It was a stunt and it failed. No controversy there.
It was a stunt and it failed. No controversy there.
Rojo, you hit the rock bottom. /kipchoge's attempt today is one of the most sensational run ever. How he grimanced, struggled but still managed to pull himself together and made it below 2:00:30 gave me huge goosebumps. It's even more impressive than what Kimetto did three years ago. In my eyes he already broke the WR.
Failed the mission (sub-2)? Yes. But they still have won all the applause.
Not a Nike fan by any means, but I admire what they did these two years, or we couldn't witness one of the greatest run ever..
MarathonMind wrote:
It was a stunt and it failed. No controversy there.
Agreed, it was a stunt. Essentially, a 2 hour Nike ad.
Yes, it failed at the primary goal. But in business, politics, and even sports, it's possible to fail at a primary goal and in the process still accomplish major other goals. To label such a thing as a failure is the pitfall of binary thinking. The m.o. of a simpleton who fails to appreciate what just happened.
Bring Back the 880 wrote:
What did the stunt accomplish? Convince people that Kipchoge is amazing? We already knew that. Waste of a spring for the 'thon GOAT.
At least he got a nice pay day out of it.
1) Served as a decent proof of concept.
2) Months of Nike marketing
3) Kevin Hart got more exposure
rec running wrote:
Bring Back the 880 wrote:What did the stunt accomplish?
For me, what it accomplished is that I don't need to go chasing after those amazing super-hoaky carbonic shoes. The shoes made no difference.
How do you know the shoes made no difference? He wore them and ran faster than anyone has in a legit marathon (including downhill wind aided Boston several years ago).
MarathonMind wrote:
It was a stunt and it failed. No controversy there.
If you consider it a stunt and all these folks are talking about it, then I would say it was a success.
grass blade wrote:
MarathonMind wrote:It was a stunt and it failed. No controversy there.
Agreed, it was a stunt. Essentially, a 2 hour Nike ad.
Yes, it failed at the primary goal. But in business, politics, and even sports, it's possible to fail at a primary goal and in the process still accomplish major other goals. To label such a thing as a failure is the pitfall of binary thinking. The m.o. of a simpleton who fails to appreciate what just happened.
I would say it was several months long with a 2hr ad at the end.
Plus KEVIN HART!!!!!
Confused by the name wrote:
If Nike's measure of success wasn't breaking 2 hours, maybe Nike shouldn't have called it the Breaking2 project.
Well I’m not a marketing guy, but “Sell more shoes project†and “A bit over2 project†don’t sound as good.
I'm fine with a casual/non track fan focusing on the fact they didn't break 2, that was what was hyped. Any true track fan (which I thought this websites founders were) focusing on it is insane when we just witnessed one of the most incredible performances of all time. Posting about the fact Kipchoge would FAIL rather than celebrating how incredible he is points to some bias in the website. I know they don't like Nike and honestly I'm not a big fan either but I'm not a douche and blindly hate them/try to detract from them.
Oh my goodness... wrote:
It proved that technically, its possible.
It actually proved quite the opposite. That as of now, technically, it is impossible.
WSJ is not the only outlet to take a "negative" approach, if you will. CNN.com's headline was about who the "elusive two-hour marathon barrier remains unbroken. I saw a few other headlines along those lines.
Dennis T Reynolds wrote:
Any true track fan (which I thought this websites founders were) focusing on it is insane when we just witnessed one of the most incredible performances of all time.
Any true athletics fan knows this performance is not comparable to real marathons and has no idea if it was good or not.
gahuga wrote:
Rojo:
First, "the writer doesn't write the headlines" isn't really true, 100% of the time. I know this because I'm a journalist and I write my own headlines. At previous jobs, I didn't -- just saying, she may or may not have done her own headline.
Second, if you really don't understand why your "just reporting the fact" that "LetsRun will be proven correct" is immature and unprofessional, the mass of posters on here will never, ever be able to help you understand. You led with "I'm totally right!" and only then moved into the fact that Kipchoge wasn't going to get sub-2, as it if were the second-most important bit of info you had to deliver. Gloat first, fact second -- does this help? This is ignoring the fact that your saying "they totally won't break two!" wasn't some bold damn prediction -- I'd bet the majority of people watching didn't think they could do it. I was sure they would fail, and was rooting like hell that EK would prove me wrong. Your stupid tweet made it sound like you were rooting for them to fail just so the entity LetsRun could be proven correct.
For all that LetsRun does for our sport, it has a reputation for smugness and smarminess of this exact kind, and that doesn't help the reaction you get. If you guys had never posted something like that before (or, similarly, awkwardly side-angled a reference to Wejo pacing Paula or finishing fourth at USA's in a non-championship year into an unrelated or barely-related article), you'd probably be forgiven more easily.
100%.
All you complainers dissing on Rojo are morans.
Social Faux Paw wrote:
All you complainers dissing on Rojo are morans.
Rojo is a Moran
Lenny Leonard wrote:
1. It did fail.
2. Sara is about as well known a running journalist as anyone these days. She's been on the flotrack podcast multiple times, and her brother Philo was on Syracuse's national title team.
Yay for her on all that. But she still treated one of the most amazing efforts I have ever seen from a human with no respect. So let's just use her language and say that her 'stunt' 'fell short' of being worth reading.
I would have only considered this event to be a failure if they didn't run faster than the world record. The fact of the matter is that Kipchoge proved that running sub-2:00 is not a pipe dream. It is now conceivable that someone will run sub-2:00 in the next 5-10 years. That is a HUGE mindset shift for our sport.
And it's exactly why the WSJ was, yes, obnoxious. Author barely even mentioned the incredible athletic achievement that just went down. Instead, she took an opportunity to take shots a Nike (which I don't really care about, but it's not news).
Rockgip wrote:
It is now conceivable that someone will run sub-2:00 in the next 5-10 years.
On a pogo stick.
That is a HUGE mindset shift for our sport.
Sure, expect spectacular blow ups in the second half of marathons now.
Bring Back the 880 wrote:
What did the stunt accomplish? Convince people that Kipchoge is amazing? We already knew that. Waste of a spring for the 'thon GOAT.
At least he got a nice pay day out of it.
It made the top of cnn.com and usatoday.com. What other running stunt does that? Well, besides Bolt.