There was a pacer for about 2200m. Was supposed to go to 3200m but dropped out at 2200m. Then Molly took the pace for about 4 laps. Then Emily took the pace for most of the rest except for one or two laps. Emily poured it on over the last 600m-800m.
There was a pacer for about 2200m. Was supposed to go to 3200m but dropped out at 2200m. Then Molly took the pace for about 4 laps. Then Emily took the pace for most of the rest except for one or two laps. Emily poured it on over the last 600m-800m.
Very strong performance. Her pacing in the last mile really suggests that she can sustain at least a second a lap faster. Rather than doing 74s much of the way, she could probably handle 72-73s and challenge the American record. 30:00 is 72/400m.
douglas burke wrote:
Sub 2:20 is possible in London for them, especially Sisson
Yes, definitely possible if everything aligns properly, like getting in the right group to run with early on and of course the temperature.
Sisson is the future for the US in the Marathon, she is coached really well. Also she is powerfully built and does not look like a skeleton like some of there other top runners who are starving themselves to look like the east Africans.
broken arrow wrote:
douglas burke wrote:
Sub 2:20 is possible in London for them, especially Sisson
Yes, definitely possible if everything aligns properly, like getting in the right group to run with early on and of course the temperature.
Sisson is the future for the US in the Marathon, she is coached really well. Also she is powerfully built and does not look like a skeleton like some of there other top runners who are starving themselves to look like the east Africans.
Looking like the East Africans seems to work pretty well for the East Africans.
Every year, she beats all expectations. Incredible runner. She is the future of US women's distance running.
Faster than the MEN'S winning time (31:40) at world XC. I know the world cross course was a bit over 10000 meters, but dayumn.
Results suggest otherwise. No need for hyperbole. Looks more like Sisson lapped the field once? Molly lapped most but not all of it?
I was at the meet wrote:
They lapped the entire field 2x.
Really excited to see what these two do in London!
Moo Goo wrote:
Every year, she beats all expectations. Incredible runner. She is the future of US women's distance running.
Great run but quell your expectations. Injury concerns linger.
Sisson even more impressively ran this race wearing flats (look at her most recent IG post for reference)
Some people are naturally skinny wrote:
broken arrow wrote:
Yes, definitely possible if everything aligns properly, like getting in the right group to run with early on and of course the temperature.
Sisson is the future for the US in the Marathon, she is coached really well. Also she is powerfully built and does not look like a skeleton like some of there other top runners who are starving themselves to look like the east Africans.
Looking like the East Africans seems to work pretty well for the East Africans.
Sir, that is not the point, the East African woman are for the most part smaller in stature and as a result weighing 90-100 pounds is a healthy weight for them.That is what I was trying to point out but I was not clear. For a western Woman that is over 5'3", and up in the 5'6"-5'8" range it is not healthy to look like a running skeleton.
GBohannon wrote:
One more thing wrote:
The announcer said both made the US top 10 all time list
Huddle didn’t really “make the list”... she already heads the list with her 30:13 AR. Although, the announcer may have meant that her time was among the fastest 10 times run by an American. Silly observation when it’s not near her best performance though; I am guessing he was simply uninformed.
The announcer meant exactly what he said and his statement was correct. Do you not know the difference between a list of PERFORMERS and a list of PERFORMANCES?
Why do all the regulars here continually act like they just discovered running 20 minutes earlier?
I wasnt there LOL wrote:
She looked really good I’m guessing.
Emily Sisson always looks good
Words Mean Stuff wrote:
GBohannon wrote:
Huddle didn’t really “make the list”... she already heads the list with her 30:13 AR. Although, the announcer may have meant that her time was among the fastest 10 times run by an American. Silly observation when it’s not near her best performance though; I am guessing he was simply uninformed.
The announcer meant exactly what he said and his statement was correct. Do you not know the difference between a list of PERFORMERS and a list of PERFORMANCES?
Why do all the regulars here continually act like they just discovered running 20 minutes earlier?
Uh... yeah, I understand the difference between performers and performances. I even highlighted said difference in my post. Dork.
GBohannon wrote:
Words Mean Stuff wrote:
The announcer meant exactly what he said and his statement was correct. Do you not know the difference between a list of PERFORMERS and a list of PERFORMANCES?
Why do all the regulars here continually act like they just discovered running 20 minutes earlier?
Uh... yeah, I understand the difference between performers and performances. I even highlighted said difference in my post. Dork.
And another thing - OP referred to Sisson’s performance as #3 all-time US. That would be in reference to performers. Just saying, man!
I was at the meet wrote:
She and Huddle took turns pacing and looked smooth and in control for most of the race. They had a 100-200 m gap by the halfway. Sisson pulled away over the last 400 m and Huddle couldn’t go with her and finished a little over 10 seconds behind. I can’t remember their exact splits but I think Emily’s second 5k was 15:07 or something like that. They lapped the entire field 2x.
Really excited to see what these two do in London!
Don’t like raining on your parade but neither are capable of finishing top 10 behind maybe the best 6 women ever assembled plus a few chasers.
Moo Goo wrote:
Every year, she beats all expectations. Incredible runner. She is the future of US women's distance running.
No, she is not the future.
She is the present!!
GBohannon wrote:
GBohannon wrote:
Uh... yeah, I understand the difference between performers and performances. I even highlighted said difference in my post. Dork.
And another thing - OP referred to Sisson’s performance as #3 all-time US. That would be in reference to performers. Just saying, man!
Do you realize that the OP and the meet announcer are not the same person?
Huddle did "make the list" of the top ten performances as the meet announcer stated. OP correctly stated that it was Sisson is now the 3rd fastest performer at 10K for American women. Why you bring that up to defend your misguided libel against the meet announcer is beyond me. Actually, it's pretty obvious that you screwed up with your little critique and are now trying to throw up any dumb thing to cover your own mistake. Or maybe you honestly do think the OP and the Meet Announcer are the same person, you do seem dumb enough that we must consider such a possibility.
But one thing is for sure - the only silly observation is whatever dumb-butt crap comes off of your keyboard. Stop posting dweeb.
douglas burke wrote:
Sub 2:20 is possible in London for them, especially Sisson
broken arrow wrote:
Yes, definitely possible if everything aligns properly, like getting in the right group to run with early on and of course the temperature.
Sisson is the future for the US in the Marathon, she is coached really well. Also she is powerfully built and does not look like a skeleton like some of there other top runners who are starving themselves to look like the east Africans.
Has Sisson ever run a marathon?
And Huddle hasn't ever bettered 2:25, has she?
Out of the loop ~ wrote:
douglas burke wrote:
Sub 2:20 is possible in London for them, especially Sisson
broken arrow wrote:
Yes, definitely possible if everything aligns properly, like getting in the right group to run with early on and of course the temperature.
Sisson is the future for the US in the Marathon, she is coached really well. Also she is powerfully built and does not look like a skeleton like some of there other top runners who are starving themselves to look like the east Africans.
Has Sisson ever run a marathon?
And Huddle hasn't ever bettered 2:25, has she?
yep, that is my point too. who i consider to be the 9th best woman in the field has run under 2.24 eight times. their best half times are 67.25 [huddle] and 67.30 [sisson], hardly in the class of 2.20 marathoners
Aussiestatman wrote:
Out of the loop ~ wrote:
Has Sisson ever run a marathon?
And Huddle hasn't ever bettered 2:25, has she?
yep, that is my point too. who i consider to be the 9th best woman in the field has run under 2.24 eight times. their best half times are 67.25 [huddle] and 67.30 [sisson], hardly in the class of 2.20 marathoners
a. they can probably run about 67 flat
b. that would be slowing 6 mins in the marathon, not unreasonable
so sure they are potentially on track for about 2:20