no serious contender out there except him
no serious contender out there except him
^I'm going to predict Ryan is going to loose.
to loose or to tight?
Mohamed Trafeh is going to win.
didn't the half champs run concurrent with the open field on sunday last year. did they separate it out this year just so the champs entrants could race on the trials course on saturday. does this mean the field for the open half on sunday will be watered down since no USA elites.
greaso wrote:
didn't the half champs run concurrent with the open field on sunday last year. did they separate it out this year just so the champs entrants could race on the trials course on saturday. does this mean the field for the open half on sunday will be watered down since no USA elites.
Pretty much. There will be some local elites running on Sunday. I would guess the winning time is still going to be around 65-68 minutes on Sunday. I imagine there's a few guys who didn't get into the Elite field on Sat that will still run well on Sunday.
greaso wrote:
didn't the half champs run concurrent with the open field on sunday last year. did they separate it out this year just so the champs entrants could race on the trials course on saturday. does this mean the field for the open half on sunday will be watered down since no USA elites.
brett gotcher is scheduled to run the full houston marathon on sunday, i thought nick arciniega was running the full marathon on sunday, but there was no mention of arciniega in the most recent press release a couple of days ago, it does not mean he has pulled out, but i thought he would be mentioned as a 2:11 american is basically one of the top american marathoners.
anyway i heard gotcher wants a 2:08-2:09 hopefully he gets it, he was with the leaders who ran 2:07 for long after the halfway mark last year, and if arciniega runs lets hope he gets a big personal best hopefully sub 2:10.
ItsTheBeard wrote:
no serious contender out there except him
1. fun.
2. because they are runners and runners race.
3. a few probably think they can win.
4. to test themselves and hopefully get a personal best.
5. because runners know runners so it is in actuality a social gathering of people who like the same activity (running).
6. to look at next years olympic trials course as many hope to run that next year.
7. these are just some each person probably has their own reason.
This is a great opportunity to hit the trials standard for many of these guys. It's only a half and it's early in the year. If they blow up it wouldn't be too hard to regroup and try again in the spring.
You have to be a troll. I would absolutely take a bet on the field over Hall if someone I knew proposed it to me.
I don't know about your claim. Hall lost last year ina half-marathon and Mo Trafeh, he of a 1:00:39 half-marathon time is in the field.
If Hall is having an off day Trafeh may take him.
This is a good race for Hall. His last few half marathons were absolutely miserable (64 this time last year and a complete meltdown in Philly in the fall). It will take about 61 to win the race. The course, which will be the trials course in 2012, has a bunch of u-turns to simulate the course design in London. It won't be super fast. If Hall is back to his old self, he will be able to win in 61 even.
If Hall went to Europe, he would end up in a field with some crazy fast E. Africans who just do halfs and road 10ks. He would get smoked pretty badly, as would any one else who was in the middle of a marathon training cycle. Houston is a good race for Hall. It will be very interesting to see how the self-training is going.
Either you are a troll, or just completely stupid.Hall's last half was a dismal 63 high in Philly I believe.He may win, but he'll have to give one hell of a fight to do it.
ItsTheBeard wrote:
no serious contender out there except him
ItsTheBeard wrote:
to loose or to tight?
Don't you mean "too loose or too tight"?
Idiots, the lot of ya.
also sub 15 fr college wrote:
ItsTheBeard wrote:to loose or to tight?
Don't you mean "too loose or too tight"?
Idiots, the lot of ya.
Dang, one post too (or to) late on this. Hilarious that someone correcting spelling (which can be attributed to a typo) would counter with horseshit grammar and not even be aware of it. "The lot of " is right.
dangiditty wrote:
also sub 15 fr college wrote:Don't you mean "too loose or too tight"?
Idiots, the lot of ya.
Dang, one post too (or to) late on this. Hilarious that someone correcting spelling (which can be attributed to a typo) would counter with horseshit grammar and not even be aware of it. "The lot of " is right.
But you're both wrong. The original poster used 'loose' as a verb - ever heard of sarcasm?