Perspective on Browne's Marathon

Let me say this; DAN BROWNE ****WILL**** RUN 2:07-2:08 AT CHICAGO/BERLIN/FUKUOKA.

DAN, GET YOUR REAR TO BERLIN NEXT YEAR!!!!

Jason

Berlin probably wouldn't be the best option because of the time difference....I am stationed in Germany for almost 2 years now, and coming back to Germany from the states is hell, talk about major jet leg!!! The Berlin race is at 9am and that would be like 3am back in the states, well from where I am from anyways. I think Oregon would actually be even worse like 1 or 2 am!! Chicago is probably the best option, but I totally agree with your statement of him running 2:07-08!!

I already know you aren't a marathoner because you would understand the difference between the TCM course and, say, Chicago. Having run up the hill from the river around the 20 mile mark, I can tell you that, and many other rises on the course, make it a moderately hilly marathon. Have a look at the TCM elevation profile. If you don't thik it makes that much difference, particularly in the late stages, then you haven't run a marathon.

I didn't make that statement lightly. consider:

1) ran a decent time, but not scorching- 2:11:31

but

2) ran it on a reasonably tough course (hills late in the race).

3) ran it from the front, tactically holding back a reserve in case someone mase a move late.

4) WON a major race.

5) it was a DEBUT

all in all, I consider this as good as a 2:09 mid-to-high, run on a fast course tucked into a pack. Looking at the last 15 years, anyway, this puts it in the league with Morris' 2:09 non-win, Lawson's 2:09 non-win, Kampainen 2:09 non-win (wind-aided at Boston), Spence at World's (bronze), and better than Williams 2:10 debut at Chicago, etc., etc.. And I give Browne a "guts" factor for the win and smart tactical race.

As far as future competitiveness, sub-4:00 mile speed in his back pocket makes him a threat in any race where he can hang with the pace. And he has made the move up at exactly the right time. Most American guys with his speed would spend a few more years at the shorter stuff and be lucky to run 2:13 by the time they moved up.

But it doesn't touch Salazaar's 2:09 win in a debut. And a few decades must mean at least three, two decades would be a couple, right? So I'd put Shorter's two Olympic medal winning races and Fukuoka wins, not to mention Rodger's wins at Boston, New York, and Fukuoka, all against major international fields, ( TC had an international field, but far froma major one), ahead of Dan Browne's race. Still, it was a very good race and certainly the best in recent years.

Browne ran a great race. As for speed, Browne has the range to run much faster. Fred Torneden won Twin Cities in 1984 in 2:11:35. The exact same time as Browne's. Torneden's best times were 4:14 mile, 14:20's 5k and low 29's 10k. He was a shuffler, but a very efficient high mileage runner.

HRE wrote:

But it doesn't touch Salazaar's 2:09 win in a debut. And a few decades must mean at least three, two decades would be a couple, right? So I'd put Shorter's two Olympic medal winning races and Fukuoka wins, not to mention Rodger's wins at Boston, New York, and Fukuoka, all against major international fields, ( TC had an international field, but far froma major one), ahead of Dan Browne's race. Still, it was a very good race and certainly the best in recent years.

I would have to go back to the Salazar/Beardsley duel (which marked the end of the "Golden Age" of American Marathoning) to find a decisively better performance. So, almost two ("couple of") decades.

Let's see if Meb or Culpepper can pick up the stick from here...

Don't forget that Bob Kempainen went under 2:09 at Boston, which is not that fast a course (I have not run TCM). Hopefully he will see a trend where other young guns dedicate themselves to this distance a little earlier.

A lot of people are saying that this time is worth 2:09 or 2:10 at a fast course like Chicago. Hopefully that are correct. Perhaps that means Dan has the potential to be a player in marathons with stacked international fields.

At this point, if any American is in the top 15 at a world championship/olympics, that will be a great leap forward.

It WAS fast in 94 when Kempainen ran that time. There was a tailwind and the performances that day dominated the all-time Boston list for some years after that (may still yet).

I'm not an old-timer, but it seems nowadays, that if a course (whether it be a marathon, road race or cross country) has any hills, any potholes, long grass, a wind of more than 1 mph, or a lack of pacesetters for the entire race, it is deemed tough. Twin Cities has some hills, but overall, if it is considered tough, then so are 99% of marathon courses. Browne ran a great race, but has anybody ever considered that he probably ran a great race because he was in a position to win? You're making the assumption that because Chicago is flatter, it is automatically faster. I don't think that is necessarily true unless you are in the position to win or place highly in both races. When you are five minutes off the pace in a race, it's much tougher to dig deep those last 5 miles. I have run most of my best races when I was really in the race for the win (or at least top 10). You can only run as fast as you're fit to run.

I'm not here to piss on Browne's parade; he ran a great race and he will run 3-4 minutes faster in the near future. However the so called marathon expert who said that a few hills are good for 3 or 4 minutes is talking out his patootie.

Did Dan Browne lose 3-4 minutes to pace over the last few miles? I doubt it.

Unless those were some monster hills then we are talking a minute to a minute and a half, max.

I would put the hill factor at about 90 seconds also. Throw in some other warm bodies to draft off of and parry with and you have 2:09 as pretty readily conceivable.

As far as hills not slowing the race at all, tell me how many marathon world records have been set on courses with the TCM hill profile (significant hills around 20 miles). Certainly not Chicago, Berlin, London or Rotterdam. Fast courses = fast times, period.