Galen Rupp PR 90th on 2017 fastest marathons time list

Instead of conversion factors what if you go with the tried and true method of head to head racing? Of the 89 people ahead of Rupp so far on the 2017 marathon list, how many of them ran Rio, Boston 2017, or Chicago 2017?

Beautiful Day wrote:

The following thread is awesome. Someone said if you took six Ryan Halls and six Galen Rupps, the Rupps would all run mid-2:09, and the Halls would finish anywhere from 2:05 to 2:10, with a DNF.

The way I look at it, if you lined up every elite marathoner who competed this year ON THE DAY THEY RACED, and they somehow all raced at once, Galen Rupp might lose to more than 100 guys.

I am certainly not a Rupp excuse maker, however, how many of those faster times were run in 60 plus degree temps? I would guess not many. Rupp has been unlucky to have run Boston and Chicago in 70 degree temps. This slows you at least 5-10 seconds per mile, which over a thon is 2 to 3 total minutes. I believe both Boston and Chicago were 2:06-07 efforts. I keep saying that I can't wait for him to get in London or Berlin and run 2:05-06. I have little doubt he will at either of those cool temp, fast course, and great competition thons.

Remind us where is he on the list of 10k for the past 5y?

Well, Rupp didn't medal at the Olympics this year. (Obviously)

And is Chicago still considered a major?

You typically rank marathons by their performances.

And you rank wins based on who you beat.

And you rank who you beat based in how fast they have run or have run recently.

So....

At some point it comes down to running fast.

The only way to rank a hundred marathoners who don't face each other all year is by how fast they ran.

The real good runners don't run Boston and Chicago.

If you want to know how good you are, run London and Berlin.

If he lined up in those races there would be no debate on how good he is on the year compared to the rest of the world.

Star wrote:

Well, Rupp didn't medal at the Olympics this year. (Obviously)

And is Chicago still considered a major?

You typically rank marathons by their performances.

And you rank wins based on who you beat.

And you rank who you beat based in how fast they have run or have run recently.

So....

At some point it comes down to running fast.

The only way to rank a hundred marathoners who don't face each other all year is by how fast they ran.

The real good runners don't run Boston and Chicago.

If you want to know how good you are, run London and Berlin.

If he lined up in those races there would be no debate on how good he is on the year compared to the rest of the world.

So what you're saying is that the world record holder is not a real good runner? Got it.

imagine being the guy who looked this up & started this thread. damn.

Some really sad people around here since Rupp won Chicago.

Most of the current top 50 marathoners in the world haven't run in the Olympic marathon and wont ever get the chance.

He is what he is, a 2:09 runner

2:09 runner wrote:

He is what he is, a 2:09 runner

Correct, he is a 2:09 marathoner. Yet for some reason 2:05/2:06 marathoners can't beat him.

Star wrote:

The real good runners don't run Boston and Chicago.

If you want to know how good you are, run London and Berlin.

If he lined up in those races there would be no debate on how good he is on the year compared to the rest of the world.

Abel Kirui was 4th at London this year, just a few seconds behind 3rd placer Bedan Karoki. Considering Rupp beat Kirui by quite a bit at Chicago, I think it's reasonable to suggest that Rupp could have been 3rd at London. Top 3 at London means you are a pretty good runner. Hopefully he actually does run London next year so we'll know for sure.

2:09 runner wrote:

He is what he is, a 2:09 runner

To only focus on time completely disrespects his accomplishments and what he is as an elite marathoner. Let's not forget he ran his 2:09s and 2:10s in RACES. Last time I checked the point of these is to COMPETE and BEAT PEOPLE. If you disagree please let me know.

I'm amazed at the love time trial specialists are starting to get on Letsrun, it's honestly hilarious.

missing equivalent conversions wrote:

Except that you are ignoring the conversion factors from the hot temperatures in Chicago, how fast Rupp closed, the fact that Rupp beat the WR holder in the marathon, got 2nd in Boston, and almost got gold in the Olympics, so that Rupp's 2:09:20 converts to a much faster time. With the right conversion factors, Rupp is at least in the top 5 fastest marathon time this year and probably would be number 1, with a slight question mark about whether he's actually faster than Kipchoge or not. However, given their ages, Rupp will just get faster and Kipchoge will get slower so in a head to head matchup I would take Rupp over Kipchoge. All Rupp knows how to do is win.

h

Sorry, Rupp close to get gold at the olympics? The marathon? Lay down the pipe bro, he wasn’t even close. I hope you are talking about the 10k at London.

Let’s look at Rupp’s accomplishments and times, without all the commentary and analysis (could have, has beaten a 2:05 runner etc)

3rd place olympic marathon 2:10

Chicago 1st place- 2:09:20

Silver in 10k london

5k best- 12:58

10k best 26:44

Now back to me-

Each one would think, compared to other elite runners how good this is.

For now... wrote:

So what you're saying is that the world record holder is not a real good runner? Got it.

Will you stop with this? Everybody and their grandmother beat the world record holder this year. Everybody.

You guys need to let Dennis go. He ran that several years back, he's not the same runner obviously. Fact is, Rupp (the marathoner) has run nothing but slow times, and the two races where he's had a chance to keep up and run faster, he's faded.

Do all the voodoo math you want. Rupp is a 2:09 guy. And the world keeps showing us 2:04 and 2:05 guys all the time. Run at Berlin or London and settle this, Rupp.

wow nobody gives a shit!

Good times are killing me wrote:

Some really sad people around here since Rupp won Chicago.

+1,000,000

Beautiful Day wrote:

I suspected Rupp's 2:09.20 Chicago win would not be among the best 100 times this year in marathoning. Following Amsterdam, Rupp fell back several more spots, given that a lot of guys finished nearly a mile ahead of his virtual showing.

Does anyone think Rupp will be among the top 100 following Fukuoka?

https://www.iaaf.org/records/toplists/road-running/marathon/outdoor/men/senior/2017

OP,

Can someone tell me where Centro's gold winning time in Rio would rank on the 2016 1500 performance list?

I thought the point of a race for a pro was to win it.