Is Deena's best marathon behind her?

She is a great ambassador for the sport. Her best days are behind her but she is still the best we have. She has no chance of a medal but we can all play pretend on August 17th.

Why do you feel she has no chance of a medal?

She was 6th in the world 10,000 this past Sept. and has no injuries to keep her out. If I recall she was within 1-2 sec of her prs in all the shorter events which were prs from like 2002-03. I wouldn't count her out just yet.

Meb had been a little off over the last 18 months and him not making the team was not a surprise.

History repeating itself wrote:

(please do not bring other distances into this discussion) .

I can see why you would not want us to do that as it would undercut your bullshit point.

sigh... wrote:

History repeating itself wrote:

(please do not bring other distances into this discussion) .

I can see why you would not want us to do that as it would undercut your bullshit point.

No. It is because we have learned how little importance it plays in the big picture. I said the same thing about Meb prior to the Trials. I was 100% positive that he would not make the team. All of the Meb supporters pointed out how good he looked for shorter distances. They pointed to the fact that Meb just recently had run a 27:41 10k and that he kicked Halls ass at Gate River. None of that matters in the marathon. Obviously we all know I WAS RIGHT. Deena looked horrible last year at Boston and that was no fluke. From the press truck, she looked bad as early as 10k. Her bathroom issues did not come until much later. These are the same signs that became apparent in Meb.

Well she has been around for quite awhile, not PR'ing wouldn't surprise me at all as she is now atleast into her 30's (like 33 or 34?). Who cares if her and Meb never PR again? They like running and competing and are still doing pretty well for themselves.

Well, this year Deena will be running the Trials and the Olympics, neither of which is a situation where she's even remotely likely to PR. And my guess would be she might have one year of marathoning at the top level after that, so... she's probably not likely to run 2:19 again. But she'll have the American record for a very, very long time.

This is why the NYRR didn't submit a bid for the men's trials. An aging superstar and no one else does not make for a quality race.

Yeah, as is pointed out in a Runner's World Chat with Colleen De Reuck today, the fastest American women's marathon time in 2007 was 2:35. That was partly due to the conditions in both Boston and Chicago, but still, that's sorta sad.

dude you people need to chill out -fact is deena has put us women's marathon running ahead of us men's marathon runninghas there been a us man to win chicago, to win london to be the 4th fastest in the world and to win bronze in the olympics in the past 3 years -didn't think so

Dusty Bones wrote:

Yeah, as is pointed out in a Runner's World Chat with Colleen De Reuck today, the fastest American women's marathon time in 2007 was 2:35. That was partly due to the conditions in both Boston and Chicago, but still, that's sorta sad.

No one disagrees with you. The discussion is wheter or not that was all in the past.

it is too early to tell...it has been only two years since she ran London and wonin the time she ran close to her pr's in the 5k, 3k, etc.(by the way even if meb ran 27:40 that was not all that close to his pr - this is different from deena)I think she has got at least another year ot two in herit may have been a motivational problem for some of her tougher races - she set the AR, won bronze, won two majors -i think she is just gaining momentum and hunger again for beijingAND mark my words she will embrass the other women at the 10k olympic trials if she runs them

NYRR ... wrote:

No one disagrees with you. The discussion is wheter or not that was all in the past.

sorry typed too quickly 'embarrass'

We haven't forgotten Deena's USATF Cross in Boulder already, have we? Remember who was in that field.

Francie Larrieu Smith was 32 when she ran her 3000m PR, and 35 when she ran her 5000m PR, and 38 when she ran her 10,000m and marathon PRs.

i was thinking of that as well

[quote]Not too old wrote:

We haven't forgotten Deena's USATF Cross in Boulder already, have we? Remember who was in that field.

[quote]

I understand that many of you are fans and it is tough to admit the obvious.

Deena looked great in Cross and she turned that excellent performance into a 2:35 at Boston. The casual fan might say that was just one bad race and certainly not a trend. So the next longer race carries even more importance.

She looked great at USATF's in the 10k and then ran a solid race at WC in Osaka. She decided again to see if her shorter distance success would translate into success by running the World Road Half Marathon in Italy. She finished in 16th place and ran horrible.

Boston and Italy have been her only races over 10k with elite fields and she failed in both of them.

NYRR ... wrote:

Boston and Italy have been her only races over 10k with elite fields and she failed in both of them.

She "failed" at boston because she had to go to the bathroom. Not exactly a valid data point.

So what you have is one "failure" here. Quite a trend.

I will repeat the same words that I said about Meb going into the marathon trials---TIME WILL TELL.

She will win the trials in 2:26. She will not finish top 10 in Osaka.

It works like this:

If she does not medal in Osaka, you will, no doubt, bump this thread up 5 minutes afterwards. And, of course, if she DOES repeat in Osaka we will never hear from you again. At least not under this name.

So repeat away. Whether she has already peaked or not, your argument is empty as there is no "trend" in evidence. So what we have here is your hunch. What is that worth? Not much.

Thanks for sharing.

Am I the only one who thinks it\'s pathetic that in 2008, if Patti (Catalano) Dillon was still running at her peak she\'d be at least the second best marathoner 27 years later? That Julie Brown\'s PR would still be friggin\' awesome? Why oh why is US women\'s marathoning in such piss-poor shape? Why is 2:30 still as much of a barrier as it was in the early 1980\'s, when the rest of the world\'s best are doing 2:20-2:23 so regularly at championship & big city races? Why are US women literally 2-3 miles behind the best in the world?