Damn Jerry Schumacher's marathoners suck

The simple answer is non of them are committed to the marathon. They all have one foot on the track. Nike contracts provide financial stability such that they can run 13:10/27:30 and know that they’ll still bring home the bacon. Truly committing to marathon training, and running fast, isn’t a requirement for them to succeed financially. Why risk a cushy contract and world class support to run a few minutes faster when it might mean burning out or getting injured?

George T Stagg wrote:

The simple answer is non of them are committed to the marathon. They all have one foot on the track. Nike contracts provide financial stability such that they can run 13:10/27:30 and know that they’ll still bring home the bacon. Truly committing to marathon training, and running fast, isn’t a requirement for them to succeed financially. Why risk a cushy contract and world class support to run a few minutes faster when it might mean burning out or getting injured?

When's the last time Derrick or Bumby ran 13:10/27:30?

As an aside I'm curious as to how much those two make annually. I doubt it's "cushy".

patti wrote:

Noooo, Galen won...A win is a win.

(And I am sure he's working on a zippety do dah time)

So winning something like the Marine Corp Marathon should be just as good.

2:12 is pretty good for being a clean athlete

Supertramp wrote:

I did not realize Bumbalough had already moved to the marathon, seems early but I guess not that early.

He's 30 with not much success on the track. I don't know how that could seem early. I'd argue that he's years late.

wejo wrote:

Have any of Jerry's guys tried a marathon in their prime? My only beef with Jerry's guys in the marathon is some of them acting like 2:12 is ok.

Where are you seeing this? I see his guys okay with 2:12 or 2:13 for their very first marathon. I haven't seen any quotes to suggest that's their end goal. Doesn't it make sense to set reasonable expectations for a distance you haven't run before and are new to?

IMissSpicey wrote:

wejo wrote:

Have any of Jerry's guys tried a marathon in their prime? My only beef with Jerry's guys in the marathon is some of them acting like 2:12 is ok.

Where are you seeing this? I see his guys okay with 2:12 or 2:13 for their very first marathon. I haven't seen any quotes to suggest that's their end goal. Doesn't it make sense to set reasonable expectations for a distance you haven't run before and are new to?

Leaving aside whether 2:12-13 is a good marathon debut in 2017, this is what bothers me about BTC: Instead of learning how to train for and race the marathon, Derrick will spend the next spring and summer focusing on the track where he'll get outkicked. Then maybe try another fall marathon where he'll run around 2:12 again and use the track season as an excuse for why he's still not a marathoner yet.

wejo wrote:

Have any of Jerry's guys tried a marathon in their prime? My only beef with Jerry's guys in the marathon is some of them acting like 2:12 is ok.

27 low/mid guys I feel should be shooting much better even first time out in my book. This coming from a guy who only ran 2:18.

Jerry's former athletes - Bairu and Tim Nelson were definitely in their prime when they attempted marathons. Both mid 27 guys who shot for sub - 2:09s in their debuts and a couple marathons after that. guess what they ended up 2:14-2:18.

So Bumby and Derrick gunning for 2:12-2:13 in their debuts is SMART. You should know better than this wejo, the marathon is about experience. Bumby didn't have a good one this time in Chicago, but Derrick had a great (smart) debut. I do only expect Derrick to run a 2:09 pr though.

And the marathon is not for everyone. a great 10k time guarantees nothing over the marathon. Its a decent baseline for some, but thats it.

(smh) wrote:

And the marathon is not for everyone. a great 10k time guarantees nothing over the marathon. Its a decent baseline for some, but thats it.

I agree. But with BTC, nobody can put a decent marathon together.

Like usual, Rojo's arguments are about as strong as a wet paper towel.

Did Geb or Kenny B run marathons during their prime? What about Carlos Lopes?

Rojo, since you're always on the war path for dirty athletes.... why do you always support Paula when she is AT LEAST as suspect as Al Sal?

Jerry's Boys wrote:

(smh) wrote:

And the marathon is not for everyone. a great 10k time guarantees nothing over the marathon. Its a decent baseline for some, but thats it.

I agree. But with BTC, nobody can put a decent marathon together.

I disagree -- if 3 or 4 of those guys could run the marathon as a relay, I think they could put a decent marathon together.

Jerry's Boys wrote:

Leaving aside whether 2:12-13 is a good marathon debut in 2017, this is what bothers me about BTC: Instead of learning how to train for and race the marathon, Derrick will spend the next spring and summer focusing on the track where he'll get outkicked. Then maybe try another fall marathon where he'll run around 2:12 again and use the track season as an excuse for why he's still not a marathoner yet.

Big deal. Derrick's 27 he has years to run marathons, so what if he goes for one more track season?

This is just a weird complaint when the n for Jerry's athlete's doing the marathon is so small. Give them a few years and then see what they do.

dude what wrote:

When's the last time Derrick or Bumby ran 13:10/27:30?

As an aside I'm curious as to how much those two make annually. I doubt it's "cushy".

I'm pretty sure that Derrick is not doing well when compared to his Stanford classmates.

It would be interesting to look at his annual income and compare it to the 10th guy on the Stanford XC team in his senior year.

IMissSpicey wrote:

Big deal. Derrick's 27 he has years to run marathons, so what if he goes for one more track season?

This is just a weird complaint when the n for Jerry's athlete's doing the marathon is so small. Give them a few years and then see what they do.

I don't think it's a weird complaint at all when his group has produced zero sub 2:11 guys ever. From that fact alone, there's no argument to be had. Are they a track focused group? Yes. Do they suck at the marathon? Yes. Bairu, Nelson, Tegenkamp, Derrick, Bumbalough. There are mitigating factors for why all these guys haven't run a respectable marathon, but the fact remains that they have not performed well as a group at the distance.

dude what wrote:

George T Stagg wrote:

The simple answer is non of them are committed to the marathon. They all have one foot on the track. Nike contracts provide financial stability such that they can run 13:10/27:30 and know that they’ll still bring home the bacon. Truly committing to marathon training, and running fast, isn’t a requirement for them to succeed financially. Why risk a cushy contract and world class support to run a few minutes faster when it might mean burning out or getting injured?

When's the last time Derrick or Bumby ran 13:10/27:30?.

Derrick has run sub-28 3 times in his career: in 2012, he ran 27:31 at Payton Jordan, and then 27:40 at the OT. Third time sub-28 was a 27:38 in a meet in Japan last November. He has run sub-13:15 five times: in 2013, he ran 13:12 (indoors), 13:08, and 13:09. In 2014, he ran 13:08 and 13:14.

Bumbalough ran 13:12 in 2013 and 13:13 in 2014. His best 10,000 is 27:56, from 2013.

Swedish marathoner Anders Szalkai ran a 2:12 marathon off 14,29/29,59 PB´s. A sub-28 10k runner should be able to run sub 2,10 in his sleep.

Rojo,

Honest question, Rojo: why do you delete comments when they are genuine questions or comments? Do you delete posts that are directed to other posters?

I asked you two questions. Instead of addressing them, you deleted them. Cowardice!

Are you running a scam? Is someone paying you for a certain bent on things.

I'll report back when this is deleted.

USA men's marathon has had some excellent runners, but even when there have been some excellent, internationally competitive runners at the top of the USA ranks, overall the ranks have never or rarely been very deep. The current 5 year period 2013-2017 that is coming to a close now is an acute example of this. Maybe someone will produce a fast time between now and the end of the year, but probably not. That means, if no fast time is produced in the next couple of months by a USA man, in the five years 2013-2017 only 3 USA men will have run sub-2:10 (Rupp/twice this year (and a 2:10 last year), Keflezighi/Boston 2014, Ritzenhein/Chicago 2013). And behind them, the 'thinness' of the ranks is even more evident: In these five years, only 3 others have run 2:10, and two of those by just a very few seconds: Puskedra 2:10:24/Chicago 2015, Eggleston 2:10:52/Gold Coast 2014, Vail 2:10:57/London 2014.

So, 2:11-2:13 is where almost all of the best USA men's marathoners are performing in this period, which I guess means that Derrick and Bumbalough are representative examples of that larger group. I don't really see this changing any time soon, for anyone in that group. Of course, it is easy to imagine Rupp continuing to run 2:09 and faster. But Keflezighi is at the end of his career, and similar for Ritzenhein. I doubt if Ritzenhein will ever run sub-2:10 again (but who knows -- in any case, he is closer to the end of his career, too). As for the several others in the 2:11-2:13 range, I would not bet on any of them making the step from that range to sub-2:10. For many in the 2:11-2:13 range, it looks like that probably is the top end of their performance range. For others who have fast enough track or half marathon times to produce sub-2:10 marathons, I don't know why that has not happened, except that there are a hell of a lot of factors at work in producing a marathon performance to one's potential, and lots of ways it can go wrong. I will be pleased if the near future of USA men's marathon running proves me wrong on this view of things.