What's a successful run for Gwen Jorgensen on Sunday in Chicago?

With luck, 2:30:05-10. Pushing her lucky day Mid 2:29-s. Her goals ignore an army of possibly doped Ethiopians, Kenyans and of course...obviously doped Russians. After Sunday we will see what possibilities she has to make it through the Olympic Qualifying marathon, unless she moves and runs for Puerto Rico where a sub 2:36 will get her in. Good luck to her, but once reality hits her face she will be thinking that Olympic top 10 isn't that bad at all.

I got an idea. Let's talk some more about a person we already talk too much about.

If she breaks 230 maybe she'll make the team

If she makes the team maybe she'll win gold

However improbable these predictions, I suppose if you don't mind sounding like a clueless housewife you can argue that she will?

doctorj wrote:

With luck, 2:30:05-10. Pushing her lucky day Mid 2:29-s. Her goals ignore an army of possibly doped Ethiopians, Kenyans and of course...obviously doped Russians. After Sunday we will see what possibilities she has to make it through the Olympic Qualifying marathon, unless she moves and runs for Puerto Rico where a sub 2:36 will get her in. Good luck to her, but once reality hits her face she will be thinking that Olympic top 10 isn't that bad at all.

Don't forget the squadron of doped American athletes, or the brigade of Canadian dopers, I think Jamaica has a least a platoon of dopers I'd have to check the casualties list, china has a nation of dopers, India is so doped it can't even participate shame on you India

Sub 2:30 would be a success, and a reasonable benchmark at this stage - unless she really goes for the Olympic Trials standard only, with a 78:30 / 73:30 split and ends up running 2:34. Much faster than 2:30 would be a big surprise (and would make her favourite to make the team, given the trajectory), slower, particularly with a positive split, would be a setback.

I agree that she hasn't proven (at least publicly) that she's cut out for the marathon, the Olympic/ITU triathlon really doesn't require the same kind of endurance. However, that only makes it more intriguing and makes her move more compelling.

correction, 78:30/75:30 for 2:34

Should have stayed with the Triathlon. It will be tough to make the Olympic marathon team.

800 dude wrote:

My point is that her past performances and background DO indicate that her goals are reasonable. And no male runner would get crucified for announcing an ambitious marathon goal if he had the times at shorter distances to back it up, as Gwen does.

...

Does she really have the times at shorter distances to back it up?

Don't get me wrong ... 15:15/31:55/70:58 are fine times but none of them scream "I have a chance of marathon gold in Tokyo!"

To put it in context, what if the significantly faster Emily Infeld (14:56/31:20) or Emily Sisson (15:02/31:25/68:21) had said the same thing? I think they'd both get similarly crucified for being just a bit delusional.

And her background in another sport is irrelevant, especially one that in reality is a bit of a haven for runners who quit athletics because they weren't quite good enough to make a significant impact (e.g., the Brownlee brothers, Non Stanford, Emma Pallant, Beth Potter & Georgia Taylor-Brown - and they're just the British ones.)

Jemima Sumgong 16:51/34:02 (obviously not indicative of what she was capable of)

Constantina Dita 15:28/31:49

Tiki Gelana 15:17/31:27

Mizuki Noguchi 15:30/31:20

Naoko Takahashi 15:21/31:48

Roba NT/NT ??? (just road PRs)

Yegorova NT/NT (just road PRs)

Mota 15:22/32:46

Joanie 15:43/32:07

Gwen has a faster 5000m PR than any women's Olympic Gold Medalist.

Should pick it up from context, but I meant to say a faster 5000m PR than any women's Olympic marathon gold medalist.*

george oscar bluth wrote:

Jemima Sumgong 16:51/34:02 (obviously not indicative of what she was capable of)

Constantina Dita 15:28/31:49

Tiki Gelana 15:17/31:27

Mizuki Noguchi 15:30/31:20

Naoko Takahashi 15:21/31:48

Roba NT/NT ??? (just road PRs)

Yegorova NT/NT (just road PRs)

Mota 15:22/32:46

Joanie 15:43/32:07

Gwen has a faster 5000m PR than any women's Olympic Gold Medalist.

Women's marathon running has moved on the last 2 or 3 years though - look at all the recent sub-2:19 clockings by a number of athletes. That means you'll need to be in 2:18 shape or better to win in Tokyo 2020 and very close to that to just make the podium.

What does a 2:18 marathoner need to be capable of at the half-marathon? 66:30 or better? Does anyone seriously believe that Jorgensen could get anywhere close to Molly Huddle's AR, never mind beat it by a minute? My point stands - there is nothing in her history that suggests she's going to be capable of getting anywhere near the gold medal.

Does your point stand? You said that her times at the shorter distances don't indicate gold medal potential. The facts are that it does indicate gold medal potential.

Do I think she will win gold? No. She will have a hard time just making the team. But it is factually inaccurate to say 15:15 doesn't indicate the necessary talent.

.....

WHAT MANY of you fail to realize is Gwen ean her 15:15 pb only 6 months after she had a baby according to articles and that means she had even less time as a FULLTIME runner. Now late 2018 about a year as a fulltime runner a 2:25 would be a beyond words and 2:28-2:29 mid would be enough to convince me with 2 years more if high mileage she has the talent to run 2:22-2:23.

Six months of training and runs 15:15 and SHE WASN'T a fulltime runner,before that, you guys arent grasping how impressive that is for any female!!!@

Special wrote:

you'll need to be in 2:18 shape or better to win in Tokyo 2020 and very close to that to just make the podium.

That is a possibility.

It is also possible for it to be a "typical" Olympic marathon, being slow(ish) at the start, especially if the high temperatures most are expecting actually happen on the day.

And then Gwen's 5k speed may work really well in her favor.

If I were her coach, unless I could see she could run the 2:18 you mention, I would focus, first, on making the team, and then prepare to run 2:26-2:27 pace in hot conditions for the first 20-22 miles and pick it up from there.

Obviously I don't know Gwen well enough as an athlete so this is just speculation.

But yes, her 5k speed could come into play.

george oscar bluth wrote:

Does your point stand? You said that her times at the shorter distances don't indicate gold medal potential. The facts are that it does indicate gold medal potential.

Do I think she will win gold? No. She will have a hard time just making the team. But it is factually inaccurate to say 15:15 doesn't indicate the necessary talent.

What about 53:13 mins for 10 miles and 70:58 for the half? Nowhere close to gold medal potential. Could she get those down to the 50:30 and 66:30 areas that would indicate gold medal potential? I very much doubt it. At 32 years old you don't do that without a midnight delivery from your local pharmacy.

I think a lot of people (including Gwen herself!) are overestimating how much more she'll be able to improve with more running training. She's already had years and years of endurance training so she's nowhere near starting from scratch.

But you said none of them scream gold medal potential. I merely pointed out the inaccuracy of lumping the 15:15 (and frankly the 31:55) into that statement. If you had only said the 70:38, then I wouldn't have corrected you.

"Don't get me wrong ... 15:15/31:55/70:58 are fine times but none of them scream "I have a chance of marathon gold in Tokyo!"

Her background is not irrelevant. Does one have to train for the running portion of the Triathlon? The answer is yes. Does the swimming and cycling also contribute to her overall cardiovascular fitness? The answer is yes. Was she previously a good runner in college? The answer is yes. And she didn't quit, she was recruited into the Triathlon, because she was also a swimmer. She found the nitch she was suited for at the time, and became a gold medalist. No small achievement. As far as her lofty goals.....well shes entitled. She has already shown ability to reach the pinnacle of her previous sport. Track and Field is replete with people who have defied and beat the odds. The question is whether she will have enough time to maximize her potential in the marathon, which typically takes many years of very specific training. We'll see. Should be fun to watch.

Special wrote:

800 dude wrote:

My point is that her past performances and background DO indicate that her goals are reasonable. And no male runner would get crucified for announcing an ambitious marathon goal if he had the times at shorter distances to back it up, as Gwen does.

...

Does she really have the times at shorter distances to back it up?

Don't get me wrong ... 15:15/31:55/70:58 are fine times but none of them scream "I have a chance of marathon gold in Tokyo!"

To put it in context, what if the significantly faster Emily Infeld (14:56/31:20) or Emily Sisson (15:02/31:25/68:21) had said the same thing? I think they'd both get similarly crucified for being just a bit delusional.

Even if Molly Huddle with 14:42.64/30:13.17/1:07:26 (the latter two American records!), said she was aiming for gold in the Olympic marathon, we'd think she had gone insane because there will be women there who have run the marathon 10 minutes faster than her. At the same time, what else is a person who already owns a gold medal going to shoot for? My opinion is that sub 2:30 in Chicago would show tremendous progress for Gwen and put her on track for being able to compete for a spot on the US team. If the goal is Olympic gold and if conditions are good, she has to run quite a bit faster. Maybe sub 2:24-2:25 in good conditions would indicate an acceptable rate of progress toward being in 2:20 shape for the Olympics and having a shot at running for gold if everything breaks right.

To rephrase the original question:

What will it take to quiet the letsrun haters?

I think the answer is 2:27. Anything slower and it's easy to argue against her odds of making the team. Anything faster would be a good sign hat she's progressing towards the trials.

Do I think she will run 2:27? No. Probably 2:28:45, or at worst 2:31

I would say her background as an Olympic Champion in Triathlon is somewhat irrelevant. Not as irrelevant as if she was an Olympic champion boxer or gymnast for example, but somewhat irrelevant all the same. Yes, Triathlon involves running but essentially it's a sport for those who are a jack of three trades but a master of none. So, as Olympic Triathlon champion, I think she isn't entitled to be disrespectful to career-long runners and say she can beat them all with a couple of years full-time running training. If she makes the team (a big 'if') she'll meet several athletes in Tokyo who are masters of their trade.