corn friend wrote:
jesus, we just watched OP backpedal so hard and fast he could run a 63:xx half backwards
In what sense? I still have the same opinion of Jim, his fans, and his chance at the trials. I learned about how certified courses are measured thanks to that Katz guy. Isn’t that the point of discussion, prove your point, be disproven, and/or learn something new along the way?
[/quote]
btw Saying that any guy with a faster 5k than Jim could destroy him in ultras is almost as dumb as saying Wayde van Niekerk could destroy Rudisha in an 800m[/quote]
No one said they’d destroy Jim, they’d destroy the trails, and of course not all talented college runners would make it but hundreds would.
popopopo wrote:
bluecolla wrote:
There are plenty of people that know he can run a 2:11 or 2:12 marathon if he shows up ready to run that day.
This is the consensus opinion among sane people. Then you have a tiny lunatic minority saying he can't run 2:15. And a tiny lunatic minority saying he can run 2:09.
He can probably run 2xhalf+5 at least because he is distance-biased.
63 without tapering = 62 low with tapering, so 2:09 on a flat course.
He also handles hills well on top of the extra distance, relative to the field, so he could overperform in an honest Trials race. 2:12 with tapering if the course is slow. It might land him anywhere from 2-10th.
We have at most 10 2:08-9 guys with the moon shoes, more than half of whom will fall apart from hills or something else, and all of whom will run 2+ min slower in the Trials race.
A good day for Jim gives him maybe 3-4% chance of qualifying. Not impossible.
Everybody in the field that has run sub 2:10 has run a 61:XX half or faster NOT tapered.
I think Jim will get into 22:12 shape for a flat fast course, which will put him about 2:14 assuming they go all out. I think he’ll place around the likes of Bernard Lagat, Abdi Abdiramin, and CJ Albertson. You really need to get over the shoes, every brand has them now, including Hoka.
even better question wrote:
Even if he finishes top 3, which I highly doubt, could he run under the olympic standard of 2:11:30? It’s a hilly hot humid course, I think times will be sluggish.
Hot and humid in February? Whatchootalkinbout.
[quote][b]
Shunpo wrote:
corn friend wrote:
jesus, we just watched OP backpedal so hard and fast he could run a 63:xx half backwards
In what sense? I still have the same opinion of Jim, his fans, and his chance at the trials. I learned about how certified courses are measured thanks to that Katz guy. Isn’t that the point of discussion, prove your point, be disproven, and/or learn something new along the way?
Generally people try to have a discussion without being such an insufferable dick. Just chill out man.
I was only a sarcastic ass with the sarcastic asses. If it’s insufferable why read all of it?
I didn’t read it all, just enough to know the answer to your question
That hardly makes your opinion valid, but I’ll try to be more civil next thread, we can always improve ourselves, I certainly had some stupid replies throughout here.
Shunpo wrote:
That hardly makes your opinion valid, but I’ll try to be more civil next thread, we can always improve ourselves, I certainly had some stupid replies throughout here.
I’d say you had more than “some” stupid replies. Everything you posted was stupid. Lots of room for improvement...
cant believe wrote:
Shunpo wrote:
That hardly makes your opinion valid, but I’ll try to be more civil next thread, we can always improve ourselves, I certainly had some stupid replies throughout here.
I’d say you had more than “some” stupid replies. Everything you posted was stupid. Lots of room for improvement...
You just said you didn’t read everything. Make up your mind.