Fair question: Did running London hurt Hall's performance in Beijing?

I am not sure, but I would of liked to seen him run a race or two in his run up to Beijing.

It didn't affect Wanjiru too much.

Didn't seem to hurt Wanjira (or however the hell you spell his name) Hall would have been more hurt by not doing anything at all. London was right in the middle of the trials and the Olympics. I think it was the best option.

Two Too Much?? wrote:

I think this is a good question to discuss...

You should know the answer without even asking if you followed the sport at all. There was nothing out of the ordinary in Halls schedule.

I did not say it was out of the ordinary...it would have been out the ordinary not do one...and could that of helped him? At the time I thought London was a good idea, but now I am not sure.

Hall's style, which I like, is that he disappears into the mountains to train hard and then emerge and race great. It did not work this time. He underperformed.

The chart is a good one to look at. I do follow the sport closely, even if it is an 18 hour delay.

Of course we don't know if Wanjira recovers quicker than Hall or a bunch of other things. I am guessing yeah London was a bit closer than would be ideal. On the other hand it had to be a major confidence boost to run 2.06. Would something like a 59 half have given the same boost? Who knows.

washed up has been wrote:

Didn't seem to hurt Wanjira (or however the hell you spell his name) Hall would have been more hurt by not doing anything at all. London was right in the middle of the trials and the Olympics. I think it was the best option.

Two Too Much?? wrote:

Especially considering he has admitted that his training leading to the Olympics was not the best.

Where did Hall say his Olympic training wasn't the best? I'd like to read that article.

I think your question is a legitimate one intellectually because I do think people have a big time tendency to overrace the marathon. However, I also think a longer buildup from the US Trials to the Olympics would be too long.

Neither is perfect and since his London race was something special, he should have no regrets.

Remember Wanjiru is way more overraced than Hall. His schedule is unreal.

This is what he's done.

Last Dec 2nd, he ran and won Fukuoka in 2:06.39

Then he missed a bunch of training because of the Kenyan violence but somehow ran 2 half marathons in February in 60:33 or better.

Then he ran London on April 13th and ran 2:05.24.

Then on May 17th he ran a 10k in 27:56. On June 1st he ran another one in 28:01.

Then he won an Olympic gold medal.

So like Hall he's run 3 marathons since late last year but his 1st marathon was a month later than Hall's and he also missed time due to the kenyan violence. He's also added in a lot of other races.

Hall has only run 2 marathons since the trials and US cross.

If anyone runs 2008 NYC, then I think they are way, way overraced.

Hall and humidity preparation- a bad combination. Beautiful, glorious Big Bear training hurt him this time. Ritz was smart going to the humid hell-hole that is Houston.

goober wrote:

Hall and humidity preparation- a bad combination. Beautiful, glorious Big Bear training hurt him this time. Ritz was smart going to the humid hell-hole that is Houston.

When did Ritz go to Houston?

To answer your question, Rojo, this is what Hall said

"I didn't know exactly where I was at fitness wise. Because of running more workouts in the heat, I was never nailing my tempo runs the way I have. I definitely didn't have the same legs that I had at London. I didn't have the same strength I had for my other marathons. Still, I ran my heart out in my training."

I thought it hurt him to do London but I'm probably projecting my own personal experiences into the situation. Maybe recovery is different when you're only out there 2:06 for the 26.2 miles.

Four months just seems like a short time between marathons...physically, mentally and emotionally.

But then there's the fellow who won.....maybe he has a calmer temperment and these races don't drain him as much emotionally.....I'm grasping.....

about 6 minutes in

three marathons in 9 months is a bit much. but the two things that most hurt him were not doing a sharpening race, maybe at 10k--wanjiru did two of them--and not training enough in the heat and humidity. it takes a while to get used to that.

That is a great chart malmo. And I made a good call on Gharib's performance, though it was foolish of me not to give Wanjiru his due.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=2639265&thread=2639047

Good question based upon Hall's comments and performance. He essentially said he didn't hit is workout times as usual because he was more focused upon heat training. I don't have a clue about the specifics but I get the sense he was preparing for a slow, grind-it-out type of race, not unlike the women's race. I do not think London was a bad choice. It sounds like they prepared for a warm weather championship race (norally won in 2:09-2:10) and did not prepare for a fast race like London or Chicago. I must also say that he did not look sharp around halfway. He looked sort of defeated. And, again, his comments reflected this... he hoped people would drop off or drop out.

Of course it did, just like running Beijing will hurt the performances of a lot of those runners at least for the next year or two.

This is classic 20/20 hindsight. If he hadn't run London, no one would have even considered him a medal contender and his 10th place finish would have been a surprise rather than a disappointment. The knife cuts both ways.

he would of had about the same Olympic result if he didn't run London. Look at how fast the top 3 ran in the heat, he just can't ran that fast in conditions he's not use to. Running London was smart after a trials race in which he held back with no competition. With out london the Olympic marathon could of have been a huge set back for him.

Hall's 2:06 justifies itself. Even if he had DNF'd in Beijing, London still would have been worth doing.