Who Dat? wrote:
Before I forget: she also agreed with what a few others have said here, that I should be more of a 2:50 or 2:55, as per what I have been able to accomplish in training.
You are not a 2:50 or 2:55 marathoner. You are a 3:02 marathoner. Maybe if you adjust your training and race approach as others have suggested you have the potential to be a 2:50 or 55 guy, but don't say you "should be" anything more than what you've delivered in a race.
I don't think he ever said he "is" a 250-255 marathoner, just that he "should be" one. Maybe or maybe not. I think he has sub-3 potential if he adjusts his training but obviously it's up to him to improve.
"as per what I have been able to accomplish in training" makes it sound to me like he thinks he's there today and he just keeps getting robbed on race day. He 'should be' a 2:50 marathoner based on what he has already done in training is false.
He has consistently spent the past 3 weeks dismissing training advice and suggestions. If he has truly embraced the fact that he's doing some things wrong, maybe some day he "can be" a 2:50 marathoner. But he "should be" what he is, and will continue to be a 3:0x runner until he realizes that.