Time for an Honest Assessment of Ritz's Performance

Ritz is the one who claimed to be in 206 shape - which is pure BS - there was absolutely no basis for this claim.

Ritz will continue to be disappointed and will continue to disappoint until his physical abilities and goals get in sync.

As for 2.09.59 or 2.10.00 - everyone here knows that it IS a big Whoop de doo - it is the equivalent of 3:59 or 4:00 and Ritz just ran 4:00.

I think you need to re think what you wrote. You meant to say that there was absolutely no race results basis for his claim. Unless you have inside info into his training then you have no indication of what he was capable of. Either way you cannot legitimately tear him down if you have no indication of what his training was reflecting.

Ritz is still only the second fastest marathoner from his home town. He's probably also the second fastest 2 miler if you include equivalent steeple chase times.

I posted this on another thread comparing his 2 mile to his marathon. Not quite on topic, but still relevant:

"RE: Which is greater: 8:11 two-mile or 2:10:00 marathon?

smart alec response wrote:

8:11 is 6.5 seconds per mile off the wr

2:10:00 is 13.75 seconds per mile off the wr

8:11 is much, much better

You are correct, 8:11 is much better, however, the 2-mile is rarely run. Komen's 7:20 3k is what...? 7:56 about. That would put Ritz off of the deuce record by 15 seconds, or 7.5 per mile.

Still, way better than his marathon. Ritz would need to run about 2:07:15 to match his 2 mile. And of course he feels he is capable of that, but hasn't come close to it. Still, as others point out, let's even assume he could run a 2:07:15. If he is that strong at the far ends of the spectrum (2 mile and marathon), he should be strongest at 10k. If he got to the point of being 7.0 seconds mile off the 10k record (a reasonable assumption IF....which is a big if.....he could indeed run 2:07:15), he'd run 27:00. Which would be fantastic, but probably never give him a chance to medal since he can't kick. Which is why he moved to the marathon in the first place, because he thought he could pull off a Meb ('04) and grab a surprise marathon medal someday. But that was before everyone and their brother started to run 2:06 or better.

It's called: between a rock and a hard palce.

I think Ritz still has not fully learned how to do a thon; I think he got beside himself in in 1st couple of Ks and payed for it in the end. He talks about cramping as if it is some strange thing when basically he when out too fast and body was letting him know. Considering he went out under WR pace, I am suprise he hung on for 2:10; his 2:07 will come.

i think once their careers are over, Ritz will be better at the marathon than Hall.

I think Hall is already on downhill spiral and we won't ever see a sub 2:07 from him ever again.

i think once their careers are over, Ritz will be better at the marathon than Hall.

I think Hall is already on downhill spiral and we won't ever see a sub 2:07 from him ever again.

One can also argue that his marathon performance is precisely in line with his track perfomrances.Based on his 27:35 then we should see something close to the following:2 Mile - 8:10.85K - 13:1710K - 27:351/2M - 1:01:23Mar - 2:09:30Compare this with his actual bests2 Mile - 8:115K - 13:1610K - 27:351/2M - 1:01:26Mar - 2:10:00Ritz is where he should be, or slightly below where he should be at the marathon.Ritz will not improve significantly in the marathon, until he improves his 10K and half marathon. Till then, he will only train himself into oblivion becasue he thinks that he is better than he actually is.

TrackCoach wrote:

I think Ritz still has not fully learned how to do a thon; I think he got beside himself in in 1st couple of Ks and payed for it in the end. He talks about cramping as if it is some strange thing when basically he when out too fast and body was letting him know. Considering he went out under WR pace, I am suprise he hung on for 2:10; his 2:07 will come.

B I N G O ! !

[quote]honest tea wrote:

One can also argue that his marathon performance is precisely in line with his track perfomrances.

Based on his 27:35 then we should see something close to the following:

2 Mile - 8:10.8

5K - 13:17

10K - 27:35

1/2M - 1:01:23

Mar - 2:09:30

Compare this with his actual bests

2 Mile - 8:11

5K - 13:16

10K - 27:35

1/2M - 1:01:26

Mar - 2:10:00

quote]

about the cramping....

why doesn't he run in those danged calf sleeves everyone else is running in these days? i remember him complaining of calf cramps during the trials. sure, they look silly, but he's not above wearing arm warmers....

1. Ritz (and us) needs to stop comparing himself to Hall. Hall is a marathoner who was trying to make himself a miler. The kid grew up at altitude, ran 100-mile weeks in high school,has perfect marathon mechanics, super durable, and his FIRST ever run was a 15 miler with his marathoning dad at altitude.

2. He moved up too fast. He spend minimal time exhausting his skills over 5k/10k, got caught up in the emotions of running (and comparing himself to his class counterparts' success), and jumped up way too fast. With his injury history and undeveloped aerobic systems, he should have stuck with the 5k/10k UNTIL he had exhausted his potential over those distances. The marathon is nothing to "play around with" and see what you can run. I say get back on the track, forget about this experience in London, and translate that 8:11 2-mile into a 12:5? and/or 27:00. My last 2 cents.

I agree with the previous two posters.

In the half marathon, Ritz is a good 2:00-2:30 behind the top guys in the world, which would put him 4:00-5:00 behind in the marathon. That puts him in the 2:09-2:10 range.

Compare Ritz with Hall. Hall ran 59:43 at Houston and 2:06:17 at London, a ratio of 2.11. The same ratio, applied to Ritz's 61:26 half marathon (also run at Houston), would translate into a 2:09:54 (at London).

I should have said I agree with "honest tea" and "Chart Man". They were the two previous posters when I started typing.

Ritz is still slower than Benji Durden. And, Benji's pr was at Boston, arguably a much harder course.

Wake me up with Ritz does something.

Agree with Milt. While it is wonderful that he wants to compete with the big boys, he simply does not have the wheels to do it.

Milton Friedman wrote:

I agree with the previous two posters.

In the half marathon, Ritz is a good 2:00-2:30 behind the top guys in the world, which would put him 4:00-5:00 behind in the marathon. That puts him in the 2:09-2:10 range.

Compare Ritz with Hall. Hall ran 59:43 at Houston and 2:06:17 at London, a ratio of 2.11. The same ratio, applied to Ritz's 61:26 half marathon (also run at Houston), would translate into a 2:09:54 (at London).

Being a fellow Michigan guy, I am a huge fan of Ritz. I am bummed for him not to have met his goal. His early race tactics were ballsy for sure, he was on pace through the half for his goal, but pure and simple got caught up in the crazy pacing instead of watching his watch and pacing HIMSELF. But all of the b.s. on here about "he is in 2:07 shape, he is in 2:06 shape" blah blah blah

D.R. is in 2:09:59 shape. EOT

I'm indifferent, just as Ritz was when he didn't run WCs in Kenya a few years ago.

So what about for Hall? Is he just a way better marathoner than what he "should" be based on his track times? How many other runners out there are like that? Wanjiru?

honest tea wrote:

One can also argue that his marathon performance is precisely in line with his track perfomrances.

Based on his 27:35 then we should see something close to the following:

2 Mile - 8:10.8

5K - 13:17

10K - 27:35

1/2M - 1:01:23

Mar - 2:09:30

Compare this with his actual bests

2 Mile - 8:11

5K - 13:16

10K - 27:35

1/2M - 1:01:26

Mar - 2:10:00

Ritz is where he should be, or slightly below where he should be at the marathon.

Ritz will not improve significantly in the marathon, until he improves his 10K and half marathon. Till then, he will only train himself into oblivion becasue he thinks that he is better than he actually is.

Based on his half marathon time, Hall was dead on.

59:43 >> 2:06:00

******************

Hall ran 2:06:17