What took so long to run under 2:08.47 by an U.S. runner?

Stop playing the Med School card... it's not like it affected his training and racing. But I think a majority of factors, including, training knowledge, nutrition, hydration, and just flat out having a great freakind day contributes to a successful marathon. Good for Hall.

maybe because 2:08 is really really fast?

just a guess.

All because of you, MD wrote:

What took so long to run under 2:08.47 by an U.S. runner?

KK did it a few years ago... do you not consider him an american?

Anyone who doesn't think that med school doesn't effect every aspect of a person's daily life has obviously never been, and probably doesn't know too many people who have either.

Seguru wrote:

Stop playing the Med School card... it's not like it affected his training and racing.

Kempainen took several long term leaves of absence during his medical school training, and most of his top performances were during those breaks.And since you're insulting the intelligence of others, it's affect, not effect.

Ha! wrote:

Anyone who doesn't think that med school doesn't effect every aspect of a person's daily life has obviously never been, and probably doesn't know too many people who have either.

Seguru wrote:

Stop playing the Med School card... it's not like it affected his training and racing.

Kempainen took several long term leaves of absence during his medical school training, and most of his top performances were during those breaks.And since you're insulting the intelligence of others, it's affect, not effect.

Ha! wrote:

Anyone who doesn't think that med school doesn't effect every aspect of a person's daily life has obviously never been, and probably doesn't know too many people who have either.

Seguru wrote:

Stop playing the Med School card... it's not like it affected his training and racing.

It didn't - KK did that along time ago

ummmmm............. wrote:

KK did it a few years ago... do you not consider him an american?

He's not native born. The guy's probably wondering about American born (Meb isn't either). But you PC guys are so quick to jump to please...yourselves.

ummmmm............. wrote:

All because of you, MD wrote:

What took so long to run under 2:08.47 by an U.S. runner?

KK did it a few years ago... do you not consider him an american?

nope.

Whether or not you want to include Meb and KK in this discussion is really a side issue. Why are there so few Americans (only 3 recently... Abdi, Hall, KK) who have run sub-2:09. Think of all the American guys who are running T&F and XC in D1, D2, D3, NAIA, etc, and yet so few go on to run super-fast marathons.

Did everyone forget that Kempainen's 2:08:47 was on a highly wind-aided day?

At the time the WR was still 2:06:50 and hardly anybody ran under 2:09 back then. Cosmas Ndeti ran 2:07:15 and a whole parade of people rocked on that day...

While I count myself among those who feel that Kempainen's 2:08 was strongly assisted (including having other fast runners ahead of him, I feel that his '96 Trials performance of 2:10 on a not very fast course puts him firmly in the 2:09-possibly-2:08 class. His 2:08 was lucky, but indicative of his fitness.

Why don't you try to go out and run 2:08:47? Then maybe you will know why.

Technorigine wrote:

While I count myself among those who feel that Kempainen's 2:08 was strongly assisted (including having other fast runners ahead of him, I feel that his '96 Trials performance of 2:10 on a not very fast course puts him firmly in the 2:09-possibly-2:08 class. His 2:08 was lucky, but indicative of his fitness.

I agree with you but in those days you didn't see the top Americans (Kempainen mainly) running on any fast courses. Boston is not a particularly fast course unless the wind is behind you. Had Kempainen ever run on a super fast course, sure he could have run 2:08-2:09.

It's only recently that the very best Americans are running on fast courses with fast competition.

It should also be mentioned that during the late 80s and early 90s, almost nobody was running enough mileage to be in shape for a sub 2:09. Our top 10k guys had trouble breaking 28:00. Not good conditions for a sub 2:09.

It only took Ryan Hall 2 hours, 8 minutes, and 24 seconds. That doesn't seem very long to me.

Kempainen's 1994 Boston mark was impressive, but for various reasons, including conditions, "beat-the-guy-who-beat the guy" analysis, and performance of others at 1994 Boston vs their perfornance elsewhere, I'm thinking his 2:11:02 2nd place at the NYCM five nmonths earlier was a superior run.

And tho BK ran only 2:12-mid (not 2:10) at the 1996 USOT in Charlotte, he (as well as Coogan & Brantly) ran a mdoerate negative split, which is a heck of a thing to do on that course, which is pretty much flat/downhill for the 1st 11 miles, then flat/uphill for last 15 miles.

12-15 years earlier Dr. Tony Sandoval ran some awfully fine marks while in medical school.

Closer to home (my home, anyway, New Jersey), in 1999-2000 while in medical school full time -- no "leaves" or "part-times" -- Dr. Chris Langan ran 4 marathons in the low-2:20s in 11 months, culmintating in the 2000 USOTM, where he ran 2:25 on that ovenlike, hilly Pittsburgh course --

and finished one place and just a few seconds behind some guy -- name like "Weldon" or something -- who ran in a hand-letterd T-shirt saying "LetsRun.com."

back to the original question wrote:

Whether or not you want to include Meb and KK in this discussion is really a side issue. Why are there so few Americans (only 3 recently... Abdi, Hall, KK) who have run sub-2:09. Think of all the American guys who are running T&F and XC in D1, D2, D3, NAIA, etc, and yet so few go on to run super-fast marathons.

I think you meant 'Meb, Hall, KK'.

Has Abdi even run a marathon?

Abdi only ran a 2:08:56 at the 2006 Chicago Marathon. Man, some of you just don't follow the sport, only the Rupp, Webb, Ritz bandwagons..

Meb's PR is 2:09:53, I believe.