An idea to use the NCAA to improve American marathoning

I thought your post was pretty dumb until you said winter. So a good idea and probably in the best interest of the athletes but the NCAA system will not turn its back on indoor track unfortunately.

if a kid cant rin the 5000m indimoors and make nationals, what are the odds of them being able to run a 210 marathon?

the US could easily have a lot more 215-2:20 guys. But we dont need that. we need guys who are breaking 208....

slaaa wrote:

if a kid cant rin the 5000m indimoors and make nationals, what are the odds of them being able to run a 210 marathon?

the US could easily have a lot more 215-2:20 guys. But we dont need that. we need guys who are breaking 208....

2:08 is crap.

I’d much rather the kids focus on track. We need more Grant Fishers (competitive) not more Ryan Hall’s (not competitive).

Regardless — in order for a person to feel comfortable at a fast pace for a marathon, they need to have serious underside ability.

The best marathoners and half marathoners have track backgrounds. Our best marathoner, Rupp, was the same.

whats real wrote:

The best marathoners and half marathoners have track backgrounds. Our best marathoner, Rupp, was the same.

This is a classic case of survivorship bias. The best U.S. marathoners have track backgrounds because we have a gigantic scholastic and collegiate track system that sifts out star 1500-5K runners, and then 1500-10K runners. Those are the people who get a shot at serious marathon training as a pro. But somehow our best home-grown marathoners keep being runners who were very good runners, but not dominant at shorter distances. It's like picking people to be 800m specialists only from your fastest 400m runners - you'll do okay, but you're going to miss a lot of talent, including a lot of top talent.

Compare this to the Japanese system, which is weak in track but extremely well developed for the HM distance. And look: they have dozens and dozens of fast marathoners.

Care to name our best male marathoners in the last 20 years who weren't dominate at the shorter distances? Other than Brian Sell I can't think of one. Rupp, Riley, abdi, meb, hall, Ritz, ward, culpepper, Browne, DeHaven, coogan we're all solid NCAA track guys.

Now you can argue a lot were running the wrong events and instead of being 342 1500m guys they should have been running 2750 10ks.

If US companies were willing to spend a lot of money sponsoring the 29-30min 10k guys we too could have a lot of sort of fast marathoners (210-215 guys). But it isn't going to up our 208 count a lot or get us completive down at 206. Getting all our 2720-2750 10k off the track where they are not completive and running marathons in their prime might.

I’ll see your Japanese system and raise you Bekele & Kipchoge.

Ridiculous and 22 years old is early enough to switch to the marathon. Is 30K even a standard race distance?

I don't think the NCAA would be willing to fund an expensive undertaking like this. The sport is already hemorrhaging teams. Maybe it would work as some type of USATF collegiate championship, but I don't see the NCAA ever funding it.

whats real wrote:

slaaa wrote:

if a kid cant rin the 5000m indimoors and make nationals, what are the odds of them being able to run a 210 marathon?

the US could easily have a lot more 215-2:20 guys. But we dont need that. we need guys who are breaking 208....

2:08 is crap.

I’d much rather the kids focus on track. We need more Grant Fishers (competitive) not more Ryan Hall’s (not competitive).

Regardless — in order for a person to feel comfortable at a fast pace for a marathon, they need to have serious underside ability.

The best marathoners and half marathoners have track backgrounds. Our best marathoner, Rupp, was the same.

Yes, the US needs more people pushing for 5th place in the distance events.

Agree with that rest of your post. There's not many good marathoners who didn't run well on the track. I do think Americans go to the marathon too late, more should specialize at age 25/26 rather than wait until they are 30. Waiting so long means we rarely see Americans running marathons at their physical peak and then they wonder why they are so far behind 27 year old's from Ethiopia and Kenya.

I think a half marathon would make more sense than a 30k road race. Half marathon would already be more than twice any race distance they typically do (10k) and it's a standard racing distance. 30k is a bit much.

So many LRers think everyone should run marathons or ultras. I've asked this before and have never had a response; all things being equal, is there more money to be made on the track or from marathons? It's something elite runners will consider.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

So many LRers think everyone should run marathons or ultras. I've asked this before and have never had a response; all things being equal, is there more money to be made on the track or from marathons? It's something elite runners will consider.

Marathon. Nobody cares about 1340/2820 track guys. A 212 marathoner is good enough get appearance/prize money at the second tier marathons. Granted we arnt really talking big money here.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

High hopes wrote:

Yes, the US needs more people pushing for 5th place in the distance events.

Agree with that rest of your post. There's not many good marathoners who didn't run well on the track. I do think Americans go to the marathon too late, more should specialize at age 25/26 rather than wait until they are 30. Waiting so long means we rarely see Americans running marathons at their physical peak and then they wonder why they are so far behind 27 year old's from Ethiopia and Kenya.

So many LRers think everyone should run marathons or ultras. I've asked this before and have never had a response; all things being equal, is there more money to be made on the track or from marathons? It's something elite runners will consider.

In terms of prize money? It's all about road races, and it's not even close. There's no money to be made on the track except for the top 2-3 in every event. Tim Hutchings was talking about this on the Sunday Plodcast. Said he used to be able to go to small track and XC meets in the 80s and pick up enough money to make a decent living. Now, that's gone and it's all about sponsorship to survive

High hopes wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

So many LRers think everyone should run marathons or ultras. I've asked this before and have never had a response; all things being equal, is there more money to be made on the track or from marathons? It's something elite runners will consider.

In terms of prize money? It's all about road races, and it's not even close. There's no money to be made on the track except for the top 2-3 in every event. Tim Hutchings was talking about this on the Sunday Plodcast. Said he used to be able to go to small track and XC meets in the 80s and pick up enough money to make a decent living. Now, that's gone and it's all about sponsorship to survive

So why isn't Centro out racing on the roads? He is living quite well having Nike as a sponsor and Houlihan was also making more money than any female marathoners.

If what you say is true, than everyone would be running marathons. How much is the not in the top 2-3 marathoner earning? Doesn't Jarad Ward partially support himself by being a teacher?

Both NJCCA and NAIA do a half marathon championship, the NCAA should do the same. Allow runners to qualify on track 10k times, but do the half marathon championship separate from NCAA track championships (indoor or outdoor). There would be a ton of runners who would hit the Olympic trials marathon, half-marathon standard, which might encourage more to run post -collegiate.

This wouldn't to magically produce a bunch of sub 2:10 guys, but for someone who is better at the marathon than the 10k, this might help them transition to road racing faster than they otherwise would.

ghat man wrote:

Both NJCCA and NAIA do a half marathon championship, the NCAA should do the same. Allow runners to qualify on track 10k times, but do the half marathon championship separate from NCAA track championships (indoor or outdoor). There would be a ton of runners who would hit the Olympic trials marathon, half-marathon standard, which might encourage more to run post -collegiate.

This wouldn't to magically produce a bunch of sub 2:10 guys, but for someone who is better at the marathon than the 10k, this might help them transition to road racing faster than they otherwise would.

Just putting the NCAA stamp on it doesn't make it more than just another road race. If I was a coach, I would only be interested in having my 2nd tier runners complete in it. If I was concerned about potential post-college marathon careers I would ask them to go for 15-20 mile runs on Sundays.

Half Marathon wrote:

I think a half marathon would make more sense than a 30k road race. Half marathon would already be more than twice any race distance they typically do (10k) and it's a standard racing distance. 30k is a bit much.

I see your point with its popularity. I do think 30k is the max distance you can race before glycogen depletion plays a key role. The problem with extreme glycogen depletion is that it takes much longer to recover from. Thus why I don’t suggest an actual marathon. I recall Bill Rodgers doing a 30k race in his lead up to winning Boston in 1975. The runners learning how to deal with the dynamics of these longer races would be beneficial imo.

Also how many guys skipped indoor for XC this last year when they coincided. I think this would be great for guys at programs like NAU and BYU that focus on 10k type runners. For the most part they could care less about the indoor championships. Not that 1500 specialists wouldn’t still focus on indoor. They would but this would a great opportunity for the longer aerobic monsters to develop towards the Marathon. Where’m they will likely end up anyway.

whats real wrote:

slaaa wrote:

if a kid cant rin the 5000m indimoors and make nationals, what are the odds of them being able to run a 210 marathon?

the US could easily have a lot more 215-2:20 guys. But we dont need that. we need guys who are breaking 208....

2:08 is crap.

I’d much rather the kids focus on track. We need more Grant Fishers (competitive) not more Ryan Hall’s (not competitive).

Regardless — in order for a person to feel comfortable at a fast pace for a marathon, they need to have serious underside ability.

The best marathoners and half marathoners have track backgrounds. Our best marathoner, Rupp, was the same.

Many of the East Africans started with marathoning training and moved down. The great Geb is an example. Also I’m not saying not to do 10k training, Just to have a time of year in the winter devoted to Marathon type training.

dirt cheap wrote:

I don't think the NCAA would be willing to fund an expensive undertaking like this. The sport is already hemorrhaging teams. Maybe it would work as some type of USATF collegiate championship, but I don't see the NCAA ever funding it.

Would like to see the major companies and American majors get behind this. Brooks, Saucony, New Balance… Boston, New York, Chicago… It benefits them to have more competitive American thoners. Work with the NCAA. Make it a bowl like event. With the pandemic things have to move outside the box. Nows the time when people are already being forced to change approaches.