Jim Walmsley WILL run 2:13:27 at the Olympic Trials Marathon.

No Walmsley fanboy wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

The effects of the hills in Atlanta are a complete unknown so predicting his time is impossible. An appraisal of what we believe he could run on a neutral course is more meaningful. I would guess he could run about 2:13.

The Atlanta hills are not Mt. Everest. They are very predicable. I am pretty sure any of the top contenders have trained with hills like this. Any serious preparation for the trails would include a study of the course and to look at the hills and train similar hills during your training.

What's the conversion then? 2 minutes?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

No Walmsley fanboy wrote:

The Atlanta hills are not Mt. Everest. They are very predicable. I am pretty sure any of the top contenders have trained with hills like this. Any serious preparation for the trails would include a study of the course and to look at the hills and train similar hills during your training.

What's the conversion then? 2 minutes?

I think around two minutes. It is less hilly than the 2007 Trials for Beijing, and Sell nabbed third place with a 2:11 mid. I expect similar times in Atlanta.

Malemute wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

What's the conversion then? 2 minutes?

I think around two minutes. It is less hilly than the 2007 Trials for Beijing, and Sell nabbed third place with a 2:11 mid. I expect similar times in Atlanta.

does anybody have the elevation gain for the 07 Trials in NYC? Tried to find those recently and struck out. Can't even find the course map

He'll finish as a midpacker or DNF, just like he's done at every other competitive race he's done.

reed wrote:

does anybody have the elevation gain for the 07 Trials in NYC? Tried to find those recently and struck out. Can't even find the course map

suspiciously easy to find. did you use an internet search engine?

Malemute wrote:

What's the conversion then? 2 minutes?

I think around two minutes. It is less hilly than the 2007 Trials for Beijing, and Sell nabbed third place with a 2:11 mid. I expect similar times in Atlanta.[/quote]

looks hillier than the '07 trials. I would guess 2:09-10 for the win and 2:11 for top 3. Not a lot under 2:13, either.

Are all of these Walmsley posts created by two or three of his buddies sitting around drinking beer and making up new ways to kiss their superior's butt?

So 2008 was 1,990ft of gain and Atlanta is 1300ft? Not sure if Walmsley has a chance now. That day was Ryan Hall, Brian Sell, Dan Browne, basically the best of the best. Ritz. The fittest.

AT THESWOOSH wrote:

So 2008 was 1,990ft of gain and Atlanta is 1300ft? Not sure if Walmsley has a chance now. That day was Ryan Hall, Brian Sell, Dan Browne, basically the best of the best. Ritz. The fittest.

I think that accounts for both gain and loss. So, around 1000ft gain. Atlanta has more.

Malemute wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

What's the conversion then? 2 minutes?

I think around two minutes. It is less hilly than the 2007 Trials for Beijing, and Sell nabbed third place with a 2:11 mid. I expect similar times in Atlanta.

Using the formula in this article, it calculates to almost exactly 2 minutes. You lose 20 seconds per 100 yards uphill and recover 55% of the loss on the downhill:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Malemute wrote:

I think around two minutes. It is less hilly than the 2007 Trials for Beijing, and Sell nabbed third place with a 2:11 mid. I expect similar times in Atlanta.

Using the formula in this article, it calculates to almost exactly 2 minutes. You lose 20 seconds per 100 yards uphill and recover 55% of the loss on the downhill:

https://www.runnersworld.com/advanced/a20820206/downhill-all-the-way/

That would be "feet", not yards.

If he runs 2:13 something, he might put together one of the top 400 - 500 fastest times in the world for 2020.

By way of comparison, the former US 50k record holder, Josh Cox, ran 2:15:50 at the OT in Birmingham and got 14th.

wrote:

AT THESWOOSH wrote:

So 2008 was 1,990ft of gain and Atlanta is 1300ft? Not sure if Walmsley has a chance now. That day was Ryan Hall, Brian Sell, Dan Browne, basically the best of the best. Ritz. The fittest.

I think that accounts for both gain and loss. So, around 1000ft gain. Atlanta has more.

Are you sure that 1900 counts up and down? I've never seen a course map count elevations like that. But if that is the case, maybe it will be a touch slower. 3rd place will probably still be under 2:12 though with all the depth at that level right now.

Malemute wrote:

Are you sure that 1900 counts up and down? I've never seen a course map count elevations like that. But if that is the case, maybe it will be a touch slower. 3rd place will probably still be under 2:12 though with all the depth at that level right now.

I did some back of napkin calcs, and it looks like it does count ups and downs. That means the '08 trials had around 945' gain. That is significantly less than Atlanta. I still think it will take a sub 2:12 to get top three, but now I will be less surprised if a 2:12 low makes it.

one model wrote:

you dont think the magic shoes will put 15+ under 214? 23 guys qualified with 214.00 or better. plus some fast halves. they wont all have their best day, and the course isnt fast (but it aint that slow) . but these shoes are something else.

faubs seems like a great dude, but i hope hes not calling himself a 209 guy, just like i hope hall doesnt call himself a 204 guy. fact remains they ran 209 and 204 with help, and i see it playing out the same way in atlanta?

Haha! Here we go again... “there was a hurricane wind that day that pushed them all the way”.

I ran that day and the wind didn’t help nearly as much as some(who have never even run the course) lead you to believe. Fauble ran 2:09 at Boston. Just a fact.

Questioning why... wrote:

Are all of these Walmsley posts created by two or three of his buddies sitting around drinking beer and making up new ways to kiss their superior's butt?

I believe this. I posted something to this effect on an earlier thread - keep in mind more than 1 a week gets started - and a poster immediately gave a 'what are you talking about' response. I suspect that responder is affiliated (agent, sponsor, coach, spouse, Jim himself, etc,) just like the OP was. There's nobody who gets a spontaneous thread every time a timed workout is done. This isn't even one of those 'look what he ran today' threads. Now they're being started on easy days too. I think this is fine but it's hard not to look at it as being very JS-like.

good question! wrote:

Questioning why... wrote:

Are all of these Walmsley posts created by two or three of his buddies sitting around drinking beer and making up new ways to kiss their superior's butt?

I believe this. I posted something to this effect on an earlier thread - keep in mind more than 1 a week gets started - and a poster immediately gave a 'what are you talking about' response. I suspect that responder is affiliated (agent, sponsor, coach, spouse, Jim himself, etc,) just like the OP was. There's nobody who gets a spontaneous thread every time a timed workout is done. This isn't even one of those 'look what he ran today' threads. Now they're being started on easy days too. I think this is fine but it's hard not to look at it as being very JS-like.

Lol, I don't know Jim nor am I a massive Jim or MUT running fan. I just found his race results and training interesting and made a prediction. Keep the conspiracies coming though!

Is he training in Iten right now? Because only the drug store there can help him.