I'm assuming the 10k takes more natural talent because success in the 10k relies on VO2max more than success in the marathon does. Although the marathon requires endurance, which I'm sure is a talent. Also other factors to consider- is not getting injured a talent, etc? Just for the fun of it. A friend of mine claims anyone can qualify for the trials in the marathon with optimal training/ lifestyle, but not the 10k. Thoughts?
10k. Also, isn't the field several times larger in the marathon? Doesn't really seem close.
10k.
bonjour wrote:
A friend of mine claims anyone can qualify for the trials in the marathon with optimal training/ lifestyle, but not the 10k. Thoughts?
Thought so.
What about this statement? I don't believe it.
10K
the 10k has fewer competitors, so based off that its the 10k. also "talent" becomes more important at shorter distances and hard work plays a larger and larger a role in the marathon.
bonjour wrote:
A friend of mine claims anyone can qualify for the trials in the marathon with optimal training/ lifestyle
Your friend is totaly wrong about that.
At 2:22, certainly the 10,000 was harder. At 2:19, its much closer, but I think the 10,000 is still harder. The reason it is even close is that that many of those who could compete for the last few spots in the 10,000 field would rather try for the marathon where they control there own destiny.
DontFeedTheTroll wrote:
bonjour wrote:A friend of mine claims anyone can qualify for the trials in the marathon with optimal training/ lifestyle
Your friend is totaly wrong about that.
I read a statement by Canova that essentially said the same thing. He threw out some crazy fast marathon time (it was definitely faster than 2:19) and said that he could train any runner to hit that time. People with talent could get there in a few years, whereas people with less talent would take most of their (peak running) lifetime.
You know more than Canova? =P
You don't have to know Canova to know that there's a lot of runners out there who aren't ever going to break 2:20 for a marathon. Canova probably didn't mean ANY runner, he probably meant, any runner who is already a serious athlete.
10K, no question
Every 10k qualifier could run a marathon under 2:20
bonjour wrote:
A friend of mine claims anyone can qualify for the trials in the marathon with optimal training/ lifestyle
With the optimal training and lifestyle, still less than 1/1000 would have the natural talent required to qualify for the OT.
Everybody who has met even the "B" standard (28:05) in the 10000m has also met the marathon standard with at least :25 to spare (28:30)
bonjour wrote:
I'm assuming the 10k takes more natural talent because success in the 10k relies on VO2max more than success in the marathon does. Although the marathon requires endurance, which I'm sure is a talent. Also other factors to consider- is not getting injured a talent, etc? Just for the fun of it. A friend of mine claims anyone can qualify for the trials in the marathon with optimal training/ lifestyle, but not the 10k. Thoughts?
The first question about which is easier seems almost as obvious as which race is longer.
As for the second question about whether anyone can do it, that's as equally an obvious question. There have been 2 women that have run that fast (2:19:00) and Catherine Ndereba only made it by 13 seconds. So your friend really believes that anyone with the right training could run faster than the 3rd fastest woman of all time? I'll even put a Larry Rawson twist on this. Go down to your local marathon and watch the winner come in. It will likely be in a much slower time than 2:19.
just passing by. wrote:
I read a statement by Canova that essentially said the same thing. He threw out some crazy fast marathon time (it was definitely faster than 2:19) and said that he could train any runner to hit that time. People with talent could get there in a few years, whereas people with less talent would take most of their (peak running) lifetime.
You know more than Canova? =P
If he said this? Yes, I do. I doubt he did.
I have never, in my life, run even a single mile at a 2:19 marathon pace. This board is not representative of your average runner. I chuckle when I hear someone say something like blah blah I started off running an 18 minute 5K and I trained my way down to 15 minutes and I don't have much talent so you can do it too yadda yadda. 18 minute 5K? That's three minutes faster than my PR (and, let me say, that I was not the last person to cross the finish line in that race). Sure, I'll agree that I haven't trained well and could run faster, but most of the people here STARTED OUT running faster than I have ever run. That's talent.
There is absolutely, positively, no way in hell that a typical male (healthy, in his 20s or early 30s) could be trained to a 2:19 marathon. One in a thousand, perhaps. If it actually were true then the marathon record would be a hell of a lot lower than it is now.
I'm going to assume that Mr. Canova was speaking in terms of physiology. That is to say, he was claiming that any runner who was willing to complete his workouts would be able to run 2:19 marathon. I don't doubt that he can train people who don't believe they have talent to reach elite levels. That is a very different thing from claiming that any particular runner *would* put their bodies through the years of intense training and constant unrelenting need to log base miles.
Physiologically a lot more is possible than most of us suspect. Still, physiologically possible != likely to happen.
DontFeedTheTroll wrote:
There is absolutely, positively, no way in hell that a typical male (healthy, in his 20s or early 30s) could be trained to a 2:19 marathon. One in a thousand, perhaps. If it actually were true then the marathon record would be a hell of a lot lower than it is now.
I think you are making the mistake of starting with somebody in their 20s or 30s. Canova's point was that it would take an untalented person their entire life. This requires starting the development process very early in life. Think of the East African stories of running to and from school and accumulating 10-20k per day, every day of their young lives. At altitude.
This whole statement reeks of somebody trying so hard to say it's impossible and coming up with reasons why something can't be done, before they even try to imagine how it can.
just passing by. wrote:
I think you are making the mistake of starting with somebody in their 20s or 30s. Canova's point was that it would take an untalented person their entire life. This requires starting the development process very early in life. Think of the East African stories of running to and from school and accumulating 10-20k per day, every day of their young lives. At altitude.
And what percentage of them go on to run 2:19 marathon? About 0.01%?
I believe that if we trained everyone in the US from an early age in running, with an eventual eye to running marathons, then we would have a lot more 2:19 marathon runners. Maybe 100x more.
That would still be a tiny fraction of the US male population.
If "Anyone" can run the Oly Trial 26.2 then why hasnt he done it?
That is very very very difficult and requires a tremendous amount of natural talent. Even if your sample group were Div I collegiate runners you still wouldn't get a majority of them to qualify.