a chip time would count.

They're with Reebok. Hall is with Asics, so I don't think they'd be training with each other. Maybe I'm wrong.

i think he should continue to focus on the 10k atleast through 2008 then he can mull over the marathon for 2012

Running a marathon in Beijing's pollution and prime time scheduling sounds like a bad idea.

cyclical wrote:

Also, I heard a rumor Hall was thinking of doing LA marathon....however, I think some spring marathons may want to lobby for him. I just hope he sticks to the 10K and try to break 27min. Fantastic run!

If LAM tries to get Ryan to run their race, I hope they pay him a HUGE appearance fee. He deserves it. (He's also a California boy from Big Bear.) But I too hope he goes with the 10K rather than marathon for Beijing... but either would be awesome.

Carnivore 69 wrote:

Correct. Some may have thought the the old record (pre-57:54) was by KK in around 57:30 or so, but KK's citizenship had not gone through at the time he ran it. So the last guy to have the AR before Hall was Abdi in 58:42.

That's what I meant. Hall won't be credited with a 20K record today, obviously, but his time at 20K was two minutes faster than any American not named Ryan Hall has ever run in a 20K race. (Curp had to have hit 20K in around 57:45-57:50 en route.)

I only listen to Malmo on this stuff anyway, as he knows the half and the marathon.

That being said what Hall did today looking like he did off the video is pretty darn impressive, time or not. He beat a guy like Meb by almost or 3 Mins.

Hall has alway had what I would call supreme talent, he used to run those 10 milers in HS awful fast, and ran 1:51.x scratch and 3:42.x in HS, now look at him. Wow, is all that should be said.

Trialswatcher wrote:

I only listen to Malmo on this stuff anyway, as he knows the half and the marathon.

I think even malmo would admit he didn't get 100% out of himself at the marathon (no criticism implied). Not built right, maybe. More of a 3k-HM body type.

Agree with you on one thing though, he's usually on the money with sage advice.

check out bizuneh interview on mens running

Does his 59:43 mean he's better than last year or that he's finding his distance? He had some great XC races last year with his 20K road race but a disappointing track season in between. I say the last point because it may mean that he's still a 13:15-20 5K runner and less than great 10Ker not that there's anything wrong with it.

I remember a certain another American getting a record quite early on in his season last year and look what happened to him and we all know the yanks are dirty fat cheats

Jonny B Good wrote:

I remember a certain another American getting a record quite early on in his season last year and look what happened to him and we all know the yanks are dirty fat cheats

Not Ryan Hall. Plus, that "certain other American," had long time ties to drug peddlers and cheats. Ryan's cleaner than a new-born baby.

If you ask me wrote:

I think even malmo would admit he didn't get 100% out of himself at the marathon (no criticism implied). Not built right, maybe. More of a 3k-HM body type.

I've never run a good marathon. I don't even think I could have run a good one in Chicago on a perfect day. My body type was just not suited for the event. We all can't be marathoners.

Ryan would have had an even better time if the roads had not been wet yesterday. I ran the ran the full marathon that day and the wet, slick road hampered me and obviously I wasn't running 4:30 miles! I think could have been close to 59 with a dry road and no wind! Ryan is the man to take on the African in the full marathon!

malmo wrote:

I never got this "solo" thing that pops up here as if it's a detriment to fast running. It's not. Running solo is one of the easiest ways to run fast times. The athlete gets completely relaxed and "into the zone" when solo.

I have to disagree with you on this one, malmo.

I do agree that people can run faster solo than think, however. I agree with the idea that too many people use the lack of competition as an excuse for something less than a full effort.

But it's just wrong to say "running solo is one of the easiest ways to run fast times." If that were true, then world, national and personal records would often be set in that manner and they're not. Quite the contrary. As you well know, huge sums are spent on rabbits and lining up good, fast fields because they help push/pull people to faster times.

WRs usually end up the last half or so being solo because they're, well, worlds records and you wouldn't expect anyone to be too close to a performance that's better than any in recorded history. But they were usually rabbitted to that point (Dave Moorcroft being the obvious exception).

The overwhelming majority of PRs and NRs are set in losing efforts against fast (usually rabbitted) fields, not solo runs.

Zat0pek wrote:But it's just wrong to say "running solo is one of the easiest ways to run fast times." If that were true, then world, national and personal records would often be set in that manner and they're not. Quite the contrary. As you well know, huge sums are spent on rabbits and lining up good, fast fields because they help push/pull people to faster times.

WRs usually end up the last half or so being solo because they're, well, worlds records and you wouldn't expect anyone to be too close to a performance that's better than any in recorded history. But they were usually rabbitted to that point (Dave Moorcroft being the obvious exception).

The overwhelming majority of PRs and NRs are set in losing efforts against fast (usually rabbitted) fields, not solo runs.

i thought the same thing when i read malmo's comment about solo runs.

Zat0pek wrote:

But it's just wrong to say "running solo is one of the easiest ways to run fast times." If that were true, then world, national and personal records would often be set in that manner and they're not. Quite the contrary. .

You need to review the history of World records then.

The fact that race promoters provide pacers in WR attempts these days is a choice, not a necessity. Even so, the athletes often overrun the pacers.

It is funny how people wrote Hall off a few years ago. They just said he as an above college runner and nothing more. Also, they pointed out that he has never broke 3;40 for the 1500 since his impressive prep-days.

Since then he has run a respectable 13:16 5k, a strong showing for the US in international Xcross, and now a 59.42 half marathon.

Currently we have the best crop of distance runners since the early 80s.

The bear is out for lunch wrote:

It is funny how people wrote Hall off a few years ago. They just said he as an above college runner and nothing more. Also, they pointed out that he has never broke 3;40 for the 1500 since his impressive prep-days.

Since then he has run a respectable 13:16 5k, a strong showing for the US in international Xcross, and now a 59.42 half marathon.

Currently we have the best crop of distance runners since the early 80s.

I wrote him off and thought he was limited. To be fair, he was at the mile, but that's no excuse as the mile's not the only event.

What I like most about him is his no-hesitation approach to race aggressively with no self-imposed limitations. I think this is his best attribute. If the lead's available and it makes sense, he doesn't go lame like so many others. He takes the lead and makes a run for the win. You just KNOW that he'll give himself every chance for a special race in London, and you can't say that about every runner, even every fit runner.