Ryan Hall has built mega base for first time since HS

Yah, Alaskan Punch is taking Ryan Hall's career very personally. I am scared.

whywouldilie? wrote:

Yah, Alaskan Punch is taking Ryan Hall's career very personally. I am scared.

Because I'm able to post a few things about Ryan Hall off the top of my head and am not a cheerleader, I'm taking his career personally?

rojo started this thread. Is he taking Hall's running personally, too?

Hey -- you forgot to compare me to Hitler!

And you say you're "scared"? Oh my!

This site becomes more and more overrun with utter freaking retards every day.

Ask Manzano wrote:

"which I haven’t done since high school".

Sounds like he has exhausted all other training options and is resorting to desperation.

Bingo. This is another Webb/Bekele situation guys. Too bad, but he's done running fast. Guy who keeps talking about what great things are to come from new/different training...think about it: guys who run great don't tell you they've changed it up or figured something out, they just run fast.

We can all debate his training , his coaches , his racing or lack of.

Bottom line is that Hall is done , he's raced himself out being able to be one of the worlds elite marathoners. You have so many of the fast marathons in you and only so many miles of capable high level training. When its gone its gone.

Sure he may run 2:10 , he may make one more Oly team given the lack other athletes breaking through , but he will not be challenging the worlds best.

This ^ is correct.

Hall's 2:04:58 that day was the equivalent of precisely a 2:08:38 on a windless day or around a 2:07 on a fast course with no wind effect.

I'd bet he is a crispy critter...

Alaskan Punch wrote:

2) Why haven't Hall, Mutai, Davila, et al. along with a huge army of recrational marathoners never approached their times from Boston that year, before or since?

The post you responded to very clearly states: "Don't forget Mutai went on to run 2:05 in New York on what everyone agrees is a tough course." Is that not "approaching" (or surpassing) his Boston effort?

And it is comments like: "(I'm trying hard to hold in derisive laughter at this point... " and "I'm honestly not sure which is more mindless... " that make you come across as an arrogant prick who always has to be right.

So, to summarize: Mutai's NYC 2:05 is the proof that his Boston 2:03 was not just the product of a tailwind, rather his ability and fitness that year that lead to amazing times. And agreed, the tailwind helped, but too many people claim it was worth 2, 3, 4 minutes... I think 45 - 90 seconds. And without a tailwind Boston is still a challenging course. The same slower times before and since that you reference for your point could also be used to prove the point that the tailwind was the only advantage that day. If the net downhill was an advantage then times would have always been fast and continue to be fast.

Good call man. I'm surprised but I won't be from now on.

Dudes a baller

Since biological passport, he is off the EPO. notice the same pattern with solinsky, webb and him?

all with amazing times before bio passport and now mediocre. all PED-users.

Hall should be able at any point in fitness to run sub 29 flat, ay any point in the year

No educated or under educated person would disagree

Alaskan Punch wrote:

So in other words, he says he's done no speed work at all, which is true with the exception of the speed workouts he's done. I'm glad that's been cleared up.

10 x mile is NOT speed work

moron

Alaskan...your posts are about as clever as your name. Stay off the boards bro.

Christ but some of you are dense.

Actually his New York effort was unquestionably *superior* to his Boston race. Mutai's splits in Boston were 1:01:57/1:01:05 despite the fact that the first half of that course is by far the faster half. Clearly, assuming that the fantastic tailwind was more or less consistent throughout the two-plus hours Mutai was on the course, he could have run close 2:02-flat that day.

Anyway, you appear to be trying to use a sample size of one to argue that the conditions in Boston in 2011 didn't really speed up times all that much. If this is indeed what you are doing, you're posting like an idiot. You need to look at patterns, not individuals. Guess you either never took statistics or failed the shit out of it.

If you think I have a bad attitude, well, good for you. My online demeanor has nothing to do with the facts here; it just may make you less inclined to embrace them, but that's your problem.

Is someone arguing that Mutai is some hack who can't get it done without mammoth aid from the elements? If so I'm not seeing it.

Wow! That's one hell of a concession you're making!

I see. Two minutes is an outlandish overestimate whereas 1 1/2 minutes is in the reasonable range. That's cutting it pretty close there, don't you think, champ?

Answer me this -- how many of the faster runners in the field who set PRs at the 2011 Boston have been within 45 to 90 seconds of their times from that race? Moses Mosop has only come within 1:57 of his 2:03:06 even though Boston '11 was his debut. Desi Davila ran 3:17 slower (2:22:38 vs. 2:25:55) at the 2012 Olympic Trials on a fast course. Women's winner Kilel was "only" 49 seconds faster than her previous best (2:22:36 - 2:23:25) but like Mutai she plainly could have run faster in a time-trial-like effort, as she split 1:11:42 - 1:10:54.

No shit, and allow me to let you in on a little secret here. The reason we are even having this discussion is because THERE WAS A BIG TAILWIND IN BOSTON THAT YEAR.

OK, fine, so the tailwind was the sole difference. But I'm going to make you privy to a little-known fact: THERE WAS A BIG TAILWIND IN BOSTON THAT YEAR.

By the way, slower runners enjoy a greater absolute advantage from a tailwind than do faster ones since they're out there for so much longer. Therefore, a four-minute gain for midpack types is perfectly reasonable estimate.

trello wrote:

ttc wrote:

Alaskan made a great post. You though ignorantly argue Hall's stated dedication to a 2011 road mile & desire for track races- that never panned out.

It "never panned out" is EXACTLY what Hall is saying. Wow you guys are slow today.

-------------------------------------------------------

Killarney said Hall dedicated himself to 5K/10K training, by saying:

"2011, when he ran a road mile and then stated he wanted to compete in some track races over the summer."

...as proof of his 5K/10K training. And we're replying that's meaningless to his point, since Hall never followed through on the dedication specifics- like not even doing a track race.

It'd be nice to get quality 5K/10K training & racing, just by proclaiming it like Hall did. But you have to do it- & Hall never hit the track as proclaimed. Understand or need a tutor?

someone had to do it wrote:

Alaskan Punch wrote:

So in other words, he says he's done no speed work at all, which is true with the exception of the speed workouts he's done. I'm glad that's been cleared up.

10 x mile is NOT speed work

moron

---------------------------------------

Whatever the case, to me it's a big mistake when a runner ignores 1 element of running- & it SEEMS like speed is & has been ignored by Hall for some time (even during long periods before this training cycle).

With speed work in particular, it's not just a formality- "Oh, I'll put in a couple weeks at the end & will be ready to blaze."- which is the attitude I've read on here very often. That's not how Rupp improved his closing. Got to put in the time- months & years. It'd be nice if a distance runner did a few late season speed sessions & could parlay them to a :52 close.