Way Back When wrote:
bored troller wrote:
Really well done. And when we consider his Boston time, which I believe is probably accurate, we’re looking at a guy who could run 4:10 or 4:30 or something in that range. It’s too bad that just wasn’t good enough for him. He could have racked up HM and marathon finisher’s medals and people would have respected that.
Yes, but remember that his apparently legitimate 4:25 at Boston was a long time ago, when he was still in his late 50s, I think. There is no way he's capable of that 12ish years later.
Oh, I agree! When I wrote that he “could” run 4:10 to 4:30 I could have added “back in the day” or “at his best.”