Is that better overall range than a guy with 3:33 / 2:03:05 range?
Is that better overall range than a guy with 3:33 / 2:03:05 range?
Pretty good but Rod Dixon was better!!!!!
81runner wrote:
Pretty good but Rod Dixon was better!!!!!
Exactly. Get back to me when Mo wins NYCM in 2:03:36. At that point he is still more than two seconds off 3:26.00compared to 1.5 sec for Rod in '74.
Incorrect.
Not worth debating such a comparison.
Anyone else?
3:28 in Monaco is is like 3:30/31 everywhere else.
Incorrect. A 3:28 in Monaco is a 3:28 everywhere else. Don't be stupid.
Kiwi Smile wrote:
81runner wrote:
Pretty good but Rod Dixon was better!!!!!
Exactly. Get back to me when Mo wins NYCM in 2:03:36. At that point he is still more than two seconds off 3:26.00compared to 1.5 sec for Rod in '74.
The credit given to old-time runners competing in the shallow amateur eras is absurd.
3:33 is weaker than 3:28, and 2:08:59 is weaker than 2:06:21.
Guys like Gebrselassie who have PB combinations like 3:31/2:03:59 deserve a place in the conversation, but guys like Dixon who have utterly inferior PBs do not.
Seyta wrote:
Kiwi Smile wrote:
Exactly. Get back to me when Mo wins NYCM in 2:03:36. At that point he is still more than two seconds off 3:26.00compared to 1.5 sec for Rod in '74.
The credit given to old-time runners competing in the shallow amateur eras is absurd.
3:33 is weaker than 3:28, and 2:08:59 is weaker than 2:06:21.
Guys like Gebrselassie who have PB combinations like 3:31/2:03:59 deserve a place in the conversation, but guys like Dixon who have utterly inferior PBs do not.
You mean the pre juice era