Nick Arciniaga Says 20+ Guys Have the Potential to Run Sub 2:10 at the Trials: How Many Do You think?

Yes, and when I posted about the 2:10 barrier a few years back, Kyle O'Brien came on here telling me that I didn't know what I was talking about and how he works his a** off...yeah sure! If you can't break 2:10, then you're merely running to run a decent marathon on the right day and bring home a small amount of cash for your efforts and there's nothing wrong with that. But call a Spade a Spade, not a Diamond! Kyle was wrong then and he's wrong now. Carry on oh wise ones.

If Hall is still not right, he should be of service to the field and pace everyone at just under 1:05 and then we might see just who could run sub 2:10 at the Trials.

"Precious Roy" - I know you are very astute...wondering why Elkanah Kibet didn't make your list after how he ran in a B of A Chicago Marathon where the early pace looked a lot like what the USOT pace tends to be...

3 possible, 4 at the most.

Nice list of guys who might do it at some point. Of course, a few already have. At the trials, one might.

Completely unrealistic, IMO.

Where the precedent for that? It isn't going to happen.

I'll go out on a limb and say no one breaks 2:10.

Of course it would change them. Apart from Ritz's 2:07, we now have Puskedra, Vail, and Eggleston in the 2:10s. It's okay to admit a mistake. Heaven knows I've made more than my share on this website.

Ta-tas for NOW wrote:

Montesquieu wrote:

By the way, you might want to use statistics from after 2011, which is when the link is from. Ritz has run 2:07:47.

Yes that would be nice, but would it change the numbers much, if at all?

Montesquieu wrote:

Of course it would change them. Apart from Ritz's 2:07, we now have Puskedra, Vail, and Eggleston in the 2:10s. It's okay to admit a mistake. Heaven knows I've made more than my share on this website.

Ta-tas for NOW wrote:

Yes that would be nice, but would it change the numbers much, if at all?

Dude- I already said it'd be good to get current numbers. If USATF ever decided to get off their asses and update anything on that pathetic site, what would change? We already counted Ritz in the below 2:10 group, and there are a whole 3 other guys drooling over 2:10. Puskedra is the biggest ? because of his huge jump after some time off. Doubt sub 2:10 at Trials but maybe after that. Give it another Olympic cycle and there might be a couple new sub 2:10s, but the odds are those guys aren't even Americans yet.

I am wondering who will take it out. Maybe some will run away like Pfitzinger did once

i don't think it's crazy either. i also believe the trials will be tough and have a deep field. i think he means there are lots of guys on the verge of breakthroughs or guys who have never and will never even run a marathon.there's talents in the united states for sub 2:10that being said, it'll be a lousy trials and the winner will be 2:13ha

wejo wrote:

We've got an article on Nick and his NYC marathon chances (he's shooting for a PR (2:11:30) and top 5 finish.

Article here with 10 minute video:

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2015/10/americas-nick-arciniaga-ready-for-a-top-five-finish-and-pr-in-new-york/

Nick also said at the Olympic Marathon Trials he thought there are 20+ guys (20-23 is what I think he said) with the potential to go sub 2:10.

That didn't sound to crazy to me, but others thought it was. What do you think?

Ta-tas for NOW wrote:

Montesquieu wrote:

By the way, you might want to use statistics from after 2011, which is when the link is from. Ritz has run 2:07:47.

Yes that would be nice, but would it change the numbers much, if at all?

Puskedra and Eggleston have both run sub 2:11.

Only 16 different Americans have gone under 2:10 (some multiple times) so 20 having Potential to do so sounds crazy, there WONT be 20 at the trial doing it, but plan on being CAPABLE of it to make the team of course if it is 90 degrees or they decide to jog for 20-30k none will, (depending on weather factors, pacing and other variables) I do think 20 or more current Americans have potential to do it in their careers, but most would need everything to go right uninterrupted training weather on race day, pacing etc.

I would add Galen Rupp to the people already mentioned (if he does not go under 2:07 in a London, Dubai, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Berlin, Frankfurt, etc type race it would be disappointing), also other fast 5/10k runners Ben True, Ryan Hill, Eric Jenkins and if/when Ed Cheserek gets citizenship I EXPECT Cheserek to be Very World class meaning sub 13 for 5k, sub 27 for 10k and sub 2:07 marathon.

After all that he is through I'd still love Hall to make that team. Imagine he does it like Boston 2011 or 2010. No half marathon results or crappy ones. And then he steps to the line at the Trials. And leads the field through a 1:03 or 1:04 half. Everybody things "wtf - he will drop". But he keeps going hard and gets that spot. It'd be one of the craziest comebacks ever and just in time. Ryan if you read that: I believe in you.

In America we talk about athletes with the potential to break 210 . In Kenya they talk about athletes with the potential to break 205. In Japan they talk about athletes who have run under 210, no potential about it.

No one mentioning Tegenkamp?

Isn't this a new curse with loops just devised for the trials that we don't know how fast or not? Can someone elaborate as this will impact who runs fast on flat course or could make the team be cause its strength course.

A bunch of american with 2:10 potential he may be right but not at the trials and not even over the course of year. Look back at the trials we have a had break way winner several time at the trials with 2nd and 3rd being the fight to make the team.

I don't know about that many having the potential to run sub 2:10, what ever that means, but there's a pretty long list of guys who are plausible candidates to make the team, including Nick.

What he said should be understood as nick believes roughly 20 guys have that potential. He threw out that number as a way to compare his ability to others that will show up. He is not saying that many or even one will run 2:10 at the trials. He can't predict weather and the way the race unfolds. What he can do is make a list of people with potential to run 2:10.(this is assuming that there training is going great) You use this as motivation in your training knowing your not heads and shoulders above the field. It is not unreasonable to assume lots of guys have this potential this year.

Good point. You either do it or you don't. There's a mindset at the professional level that sub 2:10 is too hard so very few do it.

It's the same as on this website where 2:59 is considered very very hard. You have 36 minute 10k guys on here having trouble breaking 3:00 hours when they should be under 2:49 easy.