Shalane could never quite get to Deena's American record, but I believe Molly is more talented than Shalane.
Shalane could never quite get to Deena's American record, but I believe Molly is more talented than Shalane.
What? She could barely manage a 2:28. At 32 years old, you think she could shave 9 minutes off her p.b?
2:24,2:25 would be her limit. Marathon is too long for a track runner.
Yes, if she sticks with the marathon, she can definitely get it. Most talented female American runner I've seen since following the sport. She's the female Rupp, but without the baggage that comes with being coached by Salazar and the doping accusations.
I still can't believe Deena ran 2:19. That's a sick time.
GoldenMiles wrote:
Yes, if she sticks with the marathon, she can definitely get it. Most talented female American runner I've seen since following the sport. She's the female Rupp, but without the baggage that comes with being coached by Salazar and the doping accusations.
I still can't believe Deena ran 2:19. That's a sick time.
Deena is just built for the marathon, physically and mentally. Molly is a track runner who will be a very good marathoner but she's not made for the marathon like Deena is. I don't think she'll get it at this point/age.
Exactly, Molly Huddle just seems too "fat" for the marathon.
Hmm........ wrote:
Exactly, Molly Huddle just seems too "fat" for the marathon.
Not "fat" at all, she's very lean but just more strongly built and more muscular than a Deena type. Helps her do so well on the track but takes away a bit in the marathon.
wejosvotewontmatter wrote:
GoldenMiles wrote:Yes, if she sticks with the marathon, she can definitely get it. Most talented female American runner I've seen since following the sport. She's the female Rupp, but without the baggage that comes with being coached by Salazar and the doping accusations.
I still can't believe Deena ran 2:19. That's a sick time.
Deena is just built for the marathon, physically and mentally. Molly is a track runner who will be a very good marathoner but she's not made for the marathon like Deena is. I don't think she'll get it at this point/age.
I think she's got a chance. 2:28 in NYC is equivalent to 2:25ish on a faster course. She had an abbreviated buildup coming off Rio. It was her debut so she probably ran conservatively. She's got better potential than Flanagan who is only 2 mins off Deena
Let's see Molly run 2:24 or 2:23 and then talk again.
Totally agree with this.
Do it now wrote:
wejosvotewontmatter wrote:Deena is just built for the marathon, physically and mentally. Molly is a track runner who will be a very good marathoner but she's not made for the marathon like Deena is. I don't think she'll get it at this point/age.
I think she's got a chance. 2:28 in NYC is equivalent to 2:25ish on a faster course. She had an abbreviated buildup coming off Rio. It was her debut so she probably ran conservatively. She's got better potential than Flanagan who is only 2 mins off Deena
Her time is faster than Shalane's debut. NYC is a brutal course. She could run sub 2:25 at Chicago or Berlin. She wants to go back to the track for the World's but 2018 could be her year. Don't underestimate the knowledge obtained from running your first 26.2
Joe Vigil on Deena's training:
http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_1/the-anatomy-of-a-medal.shtml
Kara Goucher ran a 2:25 in NYC marathon, and she had never progressed ever since. Some people are just not built for it, and I think Molly Huddle isn't too.
Hmm........ wrote:
What? She could barely manage a 2:28. At 32 years old, you think she could shave 9 minutes off her p.b?
2:24,2:25 would be her limit. Marathon is too long for a track runner.
Into a headwind on a tough course -- yes she can made the leap in the right marathon.
Hmm........ wrote:
Exactly, Molly Huddle just seems too "fat" for the marathon.
She's a veritable "tub o' lard."
Imagine how fast she'd be if she could get her weight under control.
Sad to think of what could be...
Kara Goucher ran her debut marathon in New York at 2:255X and improved that by a minute to 2:24:5X in Boston. so long way off 2:19
Sure, and Tiger will catch Jack. The fantasies some people come up with....
I'm sure she ran conservatively. I'm sure she would rather run for a decent placing and be confident in a stong finish rather than run for time and question if she would "hit the wall" in the final 10k.
Hmm........ wrote:
What? She could barely manage a 2:28. At 32 years old, you think she could shave 9 minutes off her p.b?
^This. And don't forget, some top runners of the past would have beaten her by over two miles.
Hmm........ wrote:
Kara Goucher ran a 2:25 in NYC marathon, and she had never progressed ever since. Some people are just not built for it, and I think Molly Huddle isn't too.
Agree. Let her first get a time below 2:25. It is outlandish to suggest she can get the AR after today.
SAlly V wrote:
Hmm........ wrote:Kara Goucher ran a 2:25 in NYC marathon, and she had never progressed ever since. Some people are just not built for it, and I think Molly Huddle isn't too.
Agree. Let her first get a time below 2:25. It is outlandish to suggest she can get the AR after today.
Deena Drossin debuted at age 28 at the same NYC marathon in 2:26:59, slightly faster. She benefited from running in a pack of 7, and came in last of those seven. Winning time was 2:25 low.
Molly ran the second half solo, and finished strong. I'd say their performances are comparable. Deena being 4 yrs younger at the time is the biggest difference.