Whelan 2:13:38 for 4th?
Whelan 2:13:38 for 4th?
1 Boniface Kongin 29 M 2:11:56 +0:00
2 Andrew Colley 26 28 M 2:12:13 +0:17
3 Harbert Okuti 157 33 M 2:13:01 +1:05
4 Joseph Whelan 202 28 M 2:13:39 +1:43
5 Craig Hunt 7075 28 M 2:15:26 +3:30
6 Nick Caprario 23 30 M 2:16:01 +4:05
7 Rory Tunningley 195 29 M 2:16:25 +4:29
Is there a massive tailwind for everyone? Looks like it's coming straight out of the northeast blowing to southwest on google weather
Rojas may break 2;28 in her second marathon and get the Oly standard.
2:28:06
is this course actually allowed for OQ ? because they have tighter rules than OTQ
fasterrrrr wrote:
2:28:06
is this course actually allowed for OQ ? because they have tighter rules than OTQ
Yes. It is on the IAAF list. (It narrowly meets the requirements for allowable drop.)
ClonedDuck wrote:
Is there a massive tailwind for everyone? Looks like it's coming straight out of the northeast blowing to southwest on google weather
I ran the half- I honestly didn't feel like the wind was a tailwind. Definitely not the strong gusting winds from the NE we had yesterday.
OTOH, one rarely notices a tailwind, and almost never gives it credit, so....
I am surprised that, for the people I'm tracking, they are not on average running as fast as I expected.
20+ OTQ for the men, 40+ for the women
Editor's Note: We counted 23 men and 44 women but may be off by 1 or to.
Men's results:
http://farm2.mtecresults.com/race/show/8014?overallm=yes
women's results:
A 12-15mph tailwind effect is massive. More than CIM's elevation drop perhaps. I feel this course will end up like St. George's, which used to be OTQ eligible.
My Grandma Cheats at Cards wrote:
A 12-15mph tailwind effect is massive. More than CIM's elevation drop perhaps. I feel this course will end up like St. George's, which used to be OTQ eligible.
Having run both I think they are about equal on a normal day. CIM has more uphill than people realize to counter the drop. Plus Grandma's is a net drop of over 100ft. With a 12 to 15 mph tailwind at Grandma's it's not even close. That is huge and makes it easily a faster course. That would be at least a 2 min gain if the runners really experienced that. A lot of the course can be somewhat sheltered so not really sure how much of a tailwind the runners actually experienced.
One thing that no one has mentioned yet is that the weather ended up a bit warmer than expected - in the low 60's during the middle part of the race. That seemed to keep some of the times in check and not let the wind have as large of an impact as it otherwise would have.
darkwave wrote:
ClonedDuck wrote:
Is there a massive tailwind for everyone? Looks like it's coming straight out of the northeast blowing to southwest on google weather
I ran the half- I honestly didn't feel like the wind was a tailwind. Definitely not the strong gusting winds from the NE we had yesterday.
OTOH, one rarely notices a tailwind, and almost never gives it credit, so....
I am surprised that, for the people I'm tracking, they are not on average running as fast as I expected.
I didn't really notice the tailwind until we changed directions for the last mile. It was brutal coming back into it.
Is 2nd place finisher, margaret njuguna , really 49 years young? That is an impressive result if true!
IAAF profile shows a 1969 birth.
you be the judge
supposedly 49, but first competitive race was in 2008?
Rick Sanchez wrote:
Is 2nd place finisher, margaret njuguna , really 49 years young? That is an impressive result if true!
IAAF profile shows a 1969 birth.
Her age isn’t consistent across the events she runs.
She ran the Tel Aviv marathon in February, 2018 and had her age listed as 45.
https://www.athlinks.com/event/34882/results/Event/707953/Course/1180244/ResultsSo she aged five years in a year and a half.
And she ran the Pound the Pavement 10k at the beginning of June 2019 and had her age listed as 50. But for Grandma’s she is supposedly 49 again. So she aged in reverse this time.
https://my.racewire.com/results/35767/41833Either she has a time machine, or something fishy is going on. ? ?
Wait, now she's 35 years old in the results?!? How does that happen?
Ackley wrote:
fasterrrrr wrote:
2:28:06
is this course actually allowed for OQ ? because they have tighter rules than OTQ
Yes. It is on the IAAF list. (It narrowly meets the requirements for allowable drop.)
Are you sure? It's not on this IAAF list:
https://media.aws.iaaf.org/competitioninfo/01664bab-af0a-44d6-a014-cd603492f592.pdfrunner123876 wrote:
Ackley wrote:
Yes. It is on the IAAF list. (It narrowly meets the requirements for allowable drop.)
Are you sure? It's not on this IAAF list:
https://media.aws.iaaf.org/competitioninfo/01664bab-af0a-44d6-a014-cd603492f592.pdf
Yes. That list is from October 2018. It is on the May 2019 List that has to be downloaded. It is not eligible for records because of the separation between the start and finish, but it is eligible for qualifying for IAAF events because the net drop is minimal.
https://www.iaaf.org/records/certified-roadeventsAlso, there is not a tailwind every year. (But there has been the last two.)
Got it, thanks