Nutella1 wrote:
runn wrote:Ironically, for all you newbies out there, Boston was once considered a tougher course because of the downhill start which pounded your quads and the uphills at such a tough point in the race.
It still is. 99/100 times you don't have 25mph wind in your back and then Boston is a lot harder than Frankfurt, Berlin, Rotterdam, Paris, London,...
And where did they get a 25mph wind? Did you actually go try to figure out what the wind was for the runners or do you see someone post something and assume that it is correct, no questions asked.
1) Wind readings most often cited are for Boston/Logan airport, far east of the race and near the ocean and typically not even for the period of the race but the 'forecast'.
2) Inland wind readings were in the range of 13-14mph*
3) *Wind readings are taken at 10meters/33 feet above ground level in an unobstructed area.
4) runners are running at ground level, average body mass at 1 meter.
5) There are trees, houses etc etc that are breaking up the wind
6) The course is point to point, but it does not run 26.2 miles in a line exactly in the direction of the wind, so reduce the wind by about 23.7/26.2 and then diminish this factor by the lack of complete alignment of the wind vector with the direction of the race
7) the gusts were typically swirling winds that on some occasions were actually head winds.
Boston does not use pacers, it has corners and turns and footing issues. Anyone that thinks that the 'aided' Boston course is easier/faster than the pancake Berlin-type course with pacers is mis-informed etc. Go argue with malmo, I sure you know a lot more than he does.