Jim Walmsley OT marathon prediction thread!

everybody is responding to this first post as if the correlations mean anything. If you use his 64:00 from 2019 when he trained like 4 weeks before Houston...that's worthless. He ran a 63:00 effort in a small race in Phoenix (I added 45sec for the short course) that was probably worth at least 30 seconds faster in Houston with a faster course and better competition.

so if his 64:00 was worth 2:12, which I don't believe, what is 63:00 worth? Not 2:10. However, I think if anybody out there is gonna outperform their half marathon, it'll be Jim. He is probably improving at a faster rate than most other contenders as well, so the time between his half and the Trials will be valuable to him.

coffee bacon - why do you think that somebody in 2:10 shape can't run 2:10 in their first attempt? In my first marathon when I was 18 and barely a runner, I wanted to run under 3:11 in San Francisco (very hard course) and I ran 3:10:25. Never raced longer than a 10k before. Lack of experience doesn't mean everything. Fast forward about 9 years and I ran my first 50 miler. I thought I could run 6:20 and I ran 6:21. Would running a bunch of 50 milers have made me run any faster than 6:20? I doubt it.

Anyway....I think the thinks that make executing a marathon difficult won't be an issue for Jim. He will have fueling under control. He knows not to overdo it on small climbs early in the race, as pacing on uneven terrain is part of what makes ultrarunning challenging. He won't hit any wall unless he gets in over his head if the pack goes out in 64:xx.

If we are looking for predictions...if the weather is perfect and the field goes out between 65 and 66min, I think Jim runs 2:12:32 and gets 6th. If the field goes out slower than 66, I think Jim might make some dumb decisions like surging away from everybody to see if they let him go. That would be a sight to see but I'd rather that he hide within the pack only to emerge as others fall away.

I'm one of the few who thinks Walmsley was being conservative saying he's in 2:10 shape. It makes more sense to me that he would slightly understate rather than overstate what he shape he thinks he's in.

According the LR interview, he has been backdating Inubushi's log (like I also did in other threads), as well as looking at the other Japanese runners that have training logs online (or in a book such as Sunada). His training really doesn't look any worse than Inubushi's before Inubushi's 2:06:57. Similar overall training volume, similar long run pace (but longer long runs for Walmsley), similar times in 1K repeats, but more volume of them (20, instead of 10 or 15), so even if he was reaching for those times, he wouldn't have been reaching if he had done the number of repeats that Inubushi did. Of course others, even fanboys, will look at the same workouts and think they indicate 2:12, but he's doing Japanese style training, so it makes sense to look at it in that context.

I know training isn't the same as racing, someone might be doing the same workout times at a different effort than someone else, and a good looking training log doesn't guarantee anything. But if he was some random Japanese dude doing this training, I think other Japanese would think he should be going for 2:06-2:08 on a flat course. And maybe someone misses by a bit. Fukuda missed his target times by 2 minutes and 1 minute in his past two marathons, but he still ran 2:10:33/2:10:32. I think Walmsley is fitter and faster than Fukuda. I don't think Walmsley is any less talented than the Yuya Yoshida, who didn't even make his college's equivalent of varsity until this past year, but debuted at 2:08:30 earlier this month. Don't know anything about Yoshida's training though.

I think Rupp and Korir are the biggest favorites. Rupp might really be healthy, but his tune up last week doesn't really prove. He didn't falter in Chicago until past halfway right? Korir seems the most like a lock if he just does what he did before his debut. Kebenei has been under the radar, but I'll put him higher the others usually mentioned, even though it will be his debut too.

I'm going with Walmsley 2nd in 2:09:21. I'm fan of Japanese training and stepping out of the box doing it your own way.

zzzz wrote:

... similar times in 1K repeats.

This may be a dumb question (I'm not signed up for STRAVA), but you're saying Walmsley was doing 1K repeats in 3min like Inubushi did?

over and out wrote:

zzzz wrote:

... similar times in 1K repeats.

This may be a dumb question (I'm not signed up for STRAVA), but you're saying Walmsley was doing 1K repeats in 3min like Inubushi did?

I just found the answer to my question:

If everything goes well JIm might be able to run a 2:14ish time and finish 11th.

If he goes out hard, in order to sell more Hoka Trail Dragger shoes, he will crash hard after 18 miles and walk it in, in 2:29. He will be a hero for the Walmsley fan crowed forever. So inspirational.

over and out wrote:

zzzz wrote:

... similar times in 1K repeats.

This may be a dumb question (I'm not signed up for STRAVA), but you're saying Walmsley was doing 1K repeats in 3min like Inubushi did?

Yep.

He hasn't done anything like this in the last 2 weeks. What's he doing. Is he injured or burnt out?

He hasn’t run 1ks in a few weeks because he was busy breaking the course record at a 50k last weekend in 2:49.

It’s funny reading the comments about not being ready for 26.2 miles when he has been training/racing/crushing 30 miles all winter. And Atlanta has hills? Wow, I bet the guy who trains and races in the mountains is going to be really put off by the mean city street hills. I think 2:11 6th place is a pretty good guess.

2:10:01 3rd place.

Goes out like a complete lunatic and leads the entire race up until 22 miles. Hangs on for 3rd. Massive fanboy here. People might not realise that Jim’s cockiness and racing style didn’t make him popular with the ultra running old guard when he burst onto their scene ruffling more than a few feathers. Some described him as disrespectful, brash and a bad tactician. He likes to go hard and will accept a blow-up as an occupational hazard. Granted, it took him a couple of attempts to nail WS but he did, proving the haters wrong and now he will be remembered as one of the greats at that distance. Maybe he won’t even finish the Olympic Trial race but who cares, he’s made it the most interesting and anticipated OT in decades.

FFF wrote:

My prediction is that every prediction here indicating 10-15 coming in before 2:13 makes you unqualified to even speak.

This. I think a lot of people here are wildly overestimating what the winning time is gonna be.

And like top 10-15 times

Valid points. I do believe somewhere in the 2:12 range is his finishing time. How that plays out within the top 5-10 will be interesting. I love that LRC is in a tailspin over Walmsley, it's classic.

Let's look at it this way.

For a long time, I didn't really like Walmsley. Tough-talker in the ultra scene, failed to really show-up on race day, and got derailed easily.

Then, the past two years, the tough-talk stops. He takes the CR at Western States (inb4 "no one care about ultra races,) then does it again. 50mi world record, though not hotly contested, he does it anyway.

Metronome-paced 1:04, then 1:03, with no taper, in the middle of big training blocks for ultras.

He's used to hills, he's used to heat, he's used to grinding. Like it or not, the Atlanta course suits him well; especially considering the bipolar weather in the South, it could be warm and humid on race day.

Let's be honest, he's no world-class marathoner. He IS, however, and Olympic hopeful, with a decent shot.

Looking at the 2016 Trials, sub 2:16 is good for top 10. Granted, that was at the warm, but flat, LA course; we can probably equivalent the heat to the hills in this case, even moreso if Atlanta is warm on race day.

Though there are many Americans w/ faster half-marathon bests, those really cannot be relied on in this case: both of Walmsley's halfs were TRAINING runs, and there's no sense on blowing his load to run whatever 61:xx he may be capable of just to stroke LetsRun egos.

tl;dr Looking at the course and his training, a good day would be coming out and running 2:14ish for top 10.

a GREAT day would put him 2:11-2:12 on the course, and likely fifth-third. Third relies on the failure of at least TWO of the big four: rupp, korir, ward, or fauble.

Either way, he will certainly be a presence at the trials, and this board will explode regardless.

LoneStarXC wrote:

2:12 and top 5

It had to happen one day... I agree with LoneStarXC. Go Jim!

And, the weather prediction two weeks out is for 33-55 degrees and partly cloudy. If that holds, it'll be a better race for everyone.

The one thing we can all agree on is that he is going to go out with the best of them until he either gets top 3 or the wheels fall off.

Walmsley's main advantage is that he is a climber. Running all the hills on the course will not be an issue for him. Walmsley's big disadvantages are that he just isn't that fast and isn't a marathoner. Unless the weather is warm, the pace at the front of the pack will probably be @2:08-9. It is the trials and everyone will be pumped up. Rupp will want to try to separate early so he is in a pack of 3 down the stretch instead of trying to test his fitness the last 2-3 miles against 5-6 guys. That means Walmsley will be going through 13.1 about a minute slower than his half PR. That is going to put him in a place that his ultra running does not take him. He will be running in totally uncharted waters while trying to keep up with surges in the pace. That is just too much to ask from anyone on their first marathon. And Walmsley's training won't help. He has been doing a lot of volume, but he is already good at that. The 1k repeat workout is really promising, but he also needs to do longer intervals and long tempos. That much quality is inconsistent with the high volume training he is doing. He really should have raced 2-3 marathons before the trials. If he had a few marathons under his belt, I would be more optimistic. But he is basically trying to have one of the best marathon debuts in US marathoning history during the trials. He just isn't that kind of runner.

So, I think he stays with the pack through about mi 17-18 and then fades badly over the last few miles. 2:14 and change, finishing in the high teens.

To even have this be a topic, he needs to beat 2:14:36 which was Max King's time in 2012.

So you're saying this will be the deepest US marathon finish ever?