I am excited to see this race. Will be interesting to see a hilly course that challenges the softies who only race on flat courses.
I am excited to see this race. Will be interesting to see a hilly course that challenges the softies who only race on flat courses.
Prediction: everyone on LRC goes home devastated when the top-3 all run 2:12 & ya'll lose your minds about how slow we are.
In all seriousness, this is the one time you get everyone in the same place and hyped for the same race. Seems like USATF learned their lesson by not putting the Trials back somewhere super warm but part of the excitement of this race is seeing how everyone stacks up and how fast people can go. Part of the fun of Houston 2012 was that 8 guys went under 2:12. I'm sure Atlanta will be a much better host than LA but the hilly course just changes the dynamics and potentially who makes the team. And not necessarily in a bad way. I think the hills make the 2 and 3 spots truly wide open. It really might be a 2:12-2:14 that takes the 3rd spot. That gives to ton of people a shot to make the team.
maybe i missed something, but why does LRC hate jared ward so much? he was 6th in rio but everyone acts like he sucks and has no shot at making another team
Wolf's Bane wrote:
Screwball Jackson wrote:
These women aint running fast - they are slow pokes allowed to gain entry for political correctness. Women - get off your lazy duff and run faster!
they should use a descending order list for the entries. Top 200 men and women by time on certifies courses can run, as well as anyone who finished in the top 25 at the US marathon or half marathon championships.
Why the hell should 200 (x2) be included by this method? Top 50, max.
Dromano19 wrote:
I am excited to see this race. Will be interesting to see a hilly course that challenges the softies who only race on flat courses.
Yeah, like this wuss:
https://runningmagazine.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/kipchoge_lg-1.jpgNewtotheSouthSide wrote:
Prediction: everyone on LRC goes home devastated when the top-3 all run 2:12 & ya'll lose your minds about how slow we are.
In all seriousness, this is the one time you get everyone in the same place and hyped for the same race. Seems like USATF learned their lesson by not putting the Trials back somewhere super warm but part of the excitement of this race is seeing how everyone stacks up and how fast people can go. Part of the fun of Houston 2012 was that 8 guys went under 2:12. I'm sure Atlanta will be a much better host than LA but the hilly course just changes the dynamics and potentially who makes the team. And not necessarily in a bad way. I think the hills make the 2 and 3 spots truly wide open. It really might be a 2:12-2:14 that takes the 3rd spot. That gives to ton of people a shot to make the team.
The trials course (except for maybe Alamosa '68) isn't really intended to mimic the Olympic marathon course. The point is simply to select people who can prepare to execute against all the variables when it counts most on a given day. Even with a non-flat course and/or non-ideal weather conditions, there are not "a ton" of people who can or will do that. Think about how NYC & Boston OT races played out. And yes, Atlanta can be muggy in February.
ATLienHJ wrote:
That main 6 mile loop is one of my daily circuits...of all the potential options the marathon course designers had here in Atlanta, I don't understand this course they came up with. Though just a hobby jogger, I am not impressed with hairpin turns and those short loops around the block at the north end of the course. They really stretched to try and stick with relatively flat (for Atlanta) asphalt.
Shoot, the Olympic Marathon course from '96 would have been better than this. But it would have shut down miles and miles of two major roads through downtown, midtown, and Buckhead, and this contains the impact of the event to a relatively small area downtown. It's definitely spectator friendly, and Atlanta Track Club's push to brand Atlanta #RunningCityUSA has bordered on the ridiculous over the last year. The ATC's hosting a race on 3/2/19 on the larger 8.2 mile loop. Y'all come down and see it for yourselves.
I run pretty frequently through parts of this course as well, and yeah it's hard for me to understand how they came up with this too. There are plenty of options that wouldn't need turns like they have...
Did they change the course this year for the Atlanta Marathon? Looks less hiller than this one.
This is sort of old news didn't they already decide on Pikes Peak?
FF wrote:
"Why are so many running so fast? More women are running, certainly—and perhaps, getting healthy inspiration on social media.
“There’s no doubt the depth of women’s marathoning in the U.S. has skyrocketed over the past decade,” said Sarah Bishop, a coach and mother of four who qualified at CIM in 2017. “I have to think this is a direct reflection of more women simply getting in the sport—which has led to an enormous increase in BQs [Boston qualifiers] as well as OTQs [Olympic Trials qualifiers]. But I also think the popularity of Instagram usage in the past five years as a daily tool to post workouts and goals has been a huge motivator for a lot of women as they follow certain athletes and see what could be possible.”"
Really? This is the key factor driving the size of the women's trials field?
Saying that Instagram has been good for running is like saying that heroin has been great for weight loss.
Only some idiot who was herself raised from the crib on a steady diet of social-media-as-driving-force would offer this idea.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot wrote:
Wolf's Bane wrote:
they should use a descending order list for the entries. Top 200 men and women by time on certifies courses can run, as well as anyone who finished in the top 25 at the US marathon or half marathon championships.
Why the hell should 200 (x2) be included by this method? Top 50, max.
I'd love to see a the trials marathon be limited to a smaller number (my suggestion would be 48, since it is double the number accepted for all the other t&f events). But as has already been pointed out, it is against IAAF rules.
rare wrote:
ATLienHJ wrote:
That main 6 mile loop is one of my daily circuits...of all the potential options the marathon course designers had here in Atlanta, I don't understand this course they came up with. Though just a hobby jogger, I am not impressed with hairpin turns and those short loops around the block at the north end of the course. They really stretched to try and stick with relatively flat (for Atlanta) asphalt.
Shoot, the Olympic Marathon course from '96 would have been better than this. But it would have shut down miles and miles of two major roads through downtown, midtown, and Buckhead, and this contains the impact of the event to a relatively small area downtown. It's definitely spectator friendly, and Atlanta Track Club's push to brand Atlanta #RunningCityUSA has bordered on the ridiculous over the last year. The ATC's hosting a race on 3/2/19 on the larger 8.2 mile loop. Y'all come down and see it for yourselves.
I run pretty frequently through parts of this course as well, and yeah it's hard for me to understand how they came up with this too. There are plenty of options that wouldn't need turns like they have...
Maybe there are considerations and other complications they needed to account for that you are not aware of????
Dril wrote:
rare wrote:
I run pretty frequently through parts of this course as well, and yeah it's hard for me to understand how they came up with this too. There are plenty of options that wouldn't need turns like they have...
Maybe there are considerations and other complications they needed to account for that you are not aware of????
When I looked at the course map and saw that looong out and back with the 180 I assumed it was there so they could minimize the number of streets that they have to close. A real loop would make it a nightmare for anyone living/working on the inside of the course
DumpsterDiver wrote:
Dril wrote:
Maybe there are considerations and other complications they needed to account for that you are not aware of????
When I looked at the course map and saw that looong out and back with the 180 I assumed it was there so they could minimize the number of streets that they have to close. A real loop would make it a nightmare for anyone living/working on the inside of the course
Yeah, fair enough.
Roland Orzabal wrote:
Saying that Instagram has been good for running is like saying that heroin has been great for weight loss.
*applause*
Drainthefecesswamp wrote:
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot wrote:
Why the hell should 200 (x2) be included by this method? Top 50, max.
I'd love to see a the trials marathon be limited to a smaller number (my suggestion would be 48, since it is double the number accepted for all the other t&f events). But as has already been pointed out, it is against IAAF rules.
In what sense?
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
