Timothy Ritchie (2:11:56) And Sara Hall (2:28:10) Win 2017 USATF Marathon Championships At CIM

Sadly the way races shepherd people through finish areas these days makes this kind of interaction impossible.

Solid year for Ritchie - sub-29 at BAA 10k, 62:40 course record with no competition at Hartford Half, and now going under 2:12. Not bad.

Santa Clauze wrote:

Amazing that Timothy Ritchie came back and won that race in such a time after literally quitting running a year ago.

Actually, he's done some training in the past year, so it's not that amazing. But it's still impressive. He's a likable athlete.

Overall? Eh. Aided course + perfect weather = of course times were fast today. If the U.S. Champs were here every year and the money were like it is at Chicago, NY or Boston, you'd see the same depth and then some. A 2:14 at NY is a 2:13 at Boston (in non-windy tears) is a 2:12 at Chicago is a 2:10 at CIM.

Sponsor a 2.12 guy? wrote:

Santa Clauze wrote:

Amazing that Timothy Ritchie came back and won that race in such a time after literally quitting running a year ago. I hope success to the man and that now he can get the sponsors and money that he needs to make a living out of it. I read that one reason that he quit running was due to the complete crap amount of money he got out of it.

I wouldn't sponsor someone doing 2.12 unless there was good evidence there were several minutes more to come.

Well I guess we are all lucky you aren't handing out the sponsorships from your bedroom in your Mom's attic.

The Overexplainer wrote:

Sponsor a 2.12 guy? wrote:

I wouldn't sponsor someone doing 2.12 unless there was good evidence there were several minutes more to come.

Well I guess we are all lucky you aren't handing out the sponsorships from your bedroom in your Mom's attic.

Hey -- enough with the stereotyping. I'll have you know that I don't live in my Mom's attic -- I live in the broom closet under the staircase.

Gregarious Deaf-Mute wrote:

Actually, he's done some training in the past year, so it's not that amazing. But it's still impressive. He's a likable athlete.

Overall? Eh. Aided course + perfect weather = of course times were fast today. If the U.S. Champs were here every year and the money were like it is at Chicago, NY or Boston, you'd see the same depth and then some. A 2:14 at NY is a 2:13 at Boston (in non-windy tears) is a 2:12 at Chicago is a 2:10 at CIM.

CIM is not 2 minutes faster than Chicago unless you're a 4-5 hour marathoner. There are plenty of uphills in the first half despite the general downhill profile. And like Boston, downhills can really screw people over if they are run too fast.

My guess....... wrote:

Good win by Sara. Some muscular looking guy on bike was seen on course yelling at her to "Expect Great Things".

arnold schwarzenegger?

think it was ryan. how was that legal? how was he allowed to be on a bike on the course riding next to her?

HRE wrote:

Scorpion_runner wrote:

As much as I dislike Galen Rupp, He is our only hope.

2:12 for the men? That time wouldn't even make a top 100 time in Kenya or Ethiopia.

America has 2 sub 2:10 guys, Galen and Nathan. That is disgusting.

Yes we are great tactical runners, but we ARE SLOW AS FOCK. It needs to change.

Aside from Kenya, Ethipoia, and Japan, what other country could put forty four guys under 2:20 in one race? Two twelve isn't slow. People from these three countries are really fast.

Alberto ran 2:08 back in 1981! Frank Shorter’s PR was 2:10 and that was in the late 70s

And 2:12 is considered fast in 2017.

This is nothing to celebrate..nothing

There is a reason why Ryan Hall is a legion! Rupp has yet to run faster than his coach.

I just can't take someone all that seriously when they call 2:12 "SLOW AS FOCK." Sorry. Yes, some have run much faster but just because Jupiter and Saturn are bigger than Neptune doesn't mean Neptune is a small planet.

Pathetic

must pay for race HIGHLIGHTS

Great race by Sara. How many women run at that level after having four kids?

HRE wrote:

I just can't take someone all that seriously when they call 2:12 "SLOW AS FOCK." Sorry. Yes, some have run much faster but just because Jupiter and Saturn are bigger than Neptune doesn't mean Neptune is a small planet.

We are talking about elite men's marathon running. Paula Radcliffe ran 2:15, so think about that for a min.

2:12 is slow as hell for men' s elite marathon running, and that is simply the truth.

What on earth have come to in america?

Scorpion_runner wrote:

What on earth have come to in america?

To faster marathon times than all but three countries in the world are normally running.

We still act as a minor un-professional sport. Why don't we post prize money winnings with the race results. My god this is the national champs is it not?

Tennis does it, golf does it, why don't we??

Scorpion_runner wrote:

HRE wrote:

I just can't take someone all that seriously when they call 2:12 "SLOW AS FOCK." Sorry. Yes, some have run much faster but just because Jupiter and Saturn are bigger than Neptune doesn't mean Neptune is a small planet.

We are talking about elite men's marathon running. Paula Radcliffe ran 2:15, so think about that for a min.

2:12 is slow as hell for men' s elite marathon running, and that is simply the truth.

What on earth have come to in america?

There are people in the world that make Billions a year. Billions. So don't tell me about you poor ass million dollar income. You might as well be on food stamps you chump.

I don't know that it's fair to criticize current American marathoners for running 2:12 when we glorify Bill Rodgers for a career of running 2:10-2:15 for almost all of his races. Running 2:12 is still quite fast.

also, with all this talk of times ... this was a national championship, where money was awarded based on place. notably, a lot less money was awarded than at the New York, Chicago, London, Olympic etc marathons of the world. there were not time bonuses (right? or did i miss that) , so it would seem to behoove racers to run tactically and compete against each other rather than focus on running the fastest possible time they could. and because the prize money is a lot less than other marathons on the calendar, "higher quality" aka faster marathoners would be better off, for their careers and bank accounts, to target the big marathons. you're not going to have Shalane choose CIM as her fall race if the first place payout is $20k when she can run NYCM and win $125k (or whatever extremely high dollar amount it is). so given that and slightly slower competition, yeah.... you're not going to have people coming to CIM to run 2:07/2:22.

this seems obvious to me. is there something i missed?

Nope, that about sums it up, but for most on here, it seems like it’s much more enjoyable to rip performances, coaches, teams, looks, choice of clothing even!, than to make a positive comment.

Good for Ritchie but hard to get excited about US male marathoners when a guy from Norway, with a population about as large as the state of Colorado, just ran a 2:05. Our US champion would have been over a mile behind. We need 44 guys running sub 2:12 not sub 2:20.