Kurdt,
Man, I didn't realize I had the power to get under your skin like that. Read the post I wrote that Thomas responded to. Thomas gets it, and his attitude really ought to be yours also.
Here's where I think I get myself into hot water with some of you people - I do not slam other runners, say they suck or anything like that like some other posters here do, and so when I call something like it is or like it should be, you all assume that I am slamming that person. Let's look at the facts:
1) I said Michael Aish shouldn't be considered elite in the Chicago Marathon. No slam there. He's an excellent runner and has the possibility of being an elite marathon runner, but until he does it, I can't consider him elite. I'd call him elite at Grandma's Marathon, but not Chicago this time.
2) Someone predicted 2:11-2:12. I think that's a bit fast for a first time marathoner, regardless of whether he's run a 1:03 half or not. Again, to use my TJ Lentz example, he also has a PR of 1:03, but his marathon best is 2:17, and that was after several tries at the marathon distance. Lentz has been mostly a low 2:20s guy. I think that Aish is more talented a runner than TJ, but again, beyond the half marathon distance, we don't know.
3) How has anything I've posted show that I don't know anything about running? So what that Aish has run 13:22. How many educated runners do you know that look at a 5,000 time and predict marathon times? The only ones who do that are ones who don't know what they are talking about. I've already given you my opinion on the 1:03 half.
4) Kurdt - pretty convenient of you to say that if Aish runs 2:19 that he just had a bad day and that I'm still not right. What kind of crap is that? This is what I'm talking about. This is what went into my prediction of 2:19 for him. The possibility of a "bad day" for a first-time marathoner is great, so if he runs 2:19, then he runs 2:19 - no conditions or what-ifs. Kurdt, seems to me like you're a "sun is in my eyes" kind of guy. You either put up on race day or you don't. If he runs faster than that, then like I said before, I'll tip my hat to him. My original post on that came as a response to someone who said he would run 2:11-2:12, so if Aish runs 2:17, then he would still be closer to my prediction than the 2:11-2:12.
5) Someone seemed to think it was a slam against Aish to say that he'd be lucky to beat all the women. I wasn't slamming him. I was pointing out what we already know which is that there are two stellar women in this field. I agree that there is no shame in getting beaten by Paula.
Anyway, lets put this on the proper playing field. Kurdt, if Aish runs 2:19 or slower or drops out, then I get to declare that I am right - that's only fair, because that is my prediction. If he runs 2:12 or faster, then the poster who predicted 2:11-2:12 is right. If he runs about 2:15:30, then he falls about right in between where 2:11-2:12 guy and I said, so you all will have to make up your mind about what that means. I go so far as to say that that still makes me wrong, because I did say 2:19. Kurdt, what if Aish runs 2:18, can I say that I am right and that Aish just had a "good day"?