Gwen Jorgensen Quitting Tri, Going Full Time Marathon.

Who has a greater upside, Kieffer or Jorgenson?

Who's tapped out the most, can Kieffer squeeze more time out now after a period of high mileage or will Jorgenson be able to drop similar amounts of time?

Who's first to 2:25?

I'm sorry. Call me a hater.

This is absurd and ridiculous. At a bare minimum it is unhealthy for our sport to promote these grand unchecked fantasies boosted by media outlets looking for "clicks". It's a JOKE! Seriously.

To talk of Olympic GOLD, totally skip over being Top 3 at the Trials, skip over the part where you run a time to even give you a chance at top 3 at the Trials, is stupid. It's embarrassing and a total sham. Average people on social media believe this crap and will actually consider her a legit medal contender.

How is anyone embracing this garbage?

I would have much more respect if her stated goal was to make the Olympic Team in the Marathon.

ghjghjghjgh wrote:

Who has a greater upside, Kieffer or Jorgenson?

Who's tapped out the most, can Kieffer squeeze more time out now after a period of high mileage or will Jorgenson be able to drop similar amounts of time?

Who's first to 2:25?

My vote is Kieffer.

Jorgenson has a MASSIVE aerobic base already, yes she needs more running in her legs but I don't see a 2:25.

Whellan Dowd wrote:

I kinda like the reasoning she's using here:

I was a solid college runner.

I became an Olympic Gold Medal triathlete.

Therefore, I can become an Olympic Gold Medal runner.

Maybe she's kidding about winning the Oly Marathon. Who knows? Before she ran NYCM last year, she said she was only doing it as a bucket list item, and suddenly she thinks a 2:41 after 6 or 7 years as a pro endurance athlete gives her a real shot?

She ran 15:52 and 33:30ish in college. Means she can probably get near 2:30 for the marathon with dedicated training. But that's 5 minutes from what it'll take to even make the team, much less win gold in Tokyo.

Hasay ran 15:51 for 5k at Oregon. Does that mean she can probably only get near 2:30 for the marathon with dedicated training?

There's a difference between competitive high school triathletes making the switch to running only, and a women who regularly dominated the running portion of the international triathlon circuit for years switching to running.

Also, all the people saying she's wrong and disrespectful saying her goal is Olympic gold are stupid. As an Olympic gold medalist in an endurance event, this is the ultimate goal and probably the only way to get motivated for all the work she has to put in. For a lot of elites you need that ultimate carrot to put in the work needed. It doesn't mean she'll do it (she probably won't). But is she going to release a sponsored (drinking red bull) video where she says her goal is to place top 10 at a marathon major? That's a garbage goal and a garbage approach for an elite mindset. Defeatist don't become olympic champions, they spend their time on Letsrun complaining.

sorry for using facts wrote:

Whellan Dowd wrote:

I kinda like the reasoning she's using here:

I was a solid college runner.

I became an Olympic Gold Medal triathlete.

Therefore, I can become an Olympic Gold Medal runner.

Maybe she's kidding about winning the Oly Marathon. Who knows? Before she ran NYCM last year, she said she was only doing it as a bucket list item, and suddenly she thinks a 2:41 after 6 or 7 years as a pro endurance athlete gives her a real shot?

She ran 15:52 and 33:30ish in college. Means she can probably get near 2:30 for the marathon with dedicated training. But that's 5 minutes from what it'll take to even make the team, much less win gold in Tokyo.

Hasay ran 15:51 for 5k at Oregon. Does that mean she can probably only get near 2:30 for the marathon with dedicated training?

Mic drop.

Another armchair athlete spouting incorrect facts.

Nobody yet knows if Tokyo will be a sprint or olympic distance race. Only that a sprint relay also will be included.

The Rio race was her HARDEST race of her career. It was on the hardest ITU bike course ever used with an enormous amount of pressure (think 4 years of sacrifice coming down to one 2 hour race) that was against the reigning Olympic gold medalist (who enigmatically had dodged her for 4 years) who then proceeded to go toe-to-toe with her on the run for 5 miles (something nobody had come close to doing for years). That was an extraordinarily exhausting experience so it's not shocking that she doesn't want to go through that whole process again for years (including living on the road in foreign countries for 10 months of the year) with a newborn all to maybe accomplish at best what she already did in Rio. Plus, Flora Duffy has improved dramatically in the past year and will be very hard to beat even if she were in top shape for Tokyo because Flora is such a better cyclist than any other woman in the world. Tokyo will be all about how much of a lead Duffy gets on the bike and can anyone run her down? With Duffy now running 34s on the run, that is going to be a very tall order. Sadly, the sport never will see a Duffy/Jorgensen Olympic battle with both in prime shape but it's not Jorgensen's job to give fans of the sport something to enjoy watching.

Actual quote hung on Gwen's fridge: "If your dreams don't scare you they're not big enough."

Um, What? wrote:

former pregnant runner wrote:

do you know how pregnancy counting works?! if she really was 10 days pregnant (where did you come up with this number?), then she hadn't even ovulated yet, much less conceived the baby, much less had any symptoms.

Really? You can be pregnant without ovulating or conceiving?

She said in a blog that she was 10 days past conception when she did the New York marathon. She is a CPA so I hope she can count. I think she is really focused, attractive, talented, and she will bring a lot to any sponsor or fan.

She also lives and trains like a monk in terms of self discipline.

Seriously, I'm mad. She's not doing it the right way!

Who are you? The butler on Downton Abbey? Don't be such a stuffed shirt.

Gwen knows how to run. She is a proven competitor. She doesn't have to genuflect to anybody "in front of her".

The more gals we have making a serious attempt, the better our team will be.

If what Flanagan did motivates a whole bunch of folks, I'm all for it.

David S. Pumpkins wrote:

Raysism wrote:

I've coached youth/HS runners who come over from competetive triathlon circuit, and many times they get no faster (and sometimes get slower) because it turns out they're really great triathletes but just good distance runners (when compared to people who are far more talented at pure aerobic running).

There's a difference between competitive high school triathletes making the switch to running only, and a women who regularly dominated the running portion of the international triathlon circuit for years switching to running.

And what's that difference? Are you suggesting that a top triathlete is guaranteed to make huge improvements in the run? Sounds like she was already a good runner -- so why would you expect that she'll get dramatically better? Again, I don't know where she'll end up, but we already know that she was just a good runner in college, so it's not like we don't have a general idea of where she stands against her peers.

Dominating the run portion of a triathlon doesn't tell me anything. She's a better runner than a bunch of non-runners. Okay, fine -- better than the alternative, I suppose, but not proof of much.

YoureahaterJM wrote:

Seriously, I'm mad. She's not doing it the right way!

Who are you? The butler on Downton Abbey? Don't be such a stuffed shirt.

Gwen knows how to run. She is a proven competitor. She doesn't have to genuflect to anybody "in front of her".

The more gals we have making a serious attempt, the better our team will be.

If what Flanagan did motivates a whole bunch of folks, I'm all for it.

Keep clicking those click-bait links buddy! Maybe you can send off for an autograph from the future Olympic Gold Medalist!

Raysism wrote:

I don't put much weight in the 10 mile race, other than it shows me she's a pretty good distance runner. Most pretty good distance runners run high 2:20s/low 2:30s. I don't think she'll ever approach Hasay's marathon times, but who knows I guess.

Why wouldn't you put much weight on her 10-mile race? 53 minutes on a hilly course is something that only a few American women can do. It's objectively a better performance than 2:30. It indicates that her ceiling is very high. The bigger question is whether she can successfully transition to the high mileage that it takes to turn potential into performance at the marathon distance.

The difference is comparing a high school triathlete to the Olympic gold medalist and assuming the same work ethic and affinity for running.

The above poster mentioned a 1s college 5k PR between Jorgensen and Hasay. If you want to compare college running against her peers, how is she nowhere close?

I'm not saying she's the next big thing in American distance running, I'm just saying we can't write her off yet.

800 dude wrote:

Raysism wrote:

I don't put much weight in the 10 mile race, other than it shows me she's a pretty good distance runner. Most pretty good distance runners run high 2:20s/low 2:30s. I don't think she'll ever approach Hasay's marathon times, but who knows I guess.

Why wouldn't you put much weight on her 10-mile race? 53 minutes on a hilly course is something that only a few American women can do. It's objectively a better performance than 2:30. It indicates that her ceiling is very high. The bigger question is whether she can successfully transition to the high mileage that it takes to turn potential into performance at the marathon distance.

I don't think her 10 mile time was better than a 2:30. Those times are roughly equivalent, and I'd give someone like her a much better shot of running fast in a 10 mile race than a marathon. I think her 10 mile time indicates that her ceiling is probably somewhere in the high 2:20s/low 2:30s.

And her beating or coming close to slow twitch monsters like Hall and Hasay is similarly not probative of much.

Look, she's a good runner. But she hasn't done anything running-wise to make one think she's a 2:25 guy (or girl, as it were).

Isn't that the point though? Had Hasay 5 years ago done anything to make us think she was a low 2:20's gal? I suspect we would all say probably not...and at that time she wasn't. However, she kept training and now she is.

Gwen hasn't done much focused running training. So she might improve. That's hit and miss for athletes switching sports, but you just don't know. I feel pretty confident saying that Gwen will challenge 2:30. Whether she will run 2:25 or better...who knows? I think being able to hop in a 10M race like that and crank out 53 min shows some potential, but much of that depends on just how much her body responds to the extra running training and specificity that comes with being a full time runner.

Reality Really Bites wrote:

Another armchair athlete spouting incorrect facts.

Nobody yet knows if Tokyo will be a sprint or olympic distance race. Only that a sprint relay also will be included.

It's definitely going to be a sprint distance race.

The whole point of adding the mixed relay was that they could add another event without adding more athletes. If they really want the relay to have the racers at their best, the main race is most definitely going to be a sprint vs. standard distance. Add the fact that the broadcasters, the head of ITU, etc all have stated they prefer sprint distance as it makes for better viewing and it's essentially a done deal. All the triathletes are planning on it.

Jerry Maguire wrote:

I'm sorry. Call me a hater.

This is absurd and ridiculous. At a bare minimum it is unhealthy for our sport to promote these grand unchecked fantasies boosted by media outlets looking for "clicks". It's a JOKE! Seriously.

To talk of Olympic GOLD, totally skip over being Top 3 at the Trials, skip over the part where you run a time to even give you a chance at top 3 at the Trials, is stupid. It's embarrassing and a total sham. Average people on social media believe this crap and will actually consider her a legit medal contender.

How is anyone embracing this garbage?

I would have much more respect if her stated goal was to make the Olympic Team in the Marathon.

It's not a joke nor is it disrespectful given the context. She is an olympic gold medalist at the top of her sport. She is "career switching" into another sport that is closely related to that sport.

Consider for example reading an announcement by Eluid Kipchoge that he is quitting marathon running to pursue trying to be a decent domestic elite cyclist in the US. That sounds weird to us, because it frames the goal as someone highly successful setting a comparative goal of relative mediocrity compared to where they were. Yes, if Kipchoge said he was quitting marathons to win the TdF we would all know it's a grandiose fantasy that is very unlikely to ever happen...but it's the only thing that makes sense. You don't quite something you're great at to chase mediocrity elsewhere.

Her dreaming and wanting to chase an Olympic gold is no different than a HS kid dreaming of being a 5000m champion on the track someday. Neither are close to their goals, and neither really have any ideal what they are capable of. Are we going to crucify HS runners for wanting to be great? Why are we doing the same with Gwen?

That's kinda my point, though -- five years ago, Hasay was a senior in college, and we all expected great things to come based on the previous five years. She definitely surprised us all with how she got here, and I'm not saying that we expected her to run a 2:21 so quickly, but... yeah, I think we all expected Hasay to be a great runner five years ago.

That being said, I agree with everything you said. The 10 mile race was great, and she seems like a real talent, but I reject the idea that an "undertrained 2:41" is the equivalent or harbinger of a "trained 2:27" or whatever. She's a 32 year old woman who has done a ton of aerobic work, so I'm skeptical of her ability to improve dramatically. But like you said, it's hit or miss.