On this week's podcast, I talked a lot about this article and the Paris Marathon course, particularly its elevation. Having thought about this some more, I think the odds of a sub-2 hour marathon in this race are way less than the odds that a sub-4 mile happens on one of the downhill miles.
Shhhh. Don't tell Jonathan Gault or Weldon Johnson but Robert Johnson secretly recorded this show without their permission. He reveals his biggest disappointments and surprises for 2023 and then gets super excited about the 2...
Dumbest article ever? Ever? Lots of articles in the 1930s claiming Germany just wanted some of their territory back and once appeased they won't seek a wider war. I'd place that as slightly dumber and more consequential.
It just is so lazy and stupid to me that I refuse to up them up on the front page.
Yes, the WR in the marathon 2:00:35. Sub-2 has a ZERO percent change of happening at the Paris Olympics.
Why?
1) No rabbits. Add at least a minute to the time to this.
2) Warm weather. Add at least a minute of time due to this.
3) Course goes up 438 meters and down 436. That's 1437 feet - NYC is like 800 meters total. Add at least a minute due to this.
And I'm being generous on those "add at least a minute" figures. That's me my own lazy analysis on xmas. I should get John Kellogg to analyze the course, temps, etc and come up with a prediction.
But the Olympic record is 2:06:32 by Wanjiru. Yes that was pre-super shoes. Even if you subtract 2:30 for the shoes, one can see why breaking 2:04:00 would be an incredible feat.
A very thoughtful, and likely correct, analysis. You left one factor that looms large: the Olympic Marathon is typically a tactical race with gold, silver, and bronze medals on the line. No reasonable competitor is going to try to crack 2 hours as a tradeoff for a top 3 finish.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
A very thoughtful, and likely correct, analysis. You left one factor that looms large: the Olympic Marathon is typically a tactical race with gold, silver, and bronze medals on the line. No reasonable competitor is going to try to crack 2 hours as a tradeoff for a top 3 finish.
The worst post yet. Anyone who goes under 2 will win a medal. Easily. Gold, in fact. I agree that nobody will. I think the 2:04 being mentioned is unlikely. But going under 2 in Paris is no tradeoff. Whoever theoretically does is not sacrificing himself and giving up Gold to someone else. Nobody is trading a medal for the 2 hour glory. It won't be done in this race, but if it is, it will result in a medal. It is possible to run an amazing performance AND win a race at the same time. You don't have to pick between:
A. Run fast.
And...
B. Win race.
If you do A. well enough, it guarantees B. No tradeoff. Do both.
When I wrote, This is the dumbest article ever, I was using hyperbole.
I wish you were a registered user. I'd send you a free t-shirt. That article is AMAZING. The only person talking truth was Peter Snell.
It reminds me of some global warming predicitons.
But regardless of whether some climate change predictions may have been subject to hyperbole, this doesn’t alter one iota that the climate is changing, that humans are contributing to this, and that it is likely your great grandchildren will have a poor quality of life.
as I nearly fell off my chair as my friend told me about the article as I was too busy with my hourly naps and TV watching to read the article as reading is against everything that I ever believed in as reading is work as everybody knows how totally much I abhor work of any kind as it has always been my goal in life to never work as I have succeeded beyond belief in achieving this goal
