Some insight on Ryan Hall's commnts on flocast

Lots of those in the Olympic Marathon ran London, some beat Hall (like Merga and Lel) and some didn't(like Kifle and Baldini). I think it's hard to draw a conclusion that Hall shouldn't have run London.

I think you're right. Sounds like he wasn't adequately recovered from London when he started his Olympic preparations.

Canova said something similar on a previous thread. Athletes who run a great spring marathon don't *usually* perform well in August. Maybe some do, but they are the exception.

You mean like the last three men's Olympic marathon gold medalists who all ran spring marathons before the Olympics?

As`I said before, they are the exception, not the rule.

Lots of exceptions

Best quote from Hall, by far, while walking down the stairs:

"These must be originals"

Track fan, excellent video interview. Thank you for posting it. It's a very good insight into Ryan Hall training and mindset. I'm looking forward to his effort to win a major marathon, as he discusses.

Did the other london marathoners also run an olympic trials marathon for their country? Maybe Hall wasn't recovered from his trials win when he did london.

I think he recovered between the trials and London. He had a lot left in NY, and it was cool. London was where he went deeep in the well, and that set him up for a not so perfect Olympic buildup. It explains why he was tired a lot and his tempo runs were not clicking.

Ryan just ran too many marathons in too short a period of time. Unless I'm adding something wrong he's run 4 marathons in a year and a half:

1. April 2007 - London

[7 months]

2. November 2007 - Trials

[5 months]

3. April 2008 - London

[4 months]

4. August 2008 - Beijing

I'm not elite, and I'm certainly not an expert; however, to me it's obvious that Ryan needs more time between marathons. I think his sweet spot is probably a 5-6 month build up. I also think Ryan would benefit from a cycle of shorter distance races (5k, 10k, 21k) between marathon cycles - something to inject some speed in his legs and keep him interested/motivated.

If I were Terrence--and this is purely my OPINION--I'd have Ryan skip London in 2009 and focus on something like Chicago or NY next fall. Take a couple of weeks off to rest up, then go back to the Houston HM where it all started back in 2007. Build Ryan's confidence back, then run World XC in March. Take another small break after WXC then start the buildup to a fall major.

Ryan Hall had a bad day! Previous to the Olympics he said things were clicking and all was well, you can do the research on that yourself, it's all over Flotrack and other video sources. Ryan Hall had a bad day and still ran 2:12 for 10th place in the Olympic Marathon. Very few elite athletes have solid races every time they run the bloody distance.

Ryan was recovered from the April marathon that he ran 4 months prior, as were the other athletes that ran London, including the phenom, who is NOT the exception, NOR the rule, but a much better HEAT runner than the average runner in the field, AND someone who trained there.

You are really grasping at straws to try to come up with the exact, almost scientific reason, that Ryan didn't place higher. He had a bad day! All runners get them. If he goes 2:06-2:07 his next time out, then whatcha gonna say? Let me guess, he ran 5-6 minutes slower in the Games because he didn't recover from London, again.

Ryan even skipped the track trials in July, where he could have easily run the 10,000 for conditioning and to see where he's at, but he didn't. He trained and rested properly when both were needed. If he had run the trial race in July, you'd say THAT'S the reason, he was too tired and should have skipped them. Yet, Ritz ran the trials and finished a place higher and he also didn't have a GREAT day, in terms of his overall ability. Ryan had a bad day and Nathan's bad day was a little better. They both did fine!

Personally, I ran a marathon in October some years back and came back 6 weeks later in Philadelphia and set my P.R. (at the time), and yes it was WELL under 3 hours. How did I do it? Am I the exception or the rule? Was I plain lucky? You CAN'T get lucky in a marathon and I've always said that and will continue to. One doesn't get lucky running 26.2 miles. If you run faster than expected, you were actually in better shape than you believed, or you wouldn't have been able to do it. Go it?

There is no luck over 26 miles, your training and ability dictates your finish, if you run smart, unless of course you have a bad day. That could be based off weather, not feeling well, your body is just OFF on that particular day, any number of reasons.

Here's one for ya. Read about what Ryan Hall had to do to get to the starting line of the 2007 Houston Half Marathon where he set the American Record. After reading it, you wouldn't guess that the guy would have run that fast on that day, but he did! Everything clicked for him that morning when it shouldn't have, meaning he should of had an off day, but he ran exceptionally well. Why? The answer is easy and I'll let you figure it out for yourself.

Running is not standing on first base having a ball thrown to you when there's a hit, even though the first baseman might not be feeling particularly well that day. It is a sport that you have to be running on all 8 cylinders to have a chance of placing high at the elite level on any given race day. If your not clicking at the right level, you won't do as well as your abilities show you can.

Frank Shorter ran 2:10 and change in the 76 Olympics and placed 2nd. Bill Rodgers was hurt and raced with the leaders for much of the race, if not actually in front, but fell back and still finished the race in 2:22. Then 3 months later (not 4 months mind you) Bill came back and ran 2:10 in New York, winning, and Frank ran 2:13 for 2nd place over 3 minutes behind Bill. What happened?

Yes, Bill wanted vindication after his perfomance in Montreal, while injured, but why did Frank finish 3 minutes behind Bill? Some will say Montreal had more of an affect on Frank because he ran so much faster and Bill jogged a 2:22, so he was more rested. NOT TRUE! The pain of slowing down after running 5 minute mile pace, while injured, is way worse when compared to someone who is ON and running 5 minute pace the entire race. Bill was hurting way worse than Frank, yet the both ran 26 miles.

What happened in New York that day? Frank did not have a great day, he wasn't on, aka he had a bad day. Bill had a great day for his ability and was feeling it. Or, should Bill and Frank have both skipped New York because it was only 3 months after the Olympic Marathon? I think Bill answered that question for ya. You're digging too deep for an easy answer. You can mock my post if you like or say that I don't know what I'm talking about, but you'd be wrong. I've run the race many times. We all have bad days, even you, regardless of your ability.

For what it's worth, Bill ran the Sedo Island Marathon less than 2 months after the 1976 New York City Marathon and ran 2:08:23 on a course that was later measured to be 200 meters short. You can do the math.

For the Love of God, give Ryan a break and accept his finish.

Yeah I mean doesn't it just seem easy to say "Hall didn't do well, probably shouldn't have ran London. Other people ran London and had great performances in the Olympics, but we'll just call them the 'exceptions'."

Hindsight is 20/20. Maybe it is true that London wasn't the best decision, but it certainly wasn't as obvious as some of you guys are making it out to be.

I mean I'm assuming everyone on this board saw the flotrack interview. Hall/Ritz simply did NOT expect the pace to go out as fast as it did due to the conditions. Again, seemed very logical at the time, even though it didn't work out that way. Would any of you have guessed the winner would have ran the time he did?

While none of us truly know what went wrong for Hall, the problem seems to have lied in the olympic marathon race, ie, wrong strategy or maybe just a bad race.

I know in the interview he said his traing was not 100% perfect and he didn't feel great but I would ber very interested to see what would have happened if he had changed his race plan and gone with the leaders. Chances are he would have crashed and burned like just about everyone else but he might have still ended up with a better time/place. Running alone for 15 to 20 miles could be cause for a poor race also.

No one is crucifying Mr. Hall; but, lets look at what happ. Ritz was forced to take time off...and i'm sure he was undertrained. Hudson said he got off the alter G and went into 100mile weeks to compensate-crazy, but he was well prepared. Hall makes the same mistake most young marathoners do, change too much and you pay the price. Guys who have the fresher legs do much better at the olympics-Look at Lel-and the Morrocan who finished second in London. Kebed is a new comer=fresh legs. Hall, ran an amazing but killer trials race on a 'killer course', ran great in London. But, you have to pay the piper at some point-too much success means you will push for more-and forget what got you there. A good example of favorites-and fresh legs is the 1984 Olympic marathon. I'm sure, Mr. Hall will adjust-he's going to learn...I like the way Deena prepares-even though she had a broken foot I think she had a good shot at first if it didn'thappen-but 20/20 hindsight. Fun to explore possibilities. Wanjiru, as I stated in anothr post...is crazy talent-26:30's 10k/and WR. in the half at 19/20 years old...Don't compare-how quick he rocovers vs. Hall.