Have Hansons Actually Changed The Face Of American Marathoning?

The hansons have improved the middle ground. They probably have helped produce more sub 2:20 runners, which could develop into potential 2:10 runners. Without Hanson's these moderately talented runners would probably give up on the sport. A Hanson runner may not win the trials, but they will play a role in making sure the top 15 will all be under 2:20. If Hanson can produce a few more 2:10-2:14 runners that can only make US races faster and more competitive. Meb, Hall, and Culpepper are at a different level and probably don't need hansons, but a struggling 2:17 runner definitely needs the support.

What can be changed? 40 years ago, Derek Clayton ran 2:09:36 without sports drinks, EPO, pacers, or perfect conditions. 42 years ago, Ron Clarke ran 27:39 on cinders...

I would say YES. I would say that anytime a runner that is part of ANY of the training groups succeeds, they have the Brooks-Hansons guys/gals to thank. They are the ones that forced us all to think about group training again. Meb and Deena flourished after that. Ryan Hall has made us all proud. The list is endless. Take a look 10 years ago at how many guys/gals were training in a group environment.

Doctor Truth wrote:

What can be changed? 40 years ago, Derek Clayton ran 2:09:36 without sports drinks, EPO, pacers, or perfect conditions. 42 years ago, Ron Clarke ran 27:39 on cinders...

40 plus years ago and still today.........THEY ARE NOT AMERICANS. We are not talking about the face of marathoning you dickweed.

Doctor Truth wrote:

What can be changed? 40 years ago, Derek Clayton ran 2:09:36 without sports drinks, EPO, pacers, or perfect conditions. 42 years ago, Ron Clarke ran 27:39 on cinders...

I agree with your point, but Fukuoka was short that year.

Doctor Truth wrote:

What can be changed? 40 years ago, Derek Clayton ran 2:09:36 without sports drinks, EPO, pacers, or perfect conditions. 42 years ago, Ron Clarke ran 27:39 on cinders...

What can be changed? We could have americans doing that. Keep in mind that the trials in 2000 had one american under 2:16. Now we have several americans thinking that 2:16 sucks (which it does). However, it appeared that americans thought differently (in 2000). Or at the very least performed differently.

last time i check no hansons runner has ever won a legit marathon. correct me if i am wrong. alan culpepper who trains on his own he sure needs that team coaching that is so great at hansons. ya mabe they have changed spots 10 thru 20 in a marathon but until someone other than sell dose something good this program has done nothing. i could get a bunch of guys that run sub 220 marathons together and coach them will i then be called the greatest mens marathon coach in the usa like kevin and keith hanson ????

no respect wrote:

last time i check no hansons runner has ever won a legit marathon. correct me if i am wrong. alan culpepper who trains on his own he sure needs that team coaching that is so great at hansons. ya mabe they have changed spots 10 thru 20 in a marathon but until someone other than sell dose something good this program has done nothing. i could get a bunch of guys that run sub 220 marathons together and coach them will i then be called the greatest mens marathon coach in the usa like kevin and keith hanson ????

You are missing the point... The Hansons are not about developing sub 2:10 guys - Brian Sell is the exception... Keven and Keith have gone on record numerous times stating their desire to develop second tier guys... I'm defining second tier as 2:14-2:16. They believe that my increasing the depth in this group it will push those above them to strive for more... And I think they are right.

And don't state that they have done nothing... Do you have the money to recruit and put together a training group? Will you provide for them a place to stay rent free and health care? Will you develop 2:22+ guys into a 2:10-2:15 guys? This is what they have done. You, sir, are no Keith or Kevin Hanson...

They are certainly on the short list of people that are responsible for others taking notice in american marathoners again.

1. Hansons

2. Mary Wittenberg

3. Deena in Athens

4. Meb in Athens

That is not an order but simply the big 4 in my book.

Power in numbers wrote:

I would say YES. I would say that anytime a runner that is part of ANY of the training groups succeeds, they have the Brooks-Hansons guys/gals to thank. They are the ones that forced us all to think about group training again. Meb and Deena flourished after that. Ryan Hall has made us all proud. The list is endless. Take a look 10 years ago at how many guys/gals were training in a group environment.

Group training never went away. Ever hear of the Reebok Enclave, the Nike Farm Team? Those groups existed prior to the Hansons in the 90s and had World Champ medallists and Golden League winners.

The Hansons create more 2:14-2:15 guys who can develop into 2:10 guys and push the 2:08 guys to higher levels.

With no disrespect, I didn't consider either of those groups to be Marathoners? Maybe I am wrong but I thought of them as TRACK CLUBS. My coach ran for Gags and speaks very highly of him, but he refers to the Hansons as getting marathoning back to the old school days.

No respect, meet punctuation. Punctuation, meet No respect.

By the way, Alan Culpepper trains with the Tempo Sports team in Boulder.