Yes nj and it is RARE!
Not only that, we are talking about top 3, you weren't top 3. In addition, the "experts" agreed with me, picking Nick 7th place, but they don't know what they are talking about, right? You finished ahead of Meb and Culpepper, but that was for obvious reasons.
I said pr's matter and they agreed with me. Please check out the men's preview on the home page. I would take on a side bet with you and the "odds are" I'd win. Nick will finish in front of Morgan. Do you believe a guy with 2 2:11 marathons is not an odds on favorite in front of a guy with one sub 2:15?
Yes, jumping from 2:11 to 2:09 is tough and I had said that. It is also tough to go from 2:15 to 2:11, agreed?
Yes, Mark's "extenuating circumstances" would have been something that made his 2:18 effort affect his performance, but I'd say it's better than Morgan's sub 2:15 effort.
I know about Trent as well and he had a great race for him, but as I also said, he ran during a time with a much weaker field, much weaker indeed. Trent ran a sub 2:13 on his best day and Nick has already ran faster twice before he enters the trials.
Trent's time is NOT getting anyone 4th place on Saturday and I'd bet on that too but I'd also bet that you wouldn't take that bet. My point is you're talking about then and I am talking about now. Please reread my post. In terms of depth, 04' was a weak field. Verran getting 5th, give me a break. How did Clint to in NY 4 years later? I rest my case. He couldn't win the Free Press marathon with extremely weak fields so how does he get 5th in a trials race? Weak field Nate, weak field.
You aren't comparing apples to apples Nate, sorry, but you just aren't.