Except the Olympic doesn’t attract the bear marathoner. It is usually a slow time. Just look at Kipchoge, his slowest known marathon time is at the Olympics.
Except the Olympic doesn’t attract the bear marathoner. It is usually a slow time. Just look at Kipchoge, his slowest known marathon time is at the Olympics.
We have rules for a reason.
I already see people defending the performance but then immediately adding their own set of arbitrary rules to exclude performances by athletes they don't like.
It was a stunt. Worse, it was a corporate stunt. The worst: cringey comparisons to landing on the moon or ushering in world peace. It's bunk.
Why are people confused about this? Obviously it wasn't a competitive marathon, this was done to show that a sub-2 marathon is theoretically possible. Just enjoy it for what it was. Or don't, I'm not your boss.
rnr_ wrote:
Why are people confused about this? Obviously it wasn't a competitive marathon, this was done to show that a sub-2 marathon is theoretically possible. Just enjoy it for what it was. Or don't, I'm not your boss.
It's a fair point that it provides theoretical support to the claim that a sub-2 hour marathon is possible, whatever value that may or may not have.
However, I can't get past the cringe and shameless corporate shenanigans.
Obvi wrote:
Nobody will ever care what he did here.
People will care about who is winning world major marathons including the Olympic marathon. People will care when the world record gets broken. They will care when national records are broken. They will compare PBs between runners in legitimate marathon competitions (and this time will not even be part of the conversation). Nobody will ever really care about this. It will be seen as a stunt whenever it is remembered at all. And it won't be remembered by very many for very long.
But it's still pretty fast.
Yeah, it's not like Kipchoge hasn't done any of those things either. He was already the best marathoner of all time before breaking 2. Being the first human to ever run sub-2 was just the last nail in the coffin.
For what it's worth, it's the only running event many non-runners have ever brought up to me (and been excited and interested) on their own. It was both refreshing and confusing to see them so excited talking about 400m splits and 5k times
Mr. Reasonable here again wrote: It's simply a time trial. I guess he won the world's two-hour time trial. But think of it like this: A basketball player could go to an empty gym with his coach and sink 50 free throws in a row. It's an amazing accomplishment. But it has nothing to do with a competitive basketball game. It doesn't mean if there are ten seconds left, and his team is down by one point, that he's going to sink his two free throws. What he did in the gym is pretty mid-blowing, but it's still not the same thing as making the free throws under the pressure of a game. It's a stunt. Kipchoge's performance was mind-blowing, but ultimately it was a stunt. A stunt that will sell a lot of Nike shoes. Yeah I said it. Bring on the haters.
You're not saying anything interesting here.
1. "I guess he won a time trial." Of course it's a time trial. Kipchoge was the only one running full distance so it wasn't a race. It was marketed as a project, not race.
2. A human running a full marathon under two hours is infinitely more impressive than someone making fifty straight free throws. Only one man's ever done first.
3. "Its not the same under pressure" There was ridiculous pressure on Kipchoge yesterday. All the eyes were on him, esp /w all everybody did so he could do it.
4. "Bring on the haters". You just watched a sub-2 marathon, an unprecedented athletic accomplishment and said "It's simply a time trial." You are the hater.