ROTTERDAM MARATHON FIELD RELEASED

the iaaf article also said more names will be released in the coming weeks.

Gideoon wrote:

Stephen Kibet (2:09:27)+ 58:54 HM in The Hague last sunday

I have come to understand that if you run a 58min Half in the buildup, your Marathon is going to blow. I predict DNF.

douglas burke wrote:

the iaaf article also said more names will be released in the coming weeks.

also would be interesting to see who they will have as pacesetters and how far into the race they are supposed to lead.

yes more names are yet to be announce

we can expect the first sub-2. Rooterdamm is a fast course.

Nutella1 wrote:

Gideoon wrote:

Stephen Kibet (2:09:27)+ 58:54 HM in The Hague last sunday

I have come to understand that if you run a 58min Half in the buildup, your Marathon is going to blow. I predict DNF.

Very true, best example: Matthew Kisorio in NYC 11

Is this true??? A month or more is enough recovery time or not??

Sammy Kitwara also has a 58.58 on his name.

A half marathon says nothing about marathon performance.

Mosop 2:03:20 FTW and WR. I bet Kirui can hang on for most of the race to finish in low 2:04 for 2nd. He looked really solid at NYC.

Get your groove on wrote:

Is this true??? A month or more is enough recovery time or not??

It's not about recovery. But in order to run a 58min Half you need Half specific training including sharpening and a taper. You won't be able to run a great Marathon only a few weeks later.

Get your groove on wrote:

Sammy Kitwara also has a 58.58 on his name.

A half marathon says nothing about marathon performance.

Yes, but after running 58:58, Sammy didn't run a Marathon that year anymore.

Nutella1 wrote:

Get your groove on wrote:

Is this true??? A month or more is enough recovery time or not??

It's not about recovery. But in order to run a 58min Half you need Half specific training including sharpening and a taper. You won't be able to run a great Marathon only a few weeks later.

Geb was able to run 2:03:59 a month and a half after running 27:06 for 10000m at the Olympics (negative splitting) so he seemed like he was in shape for a sub 59 half, so that's not always true

Maybe your right,never thought about that.

Maybe the planned the half instead of the classic 30k long run.

But if it's not about recovery than I'm missing something.

Why can they pop out good 10k's in the buildup??

Maybe if they do real marathon training they just do some speed adjustment before racing 'under' distance.

The Waterboy wrote:

Geb was able to run 2:03:59 a month and a half after running 27:06 for 10000m at the Olympics (negative splitting) so he seemed like he was in shape for a sub 59 half, so that's not always true

I'm not sure taht 27:06 correlates to a sub 59 half. Sub one hour seems closer.

The Waterboy wrote:

Geb was able to run 2:03:59 a month and a half after running 27:06 for 10000m at the Olympics (negative splitting) so he seemed like he was in shape for a sub 59 half, so that's not always true

27:06 is far from what Geb could run in his good old days. He was pretty much training through the Olympics.

Also, 27:06 is more like 60:30 Half, which is also far off his 58:xx PR.

DontFeedTheTroll wrote:

The Waterboy wrote:

Geb was able to run 2:03:59 a month and a half after running 27:06 for 10000m at the Olympics (negative splitting) so he seemed like he was in shape for a sub 59 half, so that's not always true

I'm not sure taht 27:06 correlates to a sub 59 half. Sub one hour seems closer.

Using IAAF tables, 27:06 is equivalent in points to a 59:25 half.

A 59 flat half is equivalent to a 26:54 10000m.

However, in Beijing, Haile's splits were 13:48-13:18, and even in his last 5000m his last mile was 4:10 (13 flat 5000m pace), so I'd say given the nature of the negative split, we could cut at the very least 10-15 seconds off his time in Beijing which would be right around 26:56-26:51, which is equivalent to a sub 59 Half.

In other words, the time Haile ran wasn't equivalent to a sub 59, but the way he ran it/the shape he was in was equivalent to a sub 59 according to IAAF tables.

Therefore, it IS possible to be in sub 59 shape and be in great marathon shape. Might not happen often, bit it is possible as it happened with the former world record holder.

The Waterboy wrote:

....Therefore, it IS possible to be in sub 59 shape and be in great marathon shape. Might not happen often, bit it is possible as it happened with the former world record holder.

Too many suppositions.

The fact is that there are very few, examples of a sub 60 half being run within 6 weeks of a great marathon. Off the top of my head I can't think of any.

The Waterboy wrote:

Geb was able to run 2:03:59 a month and a half after running 27:06 for 10000m at the Olympics (negative splitting) so he seemed like he was in shape for a sub 59 half, so that's not always true

DontFeedTheTroll wrote:

I'm not sure taht 27:06 correlates to a sub 59 half. Sub one hour seems closer.

Agreed. 27:06 does NOT mean 58:xx shape for the half; sub-59:00 is significantly better than sub-27:00. As every calculator, and common sense, will show you.

For 58:59 you need AT LEAST 26:50 ability if you're a 10k/half guy, maybe (MAYBE) as slow as 27:05 if you are coming from true marathon specialization. I think that because the guys tearing up the half and putting down 58:xx don't run on the track much these days, you might underestimate just how good their concurrent 10k ability is.

For thought: Wanjiru went *26:41* in 2005, and that was this same year he did 59:16 for the half. Since his half got down to 58:33, his 10k ability was likely 26:2x or even 26:1x before he moved up to the marathon.

Just throwing out 'oh, he did 27:06 so he could definitely do sub-59' is not a safe bet. 58:xx can't be taken lightly, and let's face it, 27:06 can these days.

I'd like to hear from Ventolin on this.

i can't help much on this

these are for only track times : if a guy can go 27'06, then usual rule of thumb is that his 5k is going to be in ballpark of :

10k = 2*5k + 1'00

-> 13'03

13'03 / 27'06 ->59'27 , 2"03'07 !

like i said, these are track time estimates - maybe add 1/2 minute to 1/2M & full 1'00 to M

it indicates that you can run a 2"04 off low/flat 27'00, but you really aren't going to dent the 1/2M all-time lists with only 27'06 speed

my gut feeling is that the 1/2M list is very strong ( better than M ) & that any guy running sub-59 has to be capable of well below 27'00 ( no different training - just running 10ks off his 1/2M training )

i'd be very surprised if a 59'00 guy coudn't run at worst 26'45 - 26'50 if he ran a few track 10ks off just his 59'00 training

which means i agree with your premise 100%

( remember tadesse who is wr holder for 1/2M almost broke kennster in osaka, which means he musta been well below 26'30 shape that day in temperate conditions )