Almost had me wrote:
I was all in with this until you put Walmsley at #9. He barely ran the 64 flat qualifier on a flat half course at Houston. Ya'll say he barely trained for it, but he dedicated a couple months of doing faster workouts and already had the huge base from ultra's. He's not going to suddenly beat the 40 guys ahead of him from the half marathon from the past couple years just because we're now running a full marathon. Maybe he'll be 20th, that'd be a great showing, but he's not going to be 9th place. Come on, man.
Lol, you’d be a fool to think walmsley won’t have a MASSIVE upside in the full marathon versus his half. 13.1 is an entirely lactate-threshold based race. The full is all about time on feet + fitness. And walmsley has more strength over extreme long distance than anyone else in the field. What he lacks in speed he makes up for, handily, in strength.
I personally might even put him better than 9th. He’s training with a vengeance and won’t be DNF’ing in garbage conditions, as his mental game is far superior to those with mainly road and track experience.
Just my $0.03