how did flanagan do in chicago half marathon this morning?

How did Flanagan do in the USATF National Championship 10K a couple of weeks ago?

Flanagan would've done the same thing in the 10000...blown away subpar competition in a relatively slow time. What's the difference?

Two things to note;

1. There were guys running in the 67-68 range, so there was comp at that level.

2. She was running a lot slower at the end then at the beginning. You can see it in her splits.

Still if say an encouraging result.

douglas burke wrote:

no hate, just was hoping for more and disappointed in the competition.

Yeah, well isn't this a Competitor Group event?

Potential idiots take note: There is no indication whatsoever that Shalane Flanagan was in any way upset with either her race or the fact that she had no competition. That notion was put forth by one douglas burke, who as a stalwart contributor to these boards for many years has displayed all of the insight and perspicacity of lambshit.

douglas burke wrote:

she had a 5 minute and 20 second lead at 10 miles, she is probably pissed off that the race directors were unable to find a dozen or so 67-69 minute runners to challenge her and push her to maybe kastors 67:34 american record or maybe even the fastest american womens half marathon best 66:57 (not record due to being slightly downhill.

You are so clueless, it is almost disturbing. Why did you disappear from the Hasay thread?

Statistically, this is the hottest week of the year in Chicago. The course is not particularly fast and there is no shade. Anyone wanting to run a fast time is not going to pick this race. CHICAGO is a good time this time of year and I am sure Shalene had an enjoyable visit, in addition to picking up a little extra money. A sub 1:10 in Chicago in mid-July is probably worth a 1:07-8 in Maine or New Brunswick.

george oscar bluth wrote:

Really surprised there are so many Flanagan haters.

No one is being unfairly mean. Fans can give a pro a hard time for the things they say without being "haters."

buddy puddy wrote:

I am sure Shalene had an enjoyable visit

Who the hell is "Shalene"?

Wow! - A difference of 5 degrees makes a difference of 3 minutes.

high 50's at 6:30 am start

first 3 miles all downtown and sun not showing above the buildings yet....so yes there was shade

iwasthere wrote:

first 3 miles all downtown and sun not showing above the buildings yet....so yes there was shade

____________

Where on earth did they find 3 miles downhill in Chicago? I trained there for 5 years, and the only possible place to do a hill workout was near an overpass off the lakefront path.

Honestly, Shalane Flanagan is the last person to complain about a lack of pacers or to make excuses for that. SHE is the de facto pacer in any race she enters over 10k, and in most races at 5k or 10k. At Boston, she obviously led the field for a long enough time to enable all the fast times.

?* wrote:

Where on earth did they find 3 miles downhill in Chicago? I trained there for 5 years, and the only possible place to do a hill workout was near an overpass off the lakefront path.

douglas burke wrote:

she ran 69:44

that sucks

Read Flanagan's own comments in this account of the race. She wanted to run at goal marathon pace, 5:19 per mile, and that's what she did.

http://www.runningusa.org/2014-chicago-results?returnTo=main&utm_source=Running+USA+wire+55-07-14&utm_campaign=wire+55++2014&utm_medium=email

douglas burke wrote:

she had a 5 minute and 20 second lead at 10 miles, she is probably pissed off that the race directors were unable to find a dozen or so 67-69 minute runners to challenge her and push her to maybe kastors 67:34 american record or maybe even the fastest american womens half marathon best 66:57 (not record due to being slightly downhill.

Where did you read this? 2nd place was only 4:03 back at the finish. 2nd place doesn't have a 10 mile split, but to have been 5:20 back at 10 and finished only 4:03 back, she'd have needed to run 5:00 flat pace for the last 5k. I highly doubt this happened.