Webb moving up to the Marathon

A Duck wrote:

See how many freaking idiots on this board just comment from the headline and don't even read the article???

I think that says all you need to know about this place, constant stupid assed lies about Salazar.

Crazy, idiotic, immature, lying, message board rats, indeed.

Trollolololol

he has beat ritz over 10,000 before..although it has been a while.

Ho Hum wrote:

I don't buy that Webb didn't have the gears to succeed. He had 47.X 400m speed and ran a 1:43 800, all with the strength to go 27:30. He had EVERY gear!

Yet NO world or olympic hardware EVER. The best milers on the planet have the same or superior PR's and the ability to close hard in a 1500m world final. Webb..? Not so much! Never demonstrated it.. Unless your one of the "fans" who thinks he will finally have it in his 30's.

The proof is in the RESULTS!

lksjc wrote:

tsebhi wrote:

[quote]lksjc wrote:

Again to Carthage did a bad job of explaining Rod Dixon's achievement. He didn't just break 4 for the mile and 2:10 for the marathon. He ran 3:53.62 when the world record was 3:51 and 2:08:59 when the world record was 2:08.18. I seriously doubt we're ever going to see another Rod Dixon type, a guy who can get that damn close to the mile and marathon records.

/quote]

We've already seen him -- Haile Gebrselassie.

1500 -- 3:33.73

marathon -- 2:03:59 (WR)

Geb is way ahead of Dixon in running history but the comparison is about milers moving up. Geb ran 3:33.73 when the WR was(as it is today) 3:26.00. That's a 5/10 guy moving down.

Geb ran 3,31 indoors. He was just behind El G when he set the current indoor WR.

Why would he move to Manhattan? To be close to Vig in NJ? I don't see why Webb would move to Manhattan. He'd be better off in Connecticut.

Bump.

430 miler - if you are reading this, can you provide us with an update on Webb's training? Over the years you seemed to have the best inside information when it comes to Webb.

Readit wrote:

Almost nobody watched the Olympic Marathon. FACT. Many people watched the Olympic 1500. FACT.

The Olympic marathon had more TV viewers, worldwide, than the 1500. FACT.

It also had about 3 times as many in the live audience. FACT.

You're an idiot. FACT.

lancey pants wrote:

Readit wrote:

Almost nobody watched the Olympic Marathon. FACT. Many people watched the Olympic 1500. FACT.

The Olympic marathon had more TV viewers, worldwide, than the 1500. FACT.

It also had about 3 times as many in the live audience. FACT.

You're an idiot. FACT.

Source? I can't find anything. If we go by youtube views, the marathon has half the views of the 1500.

I have a friend who works at the facility Webb trains at in Virginia. That friend has been watching Webb's workouts and can say with some authority that Webb's current leg speed velocity is 4.79318. That translates to a 2:09 marathon. If Webb can even increase his leg speed velocity to 4.79436 then he has a shot at a 2:07 which would put him in contention in a marathon like the NYC where the winner is chosen not by finishing place but by leg speed velocity LSV.

I think i'm probably the only person on these boards who believes that if he ran 2:12 or better, that'd be an incredible achievement & something he could be proud of. sub 2:10 would arguably give him the best range of any distance runner in history (1:43 to 2:09:xx). Only Gebreselassie would be a better candidate.

So yeah, if he runs 2:12 or so, damn good for him!

This should be interesting, I do recall Rupp or AlSal saying a couple of years ago that they surprised by Webb's endurance. Also, a big part of being a good marathoner is putting in the work and Webb is a trainaholic.

Ho Hum wrote:

I don't buy that Webb didn't have the gears to succeed. He had 47.X 400m speed and ran a 1:43 800, all with the strength to go 27:30. He had EVERY gear!

I agree. Only on Letsrun does a 1:43 800m and 3:46 miler get labeled as "not having the gears" to medal. Of course he did. His tactics weren't always the best, and that's what cost him.

NO. You guys do not get it. They will not be running on the 2016 Olympic marathon team. Because I will.

lksjc wrote:

tsebhi wrote:

[quote]lksjc wrote:

Again to Carthage did a bad job of explaining Rod Dixon's achievement. He didn't just break 4 for the mile and 2:10 for the marathon. He ran 3:53.62 when the world record was 3:51 and 2:08:59 when the world record was 2:08.18. I seriously doubt we're ever going to see another Rod Dixon type, a guy who can get that damn close to the mile and marathon records.

/quote]

We've already seen him -- Haile Gebrselassie.

1500 -- 3:33.73

marathon -- 2:03:59 (WR)

Geb is way ahead of Dixon in running history but the comparison is about milers moving up. Geb ran 3:33.73 when the WR was(as it is today) 3:26.00. That's a 5/10 guy moving down.

Dixon was really a 5000 guy who dropped down to the 1500. Actually, Dixon was a racer who'd let you pick the distance, then kick your ass.

there's too much sprinter in that body to survive after 20 miles.

I'd put Aouita well above Webb, today and every day.

Lost Soul wrote:

I think i'm probably the only person on these boards who believes that if he ran 2:12 or better, that'd be an incredible achievement & something he could be proud of. sub 2:10 would arguably give him the best range of any distance runner in history (1:43 to 2:09:xx). Only Gebreselassie would be a better candidate.

So yeah, if he runs 2:12 or so, damn good for him!

[quote]hardset nipples wrote:

I'd put Aouita well above Webb, today and every day.

[quote]

True.

Webb ain't no mary man. Dat fer sure. 10k maybe, tops.

Interview with Webb on the subject:

http://news.runnersworld.com/2012/10/25/alan-webb-on-the-marathon-and-other-matters/

Ho Hum wrote:

I don't buy that Webb didn't have the gears to succeed. He had 47.X 400m speed and ran a 1:43 800, all with the strength to go 27:30. He had EVERY gear!

I agree. Back in 2007 when he was on top, he always had a nasty gear-change in the last 50 meters of a race where he put many a contender to bed. The problem is that he doesn't have them now.