rojo wrote:
I just wish they would tell us what the hell they are going to do . If the only gimmick is a car pacing them or rabbits hopping in or out, then I'm fine with a "how fast can we run attempt".It won't be anywhere close to 2:00:00 but he's certainly capable of breaking the fastest time ever run if he basically ran a marathon on the track.
But they stated very early on "This won't be record eligible" and here we are 3 + months later and we still don't know what is going to make this ineligible for a WR attempt. Please tell us . Now. At least two of my fears - downhill or a motor/spring in the shoe appear to no be it.
I'm not at all "fine with a 'how fast can we run attempt.'" If it results in a sub-2 performance, it will forever diminish the achievement of the first legitimate sub-2 marathon, since it's very clear that most people -- even most moderately enthusiastic running fans -- don't appreciate the distinction between a legitimate marathon time and an aided performance. (Consider, for example, the performance of G. Mutai at the 2011 Boston marathon, which was often cited as the fastest marathon ever run, and which the Boston race organizer sought to have recognized as the world record. And Ryan Hall's performance there has frequently been described and advertised as the fast marathon ever run by an American, with Hall himself claiming to be a 2:04 marathoner, thereby diminishing the superior accomplishments of the U.S. record holder.) To me, it's appalling that Nike is seeking to rob the world of the excitement of witnessing one of the landmark achievements in the sport, apparently for no better reason than to grab a little more publicity for its latest shoe models. If the people at Nike truly cared about the sport as much as they care about short-term profits, I don't think that they would be doing this.