Can we talk about that Scott Fauble Citius Mag Podcast (December 19, 2018)

If I'm not mistaken, the only US marathon with times in the top 50 list are from Chicago...and I think you could make a pretty good case that Farah realistically belongs inside of that top 15. While we do have a lot of "2:12" guys, I think that if they raced these faster abroad marathons then they could probably have PRs more like 2:09-2:10 at least. For example, I think it's pretty hard to argue that Ward's 6th place Rio 2:11 wasn't worth at least 2:08 on London, Berlin, etc. Yes, US men's marathoning is far behind east Africa, but not as badly as it looks on paper. Marathon selection and $ incentives for Americans just don't make for fast times.

mees94 wrote:

If I'm not mistaken, the only US marathon with times in the top 50 list are from Chicago...and I think you could make a pretty good case that Farah realistically belongs inside of that top 15. While we do have a lot of "2:12" guys, I think that if they raced these faster abroad marathons then they could probably have PRs more like 2:09-2:10 at least. For example, I think it's pretty hard to argue that Ward's 6th place Rio 2:11 wasn't worth at least 2:08 on London, Berlin, etc. Yes, US men's marathoning is far behind east Africa, but not as badly as it looks on paper. Marathon selection and $ incentives for Americans just don't make for fast times.

I correct myself: add New York to the list as well (but everyone knows it's not 'fast')

Seriously mate? wrote:

Does he also realize that Keitany, a woman, ran her second half faster than every American man? I don't care if she walked the first 13.1, this should never, ever happen. The USA men's marathon program is an embarrassment and a joke on the world stage.

Amen, brother.

I listened to this podcast yesterday, and something very significant stood out to me. Though it seems only cursory and superficial at first, I think Fauble's comment on what he would choose between never eating a burrito again or running under 2 hours was a very telltale indicator of where the general overall American marathoner mindset is. Curiously, he chose burritos over a sub 2 hour marathon. Do you think thoughts that soft would even enter the mind of an African bent on running as hard as he can and as fast as he can? Kipchoge is a millionaire, yet lives in a one room dormitory and scrubs toilets when the chores call for it. Look at the non-African guys that excel. They are completely sold out to the idea and pursuit of maximizing themselves: Julien Wanders, The Robertsons , Moen , etc. They're not sitting in coffee shops musing over burrito poetry. C'mon, give me a break. In a subtle way, Fauble's unveiled his commitment in only one simple comment. Yes, American marathoning is in the toilet. I mean, it's bad. American marathoners are not even as good as they were in the early 80's...40 years ago! Time to make a commitment. Get away from the distractions, and really quit half-a$$ing it. Go all in.

Another oddity that stood out to me was his answer to "who would you like a picture of holding your book?' (or some semblance of this question. His answer was Beyoncé. Huh?

I think both sides of the coin can be right here. Scott defended American marathoning and some people here go too far in the other direction. It's disingenuous to talk about American depth at US majors when those races focus on getting the best Americans and only bring in a handful of international runners. That's why we're seeing US runners do better at those races. You see marathons in Europe all the time where there are no Americans and you know that our best runners not named Rupp would have a hard time cracking the top-5 or top-10. BUT the way it works out with the Olympics and countries only being able to send three runners, you can't say that the men and women we've sent the last two cycles haven't done pretty well. I personally think that it'd be good for some US runners to take on London and Berlin instead of NYC and Boston every year (that's why I'm excited if Molly wasn't announced for Boston because she's going to Tokyo/Rotterdam/London). There is no doubt that a lot of domestic runners could improve upon their PRs in the right race. NYC and Boston don't always provide a good opportunity to do that but US runners still run well at those races but then get slammed for having a slow PR. There's some balance to be found in this discussion.

Where did you find this? I couldn't find anything that went deeper than the top 100 or so.

As indicated, whether by intent or accident there is a system. There is money in it, though it comes from multiple sources and can go in multiple directions. USATF helped establish the Team USA centers a couple decades ago with the determined intent to improve on the Olympic team that was sent to Sydney. It worked, we wound up with Meb, Deena, Hall, Sell, Linden coming out of a rising tide. It wasn't only those names, Hansons put quite a few athletes in the top end of the OT field before they ever got one onto an Olympic team. Several of those groups continue today, the aforementioned Hansons, Zap, Mammoth, though with diminished or nonexistent targeted funding aid via USATF. It was a great step forward, yet incremental further steps didn't follow and so the system plateaued and stagnated. Much like the performance of any athlete who doesn't progress their training stimulus.

Regarding old timers, with all due respect I was referring to name runners who were placing at Boston, NYC, and making Olympic teams in the '70s and '80s. The ones who are looked to as guardians of the sport from having notably been at the top of it. Those are people who are actually quoted in the media issuing criticisms from their bully pulpit. They have the perspective to know better, AW and GBTC developed marathoners at least as well as any group in the past 20 years. Yet they don't put up, so they should just shut up.

I don't follow your last sentence at all. Firstly, who from the old days is criticizing? The only criticism I see of today's US marathon runners comes at places like this. Secondly, assuming there are people from that time making criticisms who should shut up if they aren't going to put up, what would putting up look like?

See my first post on this thread. Familiar with put up or shut up? You know, doing the damn thing that AlSal, Hansons, Kastor, Rosario and company are engaged in. As for the names, I've seen it plenty though it's less frequent as top performers from that era fade into irrelevancy. I'm not just making this up, I've seen luminaries from then quoted in print with unhelpful critical sentiments through the years.

I did see your first post. I even replied to it and honestly, the more you write the less I can figure out who or what you're talking about. Are the names you list the luminaries you're talking about? If so, what damn thing are they engaged in and what unhelpful criticisms have they made? Are you talking about other luminaries and if so who are they and what unhelpful critical sentiments have they made over the years? And I still don't get what you'd want any of whomever it is you're have in mind would do if they were to "put up."

Here you go, it's a huge amount of performances going from Kipchoge to 2:35 marathoners:)

Thanks.

Please accept my apology for any lack of clarity.

Garmin_Guy wrote:

For those who haven't listened, the Podcast is available here:

https://soundcloud.com/citiusmag/scott-fauble-2018-nyc-marathon

What brand of shirt is that? I want one. Hot.

Not a College Runner wrote:

I have a better idea

27:30 AMERICANS like Chris Derrick stick to the track instead of cashing in to get blown away by SEVEN MINUTES in a marathon.

I'd look at it another way. What do we have to change in terms of training/culture/etc. to get a 27:30 guy competitive on the world stage? Derrick is a tough case study because he tends to get hurt but he has always demonstrated great endurance, he should not be happy running 2:12s when a guy like Yuki Kawuchi has run 2:08 (no offense to the YUK).

no YOURE hilarious wrote:

Not a College Runner wrote:

I have a better idea

27:30 AMERICANS like Chris Derrick stick to the track instead of cashing in to get blown away by SEVEN MINUTES in a marathon.

I'd look at it another way. What do we have to change in terms of training/culture/etc. to get a 27:30 guy competitive on the world stage? Derrick is a tough case study because he tends to get hurt but he has always demonstrated great endurance, he should not be happy running 2:12s when a guy like Yuki Kawuchi has run 2:08 (no offense to the YUK).

Ok I’ll bite. What coule change is guys like Derrick running a marathon in their prime. As it stands, guys like him only move to the marathon when they are no longer competitive on the track. They also need better incentives. Cushy Nike contracts and support mean they stay within a safe training envelope that mostly guarantees that they train just hard enough, to stay just healthy enough, to run 2:13 and have people hope they’re just one more training cycle from running 2:09.

Citius Mag hates LetsRun, but they use it for free advertising.

She didn't run a faster second half than fauble.

no YOURE hilarious wrote:

Not a College Runner wrote:

I have a better idea

27:30 AMERICANS like Chris Derrick stick to the track instead of cashing in to get blown away by SEVEN MINUTES in a marathon.

I'd look at it another way. What do we have to change in terms of training/culture/etc. to get a 27:30 guy competitive on the world stage? Derrick is a tough case study because he tends to get hurt but he has always demonstrated great endurance, he should not be happy running 2:12s when a guy like Yuki Kawuchi has run 2:08 (no offense to the YUK).

Having them run 10,000 miles before they even start formally training and raising them at 8,000 feet.