CIM Magic strikes again: Sara Vaughn debuts at 2:26!!!!

another oldie wrote:

More whining about the elevation loss. Why is it just this race? Courses with more than double this amount of drop don't generate the same ire from the angry mob. In fact, Rodger's 2 fastest lifetime marathons seemed to count as ARs and guess where they were run. No 10 page thread forms every year before or after Boston going on and on about quite a bit more elevation loss than CIM. Rupp runs 6 minutes slower than the AR (or doesn't even finish), no one screams about the 'ski slope' he was on. Every year with CIM it's the same thread. Isn't NYC net downhill? Everybody panic! NY marathon won by somebody - no wonder. It's downhill!

Are you serious? CIM is over 300 foot of net downhill and Boston is near 400, you don't think that's a lot? New York is only like 20 feet net downhill if that. Yes there are hills at all three of these races, but the down hills of 300-400 feet literally takes off around 2 minutes for these top end runners. But Sara running 2:26:50's at CIM is still like 2:28 or 2:29 on a more normal course, that's still very good for a debut marathon. And Brendan Gregg running 2:11 at CIM, that's still 2:13 on a more normal course and would be pretty competitive with a lot of our other top marathoners this year. He'd be right in there with our top guys at Chicago (except Rupp) and probably top 5 American at Boston or New York.

I’ve ran Boston 5 times. Sure, the beginning is fairly nice. One can totally blow up later on for this reason. Oh, and about it being downhill…after the Newton hills and the location of HH, the downhills are not welcoming on your quads. Major kudos to Sara!

This. I am so tired of people that only race so they can brag to others - how about running hard, feeling good about your performance and keeping your mouth shut? No, can't keep it to yourself and just *have* to let other people know how wonderful you are? Guess what, no one cares about your amazing marathon time; even your friends and running partners who give you kudos don't actually care (well, maybe they are jealous but that's probably even more of a motivation for you to tell them!)

Nienke Brinkman of the Netherlands ran even faster, 2:26:35, for her debut in Valencia yesterday. And she’s a trail runner and has only been running for a couple years.

Work Commute Track Club wrote:

Breaking news. Runners run fast on downhill course.

You could thrown out of an airplane and still wouldn't cover 26.2 miles in 2:30...

could be thrown*

Work Commute Track Club wrote:

Breaking news. Runners run fast on downhill course.

Get a new take. This is so tired and has been explained a hundred times. I am sorry you are afraid to make the trip and run the race. At least switch your take over to "Super Shoes" for a while or drugs for a minute or two.

Lets Run Snobs Have No Self Awareness.. wrote:

Work Commute Track Club wrote:

Breaking news. Runners run fast on downhill course.

You could thrown out of an airplane and still wouldn't cover 26.2 miles in 2:30...

I've run waaaaaay faster than 2:30, my slowest marathon of my life is significantly faster than 2:30. I can acknowledge that my marathon PR is from a pancake flat course and I'd likely run a bit slower on a normal course. Just like anyone running CIM should acknowledge that there is significant net downhill and they would have to match that time on a real course to be able to claim that time as a PR, unless they also tell people their best time on a real course.

cim is aided. wrote:

"CIM magic" = aided by downhill.

Well, if you compare her time to women on the same course, Like Sara Hall, it is still the fastest time ever.

Ha ha! Yup, gotta get that in somehow. Otherwise, nobody ever realizes that us dinky little older females are somehow frequently outrunning macho men half their age... ;) We also get pushed aside on sidewalks and overlooked for salary raises. Running is almost the one place I could dare humble brag and know it might be received with a smile. Tee heeeee . So thank you for seeing the humor!

Excellent post, and great points!

Some Background Knowledge wrote:

Lets Run Snobs Have No Self Awareness.. wrote:

You could thrown out of an airplane and still wouldn't cover 26.2 miles in 2:30...

I've run waaaaaay faster than 2:30, my slowest marathon of my life is significantly faster than 2:30. I can acknowledge that my marathon PR is from a pancake flat course and I'd likely run a bit slower on a normal course. Just like anyone running CIM should acknowledge that there is significant net downhill and they would have to match that time on a real course to be able to claim that time as a PR, unless they also tell people their best time on a real course.

Suuuuuure it is.

I'll admit to a definite CIM bias, being local, and having my own pr come on this course.

But just a couple facts to throw out there:

Brendan Gregg ran 2:11:38 at Chicago in 2019. He ran 2:13:27 in Atlanta for the Trials in 2020. A 2:11:21 in that context is really not that much of a surprise. I've run Chicago twice, CIM a few times, and ran in Atlanta. I would say Chicago and CIM are pretty comparable and that Atlanta (on that day) was worth a good +3-4 minutes on a "fast course" such as those two.

I don't have the time or inclination to go through all the CIM finishers and compare the times to their other marathon times, but from the people I know who've run it and other marathons, the times are not super different than say a Chicago, Berlin, London.

Would be nice to see people just give a "job well done," when people pour a lot of themselves into training, the race, etc. and they have a great performance.

Downhill don’t matter? Wind on point to point courses isn’t a factor either, right? Was there the tailwind yesterday?

3 mph gale force winds with gusts up to 4 mph thrust these athletes screaming down 300ft Mt. Sacramento to achieve completely explainable marks based on every athletes supporting times from other races and training.

CIM is just an event that gets great weather, has a very flat and raceable second half with almost no turns, and brings together a bunch of people that are all chasing fast marks and working together, and where women run with large packs of sub elite men. The race also attracts, accepts, and caters to a large elite and sub elite field that all share a conmon goal to run fast.

These conditions allow a lot of people to all have great days on the same day which creates deep results every year which gives this illusion that it is a overly aided course. Its a fast course and yes, not record eligible by letter of the law, but CIM should be celebrated as an achievement factory rather than discrediting the performances because there are consistently so many good ones.

2:04:58 in 2011 wrote:

Downhill don’t matter? Wind on point to point courses isn’t a factor either, right? Was there the tailwind yesterday?

Don't know why you didn't post as '2:03:02 in 2011'. Those times deserve an asterisk? Are they 'worth' 3 or more minutes slower? Do you use the same math for those who have choked spectacularly on the course? Did Hasay and Rupp run it in an 'up year' (Comrade's shoutout)? Everybody has the chance to run Boston and indeed, run more downhill than CIM. If it gives you an unrealistic PR, go there and set one!

Seems Hall gets footnotes and a lot of hemming and hawing. Well, those of you far better than he will ever be, you have the opportunity to run the same course in the same direction in 4 months. Oh yeah, the greats HAVE done it. Rodgers, Salazar, and Rupp have vone there and weren't close to Hall's time. Cherono and Desisa have done it and should have been close to 2:00 flat if it is 5 minutes faster than Berlin or Valencia. Thing is, however easy or aided the course is, it is equally so for all running it. Hundreds of thousands of them have run Boston. 3 - not 300 as Charlie is asked before visiting the chocolate factory, but 3 - have run it faster.

CIM is a great way to the 4 minutes off your PR? Feel free to do so. It will be equally aided when you do it - and less than Boston.

You don't speak for everyone. I think it is useful context for people to report their times and experiences.

You are really projecting when you assert as facts people's motivation for racing.

Stop being jealous and miserable. Just relax, chief.

Totally agree with this take. I too have my PR from CIM, although back in the '90's. I ran CIM about 10 times through the years and a group of my friends and I were chasing sub 2:30 back in those days. After severals years of low 2:30's runs, I finally managed to get under, while my friends ran in the low 2:30's again. They packed up and went to Chicago the next fall, and several of them ended up running in the 2:28 range. From years of seeing overlapping w/ CIM and Chicago, i'd say that they're at the least pretty equal. The main difference lately seems to be the incredible run of perfect weather days that CIM has enjoyed. That certainly wasn't the case back in the '80's-'90's.

Also, congrats on the half last week @ US Champs. Excited to see some fast masters running in the coming years!

Brendan ran 2:11 plus at Chicago a couple years ago. I've had the pleasure to meet him more than a few times while he was in Michigan. He's just a super hard worker and you won't find a nicer person, period. With a pack of runners, he'd have probably been mid 2:10. His CIM time is legit. Don't agree, go run it yourself.