new female Hanson members

Idontthinkso wrote:

Saying that they aren't looking for these types of talented athletes or that they just recruit 30 minute 10k guys is incorrect.

Who "said" that??

29:59 wrote:

Yes, I do think 29:59 is "good". In the grand scheme of things, with the average 10k time being in the low to mid 40's, it is "good". In fact it's very good, just not good enough for Hanson standards, and as I mentioned, thats fine. I have a job. So again, why the slow chicks? Their typical female performer runs a 36 minute 10k. None have done anything exceptional that I recall. They should funnel that money into the men's program where it could be better spent. This Joslyn guy is decent regional runner, but I didn't think he was Hanson material, where/when was his 'breakthrough'?

It is guys like you that give us all a bad name. I have run considerably faster than you, but Hansons women have done great as of late. You just don't appreciate women's running.

2007 Hansons Women

Des 1:12:48 half marathon (Equal to a 62:51 for a guy)

Mel 1:13:31 half (Equal to a 63:20 for a guy)

Dot 1:14:51 half (Equal to a 64:13 for a guy)

Yo 2:43 Marathon win in San Fran, a slow hilly course (2:18:45 equivelancy for a guy)

So their weakest lady ran what would be a sub 2:19 marathon for you, on a hilly course.

Which one of these ladies are you better than?

2004 or 2005 ?? wrote:

Who was that one chick that use to cry after every race? It became a family joke. After seeing it on several occasions, my husband started taking her picture crying at different races. I have a picture of her in tears at New Haven 2005, and Gate River 2004, and a classic in the 2004 Marathon Trials. I don't think she runs anymore but my husband misses her antics.

I remember all too well. Life is just one maxi sized DRAMA. She was the leading lady.

Who said that? The following is a direct quote from the thread.

Probably because they aren't looking for 13:50 guys. Not unless they are willing to run 160 mpw.

You were responding to a quote from me and I wasn't defending that criteria. That said, why would they look to bring in anyone who isn't willing to do the level of work that the brothers Hanson prescribe, regardless of how fast he may be?

I don't disagree, but wouldn't you rather develop a 13:50/sub 28:30 guy in the marathon than a 29:30 guy. And, how many 13:50 type runners are NOT willing to do what it takes? You don't think other top level national class runners aren't training hard? Only Hansons?

Brian Sell's best 5000m is 13:59i.

Did Bill Rodgers ever break 29min?

I don't know how many, but I do know that there are more than a few who have been influenced by society. It was true in my day decades ago and it's just as true today, as America has grown lazier and fatter. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that the Hansons don't hold up any one piece of criteria (such as past performance) as an absolute trump card over all others, they probably take a good look at the whole package when making their decision and maybe excuse what might be considered weak performances with someone they feel will be a good fit and make the right contributions to the team as a whole. With a group like the Hansons, it's about building a positive and constructive culture as anything else. 13:50/sub-28:30 might be nice, but not if it comes attached to a prima donna who could poison the well.

(athletics)

Come on man - don't bring Bill Rogers into this:) He didn't do anything wrong. Bill Rogers was arguably the most accomplished runner of his day.

mobile9 wrote:

Brian Sell's best 5000m is 13:59i.

Did Bill Rodgers ever break 29min?

Stephanie is running and living Eugene and getting coached by Brad Hudson!

Buddy Roberts wrote:

[quote]29:59 wrote:

Although it should be known that a 29:59 male is equal to a 35:16 female.

29:59 is equivalent to 35:16. You sure? Sort of makes Radcliffe's time quite extraordinary?!? Try 29:59 being worth 33:00.

How many 10ks are won in 30 mins and the Women's part of the race won in 35?!

Not many i'm sure.

Those "equivalencies" look a little suspect...but they have been running well.

mobile9 wrote:

Brian Sell's best 5000m is 13:59i.

Did Bill Rodgers ever break 29min?

yes he raced about every week sometimes more than once a week his best track 10k was 2803 even though he very rarely raced on the track, one year he won boston on monday in 20927 then on saturday 5 days later he won the 10 mile trevra twosome in new york in an american record for 10 miles and i am not sure but he probably went through the 10k in under 29 minutes

Where have you been? wrote:

How many 10ks are won in 30 mins and the Women's part of the race won in 35?!

Not many i'm sure.

I would suggest you start counting. My guess is you'll find more sub 30's than you will sub 35:16's. And more sub 31's than you will sub 36:30's.

29:58 wrote:

They clearly know better about what it takes to build and run a successful elite development program than you do.

Define "successful"..

Bill rodgers ran 28:03 on the track for 10,000m

He also ran 13:42 in Sweden in 1977 on the track off a 155 mile week

Billy could roll

They reach their stated goals. Is that simple enough for you to grok?

29:58 wrote:

They clearly know better about what it takes to build and run a successful elite development program than you do.

Hynal No. 2 wrote:

Define "successful"..