Calling it now, Rupp wins Boston 2017 2:07:04, prove me wrong.

i doubt he gets the win but if the weather is average or better he runs at least 2:07.

Colospgdude wrote:

Calling it now, Rupp wins Boston 2017 2:07:04, prove me wrong.

Do you really understand how proving things works?

I was about to start a similar thread, but no way the winning time is 2:07. It will be a tactical 2:09.

I believe the burden of proof lies with you, OP.

thegripper wrote:

I was about to start a similar thread, but no way the winning time is 2:07. It will be a tactical 2:09.

Shouldn't the weatherman have a big say in the winning time? I know he did in both 2011 and 2012. And many other years as well.

Who else (worthy of mention regarding this prediction) is entered? Have many others confirmed yet?

I agree tho

I would love it, but after the Rio marathon, when I really thought he had a chance when all 3 were together, I don't think he has it in him. 2nd or 3rd would be a good finish.

Boston has a damn mountain (hill) @18 miles and cold or rainy weather that causes all kinds of hell @20 to 24 miles so I call your bluff. unless you run there with good conditions (maybe 1 out of 3 years) you are wrong from my experience.

Black Cactus is the goat and gets the top US citizen spot.

Oldie wrote:

Boston has a damn mountain (hill) @18 miles and cold or rainy weather that causes all kinds of hell @20 to 24 miles so I call your bluff. unless you run there with good conditions (maybe 1 out of 3 years) you are wrong from my experience.

I realize it's at a pivotal point in the race, but it's an 88' elevation gain over 600m. Not a mountain, and not much of a hill.

Rupp will win. Relatively soft international field. Honestly, no question.

This is an adidas race. It won't be a soft field.

He doesn't win. Runs 2:10. He was dead those last 3 miles in Rio on a flat course.

That's rather difficult to do. It's also difficult to speculate on who will win a race when many of the elites have yet to be announced. I think Rupp will probably run a good race. The place that this good race nets him will remain to be seen.

Colospgdude wrote:

Calling it now, Rupp wins Boston 2017 2:07:04, prove me wrong.

2:09-2:11. Too concerned with some technical crap at the aid stations, the others put a surge on him to gap him, and he can't catch back up. GAME OVER.

I think it's a lot more likely he wins than sub 2:07. Here's the top ten winning times in the history of the Boston marathon. Only two ever sub 2:07, only seven ever sub 2:08.

2:03:02 Geoffrey Mutai 2011

2:05:52 Robert Kiprono Cheruiyot 2010

2:07:14 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot 2006

2:07:15 Cosmas Ndeti 1994

2:07:34 Moses Tanui 1998

2:07:45 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot 2008

2:07:51 Robert de Castella 1986

2:08:14 Ibrahim Hussein 1992

2:08:19 Gelindo Bordin 1990

2:08:37 Meb Kaflezighi 2014

Plus, the average winning time over the past 5 years is 2:10:32. If the conditions are right it can happen, but I don't think Rupp is much better than most recent Boston winners.

bahston wrote:

I think it's a lot more likely he wins than sub 2:07. Here's the top ten winning times in the history of the Boston marathon. Only two ever sub 2:07, only seven ever sub 2:08.

2:03:02 Geoffrey Mutai 2011

2:05:52 Robert Kiprono Cheruiyot 2010

2:07:14 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot 2006

2:07:15 Cosmas Ndeti 1994

2:07:34 Moses Tanui 1998

2:07:45 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot 2008

2:07:51 Robert de Castella 1986

2:08:14 Ibrahim Hussein 1992

2:08:19 Gelindo Bordin 1990

2:08:37 Meb Kaflezighi 2014

Plus, the average winning time over the past 5 years is 2:10:32. If the conditions are right it can happen, but I don't think Rupp is much better than most recent Boston winners.

Remind me, how many of those runners have gone sub 27 for 10k?

Look forward to Galen's Boston debut. He is definitely a favorite for the win. But disappointed that he did no select London. London would have given him a better chance to go fast, 2:04-2:05.

bahston runnah wrote:

bahston wrote:

I think it's a lot more likely he wins than sub 2:07. Here's the top ten winning times in the history of the Boston marathon. Only two ever sub 2:07, only seven ever sub 2:08.

2:03:02 Geoffrey Mutai 2011

2:05:52 Robert Kiprono Cheruiyot 2010

2:07:14 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot 2006

2:07:15 Cosmas Ndeti 1994

2:07:34 Moses Tanui 1998

2:07:45 Robert Kipkoech Cheruiyot 2008

2:07:51 Robert de Castella 1986

2:08:14 Ibrahim Hussein 1992

2:08:19 Gelindo Bordin 1990

2:08:37 Meb Kaflezighi 2014

Plus, the average winning time over the past 5 years is 2:10:32. If the conditions are right it can happen, but I don't think Rupp is much better than most recent Boston winners.

Remind me, how many of those runners have gone sub 27 for 10k?

Listen, I don't think many of us would disagree that if this was going to be an evenly paced attempt to run fast that Rupp would excel. The issue is that Boston won't have pacers, and you can bet your bottom dollar that Rupp isn't pushing anything the first 30km. So if no one goes out there and gets on it (Hall, 2011). Then there will not be sub 208.

Even odds at 210.