Really? Meb's coach:"Anyone who runs a fast 10K can run a fast marathon.”- List of fast 10kers but failed marathoners

Just because someone didn't run a fast marathon doesn't mean he couldn't. With Tadese, for example, there had to be something more going on. There is absolutely no way you can't break 2:10 as a 58:20 half marathoner.

Ho Hum wrote:

Just because someone didn't run a fast marathon doesn't mean he couldn't. With Tadese, for example, there had to be something more going on. There is absolutely no way you can't break 2:10 as a 58:20 half marathoner.

But 2:10 isn't fast for a 58:20 guy.

I think the OP is talking relative to each other.

Wejo: His 10k best 28:06. Marathon pb 2:18. That's not close to equivalent.

The #4 and #5 fastest ever at 10,000 aren't exactly marathon stars.

Nicholas Kemboi 26:30 10,000 at age 19. 4th fastest man ever. Marathon pb is just 2:08:30 and he's still 29.

Not exactly failed but what happened to that guy?? Anyone?

#5 Abebe Dinkesa Negera also a 26:30 10k guy at age 21. Now he's also 29 and his marathon pb is 2:14:33.

-alltime 10k fan

PS. I wouldn't be stunned if Meb's not a marathon star. Everyone seems to think he's a doped guy now thanks to the 3:28 but is it possible he's just more of a 1500/5000 guy who wins the 10k because it's a jog fest each time?

Regardless, Larsson's comments were off.

rojo wrote:

But 2:10 isn't fast for a 58:20 guy.

I think the OP is talking relative to each other.

Wejo: His 10k best 28:06. Marathon pb 2:18. That's not close to equivalent.

That means wejo was doing something wrong. Like nutrition, hydration, etc.

rojo wrote:

Ho Hum wrote:

Just because someone didn't run a fast marathon doesn't mean he couldn't. With Tadese, for example, there had to be something more going on. There is absolutely no way you can't break 2:10 as a 58:20 half marathoner.

But 2:10 isn't fast for a 58:20 guy.

I think the OP is talking relative to each other.

Wejo: His 10k best 28:06. Marathon pb 2:18. That's not close to equivalent.

But have they done the Pfitzinger Advanced Marathoning training schedules or the Hanson's Marathon Method plans? I didn't think so.

Well with Wejo, I don't know his training specifics, but it seems like he just didn't figure out the marathon. With Tadese, coaches on here have said that his training was always too fast and mileage pretty low.

I think Ritz is a good example of what Larsen's talking about. Look at his progression:

http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/dathan-ritzenhein-181857#progression

Before his breakthrough in Chicago he's another "failed" marathoner, but given enough attempts he eventually put it together. I think Larsen is right on: any guy with Mo's wheels has the ability to run a fast marathon. Whether he will is anyone's guess. It probably depends on whether he makes the race a serious focus or not.

Simon Bairu ran a 27:23 10K, was hailed as the future of Canadian distance running, but has never finished a marathon faster than 2:19.

On the women's side...

Werknesh Kidane 30:07.15 and 2:26:15

Her 10,000 PB is from 2003, but she also ran a 30:39 for 4th in the 2012 Olympics.

Shalane Flanagan 30:22 and 2:25:38

Kim Smith 30:35 and 2:25:21

failed marathoner wrote:

anyone who runs a fast 10K can run a fast marathon, I think.”

can =/= will

How about Meb? I know he\'s been an extremely successful marathoner(silver, NYC) but he\'s never popped a truly fast marathon. Ryan Hall is a minute slower than Meb in the 10,000, but three minutes faster in the marathon. Meb talks about running marathon PRs, but drops his time like Bubka raised his PV heights.

As quoted, then I agree the answer is "no." But if he had inserted the word "potential," as in anyone who can run a fast 10k has the potential to run a fast marathon, then that makes sense.

On the American side, maybe Todd Williams, Lynn Jennings and Mark Nenow although their marathon PRs are very respectable.

rojo wrote:

Ho Hum wrote:

Just because someone didn't run a fast marathon doesn't mean he couldn't. With Tadese, for example, there had to be something more going on. There is absolutely no way you can't break 2:10 as a 58:20 half marathoner.

But 2:10 isn't fast for a 58:20 guy.

I think the OP is talking relative to each other.

Wejo: His 10k best 28:06. Marathon pb 2:18. That's not close to equivalent.

I would give him the benefit of the doubt. That was his first marathon right? Took Geb a few to get it right. Marathon is a different beast with fueling problems.

Nur Stel wrote:

On the American side, maybe Todd Williams, Lynn Jennings and Mark Nenow although their marathon PRs are very respectable.

Williams is 27:31-2:11:17 pb. That's certainly not equivalent, but it's not awful either. 27:31 is worth like a 2:09 (McMillan says 2:09 low, JK would say 2:09:20ish) so it would be like Farah running 2:07 instead of 2:05.

Nenow is a better example 27:20-2:14:21 .

As for Jennings, she ran 31:19.89 and 2:38:37 which is way, way off. 10 minutes so.

But how many marathons did those guys/gals run? I only see one marathon result of Jennings. I guess one could argue they weren't running them as maybe they knew they wouldn't be good at them but also it was a different era when the money was on the track/roads for shorter stuff.

Keep in mind that Wejo had a really crappy coach who crippled him with all the wrong kind of running.

can = "has the potential to." it just takes less words.

DC Racer wrote:

As quoted, then I agree the answer is "no." But if he had inserted the word "potential," as in anyone who can run a fast 10k has the potential to run a fast marathon, then that makes sense.

The level of specialization in the marathon and 10k is very high right now. Kipsang's runs splits in the marathon that are faster than his track 10k PR. That is not because he is slow on the track, but because he has been on the road and working up to the marathon since he first attracted the attention of agents. Someone who specializes in the 10k is going to need time to transition to the marathon. That is why some very fast guys on the track have yet to break through on the road. Also, guys like Tadese who do not have the best marathon times have generally gone out with the leaders and fallen apart. Tadese could have run 2:06-7 if he did not try to run 2:04-05. But the track guys are expected to win on their debut whereas their colleagues who have only raced marathons have had three or four races to develop before they start winning.

rojo wrote:

But 2:10 isn't fast for a 58:20 guy.

I think the OP is talking relative to each other.

Wejo: His 10k best 28:06. Marathon pb 2:18. That's not close to equivalent.

I have to laugh being an example of one of the guys with a good 10k who couldn't run a good marathon. A 26:30 guy and 28:06 are very different.

I never figured out the marathon for sure or any of the longer distances.

The bigger thing I would say is I never finished a marathon after being a 28:06 guy.

Heading into 2000 I was a 29:49 guy. I ran 28:27 that year and was I think 20th at the Trials in the heat in Pitssburgh. Not a disaster. I said I wanted to give myself a shot and halfway I was in the group that had the eventual winner (Rdd DeHaven)

2001 I got 4th at USAs, ran 28:10 to win in McGill in Canada.

I paced the men at Chicago sub 5:00 pace for 20 miles. Now a 28:10 guy perhaps should be able to do that for a full marathon but I wasn't ready for sure. That 20 miler was my #1 long distance effort of the year and was very, very hard. Nonetheless my pacing was excellent and very consistent and would I think indicate I could figure out how to do that for 6 more miles. NYC (my marathon) was 3 weeks later. Chicago was too much for me and my foot was bothering me by NYC. I died to 2:21.

2002 I paced Paula to her WR. Wasn't planning on running the whole way but I got a bonus if she broke the WR and if she finished.

2003 I ran my 28:06 to get 4th at USAs.

2004 Injured and dropped out of Trials.

So the way I see it I ran no marathons healthy after being a 28:10 guy.

I still would like to run a marathon and feel like I ran it properly. I never felt I understood the distance.

rojo wrote:

But 2:10 isn't fast for a 58:20 guy.

I think the OP is talking relative to each other.

Wejo: His 10k best 28:06. Marathon pb 2:18. That's not close to equivalent.

What the OP is talking about is irrelevant. What Larsen is talking about IS relevant. 2:10 and 58:20 are both very fast and fit Larsen's quote and probably his intended meaning. You can go ahead and disagree but your entire disagreement is based on an incorrect inference, or at least an unsubstantiated one.