Steve Jones did not reach the half in 1:01:40 at Chicago

Shit! Now you tell me, all this time I thought it was 1:01:40, damn. I knew he couldn't run that fast.

short course

Wow, you really have issues.

checkout Steve Jones' chapter in "Running with the Ledgends".

He is one bad ass motha!

It is hard to compare halfway times because the halfway mark can be "up or down" and, "into the wind/with the wind". I think that London has with the wind in the first half and against it in the latter portions, which accounts for some of the pace difference. While wind hurts overall, going into the wind in the first half when there is a large group is faster than the reverse.

barakus wrote:checkout Steve Jones' chapter in "Running with the Ledgends".

"check out"

"legends"

He should have leaned at the line.

Living in the Past wrote:

It was in 1:01:42.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/more_sport/article3743231.ece

nice piece

tougher than nails. PRobably could have run what Hall is running now, 20+ years ago.

26mi235 wrote:

It is hard to compare halfway times because the halfway mark can be "up or down" and, "into the wind/with the wind". I think that London has with the wind in the first half and against it in the latter portions, which accounts for some of the pace difference. While wind hurts overall, going into the wind in the first half when there is a large group is faster than the reverse.

I'm not entirely sure whether this comment was intended to say anything about Jones's remarkable race in Chicago back in 1985, but it is worth noting that Jones led the race from about the two-mile mark to the finish, with no one to draft off of or be "paced" by. There were some pretty strong winds, which (along with the effects of his early pace) slowed Jones a lot over the last five or six miles. It's hard to say what kind of time Jones could have run with pacemakers and a big lead pack.

Sub 2.06. I think he went through 30K in 1.28.40.

2 seconds wrote:

Wow, you really have issues.

Okay, then let's try the opposite view: Jones actually tied Lopes's world record, since Jones only missed it by two seconds, and two seconds means nothing over 26 miles.

What I was after is that the splits for the first and second halves may not accurately reflect the effort on each, the 1:01 being wind-aided and the 1:05 wind-hindered. Thus, the 1:01 is misleading, as balanced wind (e.g, two complete circuits) might have lead to 1:02/1:04, for example. I am NOT commenting upon the overall time, which would have been better in a group (although maybe not much if he was wind-aided during the section where he would have had company).

Living in the Past, how many years at Looney Logician school did it take for you to get your degree?

Wow, another personal attack. I'm impressed. That takes at least a GED.

Living in the Past, you have some personal issues or are very insecure because the majority, if not all, your posts try to cut down great runners. You put past elites down not in a straight forward manner, but with snide remarks about their training or race times or how they were not coached properly.

You will always be the little man who never broke 60 minutes for 10 miles or whatever mediocre time you ran in the past.

Remember that.

You were not a warrior, but simply, a mediocre critic. Amazingly advances in computers and the creation of the internet (and this message board) have allowed you to spew your jaded and insecure opinions and facts past your fellow mediocre running friends and out onto this public forum.

To people not familiar with this guy, simply put his name into the Letsrun search engine and read some of his past posts.

Living in the Past, this is not a personal attack as you may interpret it to be. This is simply someone stating the facts.

You insecurity shines brightly.

I agree with "All out".

All I do is point out a factual error on the part of letsrun, and I catch flak for supposedly diminishing Steve Jones's achievement. You guys are the one with problems.

well put.