800 dude wrote:
The simple truth is that 2:22 is beyond the genetic capability of most trials dreamers. It is fortunate that they continue training for it anyway.
Why is it fortunate that people continue to train for something that is beyond their genetic capability? From my experience, that just leads to injury and exhaustion, and there are huge personal costs involved in devoting a good portion of one's life to running 5,000 to 7,000 miles per year pursuing a goal that one is "genetically" incapable of achieving.
I actually believe that most guys who have run 2:22 on a legitimate marathon course are "genetically" capable of running 2:19 or faster. That doesn't mean that they will, or that they should even try. But if it's important to them to squeeze a little more out of their talent, this gives them some incentive to do so. Although I'm not absolutely certain, I'm pretty confident that the change will result in considerably more sub-2:19 U.S. marathoners and sub-1:05 half-marathoners. I don't know if that's a worthwhile social goal, but it doesn't seem any less worthwhile than the goal of producing more sub-2:22 marathoners, and it seems like a reasonable goal for a USATF committee that's apparently trying to raise competitive standards in U.S. road racing.
In any event, I believe that the more significant change for the sport as a whole -- depending on exactly how it's implemented -- is the change in course standards. For years, people have used USATF's laxity in course standards to market and justify the odd practice of running down hills and mountains for the purpose of achieving alleged "PRs" for various distances -- especially the marathon and half-marathon. Among other things, that's created, both literally and figuratively, a "race to the bottom" among road races in the U.S., and has also effectively penalized some very good races that have not engaged in such practices. As I've said before, this is a matter that -- unlike the precise time cut-off for trials qualifiers -- goes to the integrity of the sport. Removing USATF's purported seal of approval from at least a few races won't turn things around entirely, but it seems like a big step in the right direction.