Ray Treacy was thrilled with Huddle's debut - "We will be looking to go close to 2:20 in the next couple of races.&quot

Oh yeah one more thing. Off camera, he told us he thought if he had Huddle run a 10k today instead of the marathon that she'd run 30:40.

Going from 2:28 to 2:20 would be a massive improvement. Especially for a runner this far along in her career. Not saying it can't be done. But Deena is the only one to come to mind that's pulled it off.

minong wrote:

Going from 2:28 to 2:20 would be a massive improvement. Especially for a runner this far along in her career. Not saying it can't be done. But Deena is the only one to come to mind that's pulled it off.

Why? You need to understand this was a tactical race on a windy day.

Keitany has run 2:18:37 and yet she only ran 2:24 today.

I think low 2:20s (222 ish) is certainly doable. A 2:20 would be like her 30;13 - near perfection.

Anyway, Treacy had good reason to praise Huddle’s close. The stats actually reveal that no one in the women’s race was faster over the last 5.2 miles of the race.

LetsRun.com wrote:

I think low 2:20s (222 ish) is certainly doable. A 2:20 would be like her 30;13 - near perfection.

Of course it's doable, I didn't say it wasn't. I'm just saying the list of both men and women that we think are capable of a certain marathon time but never get there is much much longer than the list who have. Especially when you're talking about someone approaching 2:20.

What kind of idiot are you? She ran a 2:28 in her debut, in a tactical race, on a windy day, in NYC--which does not produce fast times, if you haven't noticed.

And as whichever inbred Johnson brother pointed out, she closed the last handful of miles faster than anyone woman out there today.

Put her in London or Berlin with some pacers and I don't think it's unrealistic at all.

How presumptuous of Ray to comment without first consulting the LRC Cognoscenti.

Optimist wrote:

What kind of idiot are you? She ran a 2:28 in her debut, in a tactical race, on a windy day, in NYC--which does not produce fast times, if you haven't noticed.

And as whichever inbred Johnson brother pointed out, she closed the last handful of miles faster than anyone woman out there today.

Put her in London or Berlin with some pacers and I don't think it's unrealistic at all.

Why are you calling minong an idiot?

What was Ingrid Kristiansen's WRs when she ran 2:21:06?

14:58 (June '84) / 30:59 (July '85) / 2:24:26 (April '84 - personal best)

14:37 (August '86) / 30:13 (July '86) / 2:21:06 (April '85) -- (the first two at age 30)

She held all three WRs at once and she ran the 5k/10k BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER her 2:21:06 marathon WR.

Incidentally, her debut was 2:38:45 in Sweden in '80. Her 3rd marathon was 2:30:08 in NYC in 1981 (at age 25).

Read the rest of the thread. Who is minong? Why should I care? The comments were idiotic.

Because it's silly to claim someone will become the greatest American female marathoner of all time off of a 2:28 debut. Keitany's 2:19 was 4 years ago and she was running 1:06 halfs around that time so she probably has already peaked. Yes her debut (also at NYC) was only 2:29 but she tried to hang with the leaders and faded. Laura Thweatt with way less credentials was only 10 seconds slower last year in her debut at NYC (2:28:23) and placed 7th. Just because it was a weak field and Huddle got on the podium the spin is she ran great because it was "tactical." And I get it at the Olympics and World championships but not sure what the point of a tactical NYC marathon really accomplishes. What was her response when Kipyego passed her - did she go with her or just let her pass. I agree she certainly has potential but I was expecting Huddle to be closer to 2:25.

Please list Coach Treacy's history with female marathoners. I only know of Kim Smith who has underachieved compared to her track times and Amy Cragg who ran better before running under Treacy and improved again after leaving him.

Just looking at numbers objectively.

Keitany ran 6 minutes slower yesterday in NYC than her London PB.

Huddle ran 2:28 yesterday. If you give her 6 minutes on a faster course, she'd be at 2:22. Not too far out of the realm of possibility to say she could get 2:20.

Were the white Saucony Type A's?

Optimist wrote:

Read the rest of the thread. Who is minong? Why should I care? The comments were idiotic.

Go to Vegas, tell them you want 2/1 odds that she breaks 2:20 within 3 years. They'll happily take your money. So would I.

Man, if anyone wants to kill off Nate Silver have him read the threads around here. He'd have an aneurysm seeing the lack of understanding basic probability.

And before you comment, read every word I've written in this thread. It'll save you from saying something really ignorant.

type a with fastwitch upper

Wonder wrote:

Were the white Saucony Type A's?

"I don't think it's unrealistic at all"

"Go to Vegas, tell them you want 2/1 odds that she breaks 2:20"

And you're going to try to tell me about "basic probability." What kind of odds are you giving for whether or not you have rudimentary reading comprehension skills? Dear lord, you might be the biggest retard on these forums--and that's saying quite a bit.

2:25? Her marathon yesterday was already worth 2:25 under good conditions(Not to mention the abbreviated training of less than two months).

I would expect her to at least surpass Shalane's 2:21.

How was this a tactical race? Keitany blew the doors off the barn. Huddle did not want to go deep and so she ran tactical. Not a bad choice in her first marathon. But after a 10k olympic build up and then a solid 11 weeks of training i would have thought 2.26. Nice effort but not a Salazar debut and she is just as accomplished.

Just wondering, doesn't Type A seem a bit too light for the marathon?