Rupp at 2:06 is nothing to brag about but for the next fastest runner to be 6 minutes behind is beyond pathetic. Seriously dudes, quit reading this and get out and train!
Rupp at 2:06 is nothing to brag about but for the next fastest runner to be 6 minutes behind is beyond pathetic. Seriously dudes, quit reading this and get out and train!
Which loser country do you belong to?
Technically last year we were like the fifth best country in the marathon. Not bad at all. If we had the same pharmacies as they do in east Africa our second best would be in the 2:04 range.
The US Sucks wrote:
2:06 is nothing to brag about!
really? then what would you brag about?
We're still like top five in the marathon wrote:
Technically last year we were like the fifth best country in the marathon. Not bad at all. If we had the same pharmacies as they do in east Africa our second best would be in the 2:04 range.
One fast Marathoner past the age of thirty and all other Marathoners slower than 2:12. You can pretend like that is good if you like. What would you say if next summer, US had one sub-20 200m man. A man past age thirty with a broken leg and all other US 200m sprinters were 21+ guys?
2:01:39
runnerguy315 wrote:
The US Sucks wrote:
2:06 is nothing to brag about!
really? then what would you brag about?
2:01:39 would be a good start
whistling through the graveyard ... wrote:
We're still like top five in the marathon wrote:
Technically last year we were like the fifth best country in the marathon. Not bad at all. If we had the same pharmacies as they do in east Africa our second best would be in the 2:04 range.
One fast Marathoner past the age of thirty and all other Marathoners slower than 2:12. You can pretend like that is good if you like. What would you say if next summer, US had one sub-20 200m man. A man past age thirty with a broken leg and all other US 200m sprinters were 21+ guys?
I agree. The US should incentivize sub 2:12 marathons. How about the government pays 3 million to everyone who breaks 2:10, all on the taxpayer's dime.
Nobody in the US can live comfortably on (at best) $20K in prize money, lots of East Africans can. Money is why.
Ward, Biwott, Derrick, and Fauble all received more appearance money to run on a slow NY course than they would have to run on 3 plus minute faster course at CIM and win.
If all 4 of those guys ran at CIM we would have had 5 Americans under 2:10 and this board would of called it a resurgence.
The US Sucks wrote:
Rupp at 2:06 is nothing to brag about but for the next fastest runner to be 6 minutes behind is beyond pathetic. Seriously dudes, quit reading this and get out and train!
How about maybe YOU quit writing this and go out and train. You think a 2:12 guy isn't training enough and should hang his head in shame? You think he's "only" done 2:12, or 2:15, or 2:20 because he's not training enough? Then what's your excuse for not being faster? If it's just a matter of training enough then get your behind out there, train enough, and prove your point.
HRE wrote:
The US Sucks wrote:
Rupp at 2:06 is nothing to brag about but for the next fastest runner to be 6 minutes behind is beyond pathetic. Seriously dudes, quit reading this and get out and train!
How about maybe YOU quit writing this and go out and train. You think a 2:12 guy isn't training enough and should hang his head in shame? You think he's "only" done 2:12, or 2:15, or 2:20 because he's not training enough? Then what's your excuse for not being faster? If it's just a matter of training enough then get your behind out there, train enough, and prove your point.
Ah, the "you can't criticize anyone unless you are better than them" argument
classic defense mechanism
I saw this thread and it got me thinking. Why doesn't anyone talk about the US men's 1500 runners? Centrowitz ran 3:31.77 but no one else came within 4 seconds of him (Hunter 3:35.90)? Isn't that basically the same type of ineptitude? I mean a second a lap is a lot.
My intuition was pretty accurate. If you want to talk about the 1500 guys, go here:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9180954The US Sucks wrote:
get out and train!
^ not bad advice really.
Top 5 US in 2018:
Galen Rupp 2:06:07
Shadrack Biwott 2:12:52
Jared Ward 2:12:24
Scott Fauble 2:12:28
Chris Derrick 2:13:08
Top 5 US in 1978: (50 years ago!)
Bill Rodgers 2:10:13
Jeff Wells 2:10:15
Randy Thomas 2:11:16
Jack Fultz 2:11:17
John Lodwick 2:14:41
Sorry, 40 years ago.
rojo wrote:
I saw this thread and it got me thinking. Why doesn't anyone talk about the US men's 1500 runners? Centrowitz ran 3:31.77 but no one else came within 4 seconds of him (Hunter 3:35.90)? Isn't that basically the same type of ineptitude? I mean a second a lap is a lot.
My intuition was pretty accurate. If you want to talk about the 1500 guys, go here:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9180954
We have a coaching issue , no understanding on what it takes an athlete to be world class times.
Athletes that are apathetic, ok with being top US athlete, working hard for that standard but no understanding to get to the world class standard.
More concerned with getting shoe deals and posting workouts.
rojo wrote:
I saw this thread and it got me thinking. Why doesn't anyone talk about the US men's 1500 runners? Centrowitz ran 3:31.77 but no one else came within 4 seconds of him (Hunter 3:35.90)? Isn't that basically the same type of ineptitude? I mean a second a lap is a lot.
My intuition was pretty accurate. If you want to talk about the 1500 guys, go here:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9180954
How is bashing home grown talent helpful? A lot of our milers are young and I can't wait to see what they can do this year.
As for the marathon side, there needs to be some balance to the conversation. Rupp is for sure on another level but there are a ton of sub-2:15 guys. 39 includin Rupp. Compare that to 27 in 2016. You can't sit behind a keyboard and tell me that we don't have more depth than years past.
We didn't get great weather at Boston and Chicago this year. You can't fault the top tier of US Marathoning from choosing those two plus NYC (slow course) where they'll get paid much more than going to Berlin/London/Rotterdam/Frankfurt/Toronto etc. There isn't much money in the sport so they go to those races and they do quite well. The US men had a lot of top-10 finishes across those races. Balance comes back in again because domestic races maybe aren't bringing in the same depth of international runners that they used to. I'll wait until after the Olympic marathon to say we should hold our heads in shame. We're competitive to the races we show up to. We had a bronze and 6th place finish in 2016. I think whoever makes it out of our crop of 2:12-2:13 runners have top-10 Olympic potential for sure.
I'm not saying we don't need some more sub-2:10 guys but with the pay structure and difficulty of US majors, we might be waiting for a while. Having the Trials in LA was a mistake in 2016 for that reason. Put the Trials somewhere fast/flat so we can really see what people are capable of. I like Houston in 2012 for that reason.
The US Sucks wrote:
Rupp at 2:06 is nothing to brag about but for the next fastest runner to be 6 minutes behind is beyond pathetic. Seriously dudes, quit reading this and get out and train!
Is it an issue that ties into the NCAA system, maybe too burnt out by the time they're in their mid to late 20s, and the marathon training is just too taxing for their bodies?
Or is it a talent issue? Idk, but it's food for thought. I really don't think it's a money issue, at least on the US side. Maybe the incentives aren't as strong, like it sounds appealing at first and after a few marathon training blocks, nooope.