FW: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Forward for Drew Eckmann: -Original Message- From: Eckmann, Drew [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:58 PM To: 'malmo' Subject: RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! Hey there. I sent this to the list 3 times now with no luck. Wanna Try? I'm a little late into the game her, but two different posts, that I sent on Saturday, never showed up. Paul's group does indeed do the 3 times a day regiment. This is when the 'want to get very fit.' The first run of the day is at 6AM. It's an hour of easy running. Then it's back home for bed and tea. The next run is at around 11AM. This is the tough one. I was told that from the beginning to the end, 'EACH STEP SHOULD BE FASTER THAN THE LAST ONE' It's a hard run of continually increasing speed for 40 minutes. The last run of the day is done around 6pm. It's another easy hour of running. So it comes out to 2 hours and 40 minutes a day. I think they do this for 3 weeks, but I could be wrong about that. /Drew
RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Better start believing, Ed. I've seen many sub 2:15 types do their long runs at a 6:50 crawl. Many run them at 5:30 pace. Some have dark hair some have blond hair. Some are tall some are short. You get the picture. Mr. Eckmann, any thing to reveal about Tergat's training? malmo No, of course I don't believe that. Any more than I believe that many sub 2:15 marathoners do a lot of long runs at 6:50 pace as someone earlier suggested they should. Given the various contradictions, I don't think we know what Tergat is doing. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
No, of course I don't believe that. Any more than I believe that many sub 2:15 marathoners do a lot of long runs at 6:50 pace as someone earlier suggested they should. I guess my 2:09:57 doesn't count since the bulk of my runs long and short when not in a race or during the 10-15K of speed work I did per week was at 6:45-7:00 pace. I wasn't just guessing the pace either, I ran a measured mile every so often just to see. bd -- Benji Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
These guys just don't get it, do they? Coming to NYC marathon? malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Benji Durden Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2001 1:34 PM To: tf list Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! No, of course I don't believe that. Any more than I believe that many sub 2:15 marathoners do a lot of long runs at 6:50 pace as someone earlier suggested they should. I guess my 2:09:57 doesn't count since the bulk of my runs long and short when not in a race or during the 10-15K of speed work I did per week was at 6:45-7:00 pace. I wasn't just guessing the pace either, I ran a measured mile every so often just to see. bd -- Benji Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
from a recent interview with paul tergat on his traing for chicago: The training has not been much different. I just run longer. Instead of going out for a morning run of 5K, 8K, 10K, now about every run is 20K. My training has been 200 to 205 kilometers a week. bob _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
from a recent interview with paul tergat on his traing for chicago: The training has not been much different. I just run longer. Instead of going out for a morning run of 5K, 8K, 10K, now about every run is 20K. My training has been 200 to 205 kilometers a week. Ok, Tergat is obvuously playing coy. Here's from an excerpt from an article about him on Yahoo at: http://sports.yahoo.com/m/sa/news/ap/20011005/ap-chicagomarathon.html In making the jump to the marathon distance, Tergat's biggest adjustment has been the training. He's running about 120 miles a week, almost twice as much as what he might do if he were training for a half-marathon. He's also added more speedwork since London. It sounds to me like the training HAS been much different! Who knows exactly what he's doing, but I can almost guarantee you plenty of it is fast. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
I don't quite see the discrepancy. The 200 km/week that Tergat claims is in fact about 120 miles a week that the excerpt quotes. Kurt Bray from a recent interview with paul tergat on his traing for chicago: The training has not been much different. I just run longer. Instead of going out for a morning run of 5K, 8K, 10K, now about every run is 20K. My training has been 200 to 205 kilometers a week. Ok, Tergat is obvuously playing coy. Here's from an excerpt from an article about him on Yahoo at: http://sports.yahoo.com/m/sa/news/ap/20011005/ap-chicagomarathon.html In making the jump to the marathon distance, Tergat's biggest adjustment has been the training. He's running about 120 miles a week, almost twice as much as what he might do if he were training for a half-marathon. He's also added more speedwork since London. It sounds to me like the training HAS been much different! Who knows exactly what he's doing, but I can almost guarantee you plenty of it is fast. - Ed Parrot _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Ed, do you seriously believe the reports that Tergat was running sub-60 halfs and sub-27 10k's on merely 60 miles a week? I don't even trust Khannouchi when he claims he is doing only 90 miles a week... This is from RunnersWorld Daily, 6 months ago: http://www.runnersworld.com/dailynew/archives/2001/April/010403.html The competition: IAAF London correspondent Duncan Mackay reports that Paul Tergat is training over 150 miles a week for the London marathon, sometimes running a marathon a day at altitude Oleg. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ed and Dana Parrot Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 3:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! The discrepancy is in the first interview he says the training has not been much different, while the Yahoo article indicates that he has doubled his mileage and is doing more speedwork. I know of few people who would consider doubling your mileage from 60 to 120 to be not much different. But you are correct that the fundamentals of the two interviews are not contradictory - he's running ~200K per week. If he indeed was only running 60 MPW before, I suspect that all of it was close to marathon pace or faster. If he now is running more miles, more speedwork, but the training is not much different, one can only assume that he's doing quite a few miles at a lot faster than a jog. The amount of work he's doing at marathon pace (and the length of those runs) is not apparent. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: Kurt Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 3:07 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! I don't quite see the discrepancy. The 200 km/week that Tergat claims is in fact about 120 miles a week that the excerpt quotes. Kurt Bray from a recent interview with paul tergat on his traing for chicago: The training has not been much different. I just run longer. Instead of going out for a morning run of 5K, 8K, 10K, now about every run is 20K. My training has been 200 to 205 kilometers a week. Ok, Tergat is obvuously playing coy. Here's from an excerpt from an article about him on Yahoo at: http://sports.yahoo.com/m/sa/news/ap/20011005/ap-chicagomarathon.html In making the jump to the marathon distance, Tergat's biggest adjustment has been the training. He's running about 120 miles a week, almost twice as much as what he might do if he were training for a half-marathon. He's also added more speedwork since London. It sounds to me like the training HAS been much different! Who knows exactly what he's doing, but I can almost guarantee you plenty of it is fast. - Ed Parrot _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Tergat at 60mpw? Written by an AP sports writer, clearly someone who doesn't understand the sport. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Kurt Bray Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 10:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! I don't quite see the discrepancy. The 200 km/week that Tergat claims is in fact about 120 miles a week that the excerpt quotes. Kurt Bray from a recent interview with paul tergat on his traing for chicago: The training has not been much different. I just run longer. Instead of going out for a morning run of 5K, 8K, 10K, now about every run is 20K. My training has been 200 to 205 kilometers a week. Ok, Tergat is obvuously playing coy. Here's from an excerpt from an article about him on Yahoo at: http://sports.yahoo.com/m/sa/news/ap/20011005/ap-chicagomarathon.html In making the jump to the marathon distance, Tergat's biggest adjustment has been the training. He's running about 120 miles a week, almost twice as much as what he might do if he were training for a half-marathon. He's also added more speedwork since London. It sounds to me like the training HAS been much different! Who knows exactly what he's doing, but I can almost guarantee you plenty of it is fast. - Ed Parrot _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Ed, do you seriously believe the reports that Tergat was running sub-60 halfs and sub-27 10k's on merely 60 miles a week? I don't even trust Khannouchi when he claims he is doing only 90 miles a week... http://www.runnersworld.com/dailynew/archives/2001/April/010403.html The competition: IAAF London correspondent Duncan Mackay reports that Paul Tergat is training over 150 miles a week for the London marathon, sometimes running a marathon a day at altitude No, of course I don't believe that. Any more than I believe that many sub 2:15 marathoners do a lot of long runs at 6:50 pace as someone earlier suggested they should. Given the various contradictions, I don't think we know what Tergat is doing. - Ed Parrot
RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have. Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. There is a guy most of us know and love ... He ran at the highest levels many times over a career that stretched from age 15 to 35 ... 4-minute-miler, AR Steepler, AR half-marathoner, and pretty good marathoner ... still high on the US all-time list in the last three. Never ran a 200 mile week, never consistently logged 150 a week for any extended period. Never ran slower than 2:13:44. We see what you are saying about commitment and training levels, etc. and improvements in those things would help the US situation. But 150, 180 or 200 mpw isn't really what is gonna get this done /Brian McEwen -Original Message- From: Michael Rohl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 6:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; alan tobin Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. I think we would have a lot of dead runners. I keep hearing this again and again but 200 mile weeks are not the answer because I don't believe there are any runners really running 200mpw. Some say so but Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, TF Mansfield University
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
In a message dated Thu, 4 Oct 2001 4:02:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Ed and Dana Parrot [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is crazy. There is no need for a 2:15 marathoner to run for 3:30 in training. It would be a huge waste of time. The problem is that people are doing 18-24 milers relatively easy (and even close to 6:00 pace is relatively easy if you are a 2:15 marathoner) and NOT doing the 13-20 mile hard runs at marathon pace, which will total 18-25 miles with a few miles of buildup and cooldown. - Ed Parrot Tell the Japanese that runs longer than the marathon distance are a waste of time. sideshow
RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
We see what you are saying about commitment and training levels, etc. and improvements in those things would help the US situation. But 150, 180 or 200 mpw isn't really what is gonna get this done /Brian McEwen 100 is better than 70, 130 is better than 100, 160 is better than 130.. The Japanese seem to do quite well with ultra high mileage do they not? If you are running sub 2:13 on 100-120 miles a week then good for you, but if you are not then might as well jump up the mileage. If 150, 180, or 200 mpw isn't going to get it done then what will? 50? 70? 80? Of course mileage is only one issue here. 1. Run a lot of mileage (read: could be only 100, could be 150 could be whatever...it's a personally thing ,but you won't know what will work until you try it...who knowsmaybe Malmo would have been 2:09 with weekly doses of $1.50...then again maybe he would have been ran into the ground...again...who knows) 2. More longish runs at marathon pace. Monkey see, Monkey do. Japanese seem to have success with it, as do the Kenyans. Have we forgotten how to play follow the leader? 10-15 miles at marathon pace. I've heard that a staple of some of the Ehiopian marathoners (or maybe used to be) is a 20 mile run with the last 10 miles at marathon pace. Who said 10 miles at marathon pace is not a workout? It's better than 10 miles at a jogging pace. 3. Fast young runners running the marathon. The post about track credentials shows that the young fast runners don't move up to the marathon. We have a couple potential sub 2:10 marathoners out there, but they are running 10ks. The marathon in this country almost seems like a second string race now. Recap: There needs to be more young fast runners racing the marathon. Running higher mileage (100-200mpw), and running more longish tempo runs that are specific to the race distance instead of the usual 10k man workouts. Alan _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
This is crazy. There is no need for a 2:15 marathoner to run for 3:30 in training. It would be a huge waste of time. The problem is that people are doing 18-24 milers relatively easy (and even close to 6:00 pace is relatively easy if you are a 2:15 marathoner) and NOT doing the 13-20 mile hard runs at marathon pace, which will total 18-25 miles with a few miles of buildup and cooldown. - Ed Parrot Tell the Japanese that runs longer than the marathon distance are a waste of time. sideshow I didn't say that - I said there is no need to run 3:30 in training if you are 2:15 marathoner. 30 miles at 6:50 pace IS a waste of time, whether you are Japanese, Kenyan, American or whatever. From what I've heard about Japanese training, their primary focus is on 25 to 40K effort runs, sometimes doing two of them in a day. Sure there are stories about guys like Seko running 4 hour runs but you also hear about these incredible 35K training runs that I feel certain are one of the main reasons for the Japanese success. How many of the top Kenyans and Ethiopeans do a lot of 30 mile runs -very few. How many of the top Kenyans and Ethiopians (and Japanese) do 15-25 mile runs with large portions of it close to or slightly faster than marathon pace - many of them. How many of them, along with many of the Americans from the late 1970's and early 1980's, have a steady diet of fartlek, hills, and long steady state runs that get them down towards marathon pace or marathon effort - most of them, even if they don't call it that. I agree with you that the Jack Daniels 10 mile workout at marathon pace is nearly useless (note that I like quite a bit of Jack Daniels' ideas, just not this). Double the distance and you've got a workout. 30 miles slow? Maybe once or twice the entire training cycle at most. There are plenty of ultra-runners (myself included) who can't break 2:35 for the marathon but run regularly 30-35 mile training runs at 6:45-7:00 pace with little problem when training for a 50 miler or 100K. Take my word for it, these runs slow down our marathon times, not help them. For a 2:15 marathoner to do this would be even worse. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
2. More longish runs at marathon pace. Monkey see, Monkey do. Japanese seem to have success with it, as do the Kenyans. Have we forgotten how to play follow the leader? 10-15 miles at marathon pace. I've heard that a staple of some of the Ehiopian marathoners (or maybe used to be) is a 20 mile run with the last 10 miles at marathon pace. Who said 10 miles at marathon pace is not a workout? It's better than 10 miles at a jogging pace. No it's not if you should be doing 10 miles of fartlek or 10 miles of hills or 15-20 miles at marathon pace. Doing 10 miles at marathon pace is just hard enough to risk injury and breaking down, while not hard enough to really give you much benefit. Running the last 10 miles of a 20 miler at MP is a good early season workout, but as the cycle progresses, the length of the MP run needs to increase. Meanwhile, other types of workouts can give a better training effect than 10 mile MP runs without the risks of doing the same thing 3 or 4 times a week. Maybe the bar has been raised. But it appears you've got to train long AND hard or you've got no shot. - Ed Parrot
RE: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
But it's those stretches of 140-170s that makes everything else possible. Train hard -- really hard -- but listen to your body and know when to back off. Get those 100 runners at 140-150mpw and you'll mine a few 2:09s. Get 1000 of them and you'll mine a few 2:07s (and many 2:09s). It's all a numbers game. malmo, inventor of malmo pizza, and malmo frottage. If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have. Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. There is a guy most of us know and love ... He ran at the highest levels many times over a career that stretched from age 15 to 35 ... 4-minute-miler, AR Steepler, AR half-marathoner, and pretty good marathoner ... still high on the US all-time list in the last three. Never ran a 200 mile week, never consistently logged 150 a week for any extended period. Never ran slower than 2:13:44. We see what you are saying about commitment and training levels, etc. and improvements in those things would help the US situation. But 150, 180 or 200 mpw isn't really what is gonna get this done /Brian McEwen -Original Message- From: Michael Rohl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 6:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; alan tobin Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. I think we would have a lot of dead runners. I keep hearing this again and again but 200 mile weeks are not the answer because I don't believe there are any runners really running 200mpw. Some say so but Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, TF Mansfield University
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Hey, you know I have a lot of useless data in my computer and in my head, stuff like the S African marathon program and the Fila program and the logs from Shorter, and Clayton and stuff like that. What I don't have is hard factual data on what the guys/gals from the rising sun do. Sure I've read the online interviews with Morris, but I wanted to see an actual annual outline with annual and seasonal progressions, workout paces, etc. It would be great if it was accurate and from the source, but if someone can just give me the nuts and bolts of it, I'd appreciate it. Heck I'm even half Japanese and I don't know what they're doing. Joe ps. And please don't say they run a lot of miles each week. I got that much of it, but wanted some specific and detailed insight if it's available. alan tobin wrote: We see what you are saying about commitment and training levels, etc. and improvements in those things would help the US situation. But 150, 180 or 200 mpw isn't really what is gonna get this done /Brian McEwen 100 is better than 70, 130 is better than 100, 160 is better than 130.. The Japanese seem to do quite well with ultra high mileage do they not? If you are running sub 2:13 on 100-120 miles a week then good for you, but if you are not then might as well jump up the mileage. If 150, 180, or 200 mpw isn't going to get it done then what will? 50? 70? 80? Of course mileage is only one issue here. 1. Run a lot of mileage (read: could be only 100, could be 150 could be whatever...it's a personally thing ,but you won't know what will work until you try it...who knowsmaybe Malmo would have been 2:09 with weekly doses of $1.50...then again maybe he would have been ran into the ground...again...who knows) 2. More longish runs at marathon pace. Monkey see, Monkey do. Japanese seem to have success with it, as do the Kenyans. Have we forgotten how to play follow the leader? 10-15 miles at marathon pace. I've heard that a staple of some of the Ehiopian marathoners (or maybe used to be) is a 20 mile run with the last 10 miles at marathon pace. Who said 10 miles at marathon pace is not a workout? It's better than 10 miles at a jogging pace. 3. Fast young runners running the marathon. The post about track credentials shows that the young fast runners don't move up to the marathon. We have a couple potential sub 2:10 marathoners out there, but they are running 10ks. The marathon in this country almost seems like a second string race now. Recap: There needs to be more young fast runners racing the marathon. Running higher mileage (100-200mpw), and running more longish tempo runs that are specific to the race distance instead of the usual 10k man workouts. Alan _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Back when Seko was running well, the reports were of him running ~160 miles per week, with the most critical workouts being two hard days of long tempo runs per week. I remember the hardest workout day struck me as 25K in both the morning and the afternoon at marathon pace for a 50K day at marathon pace. Occasionally he'd go out and run for 3 or 4 hours - I'm unsure of the pace but it was clearly not an easy 6:50 pace jog. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: Joe Rubio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 1:18 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! Hey, you know I have a lot of useless data in my computer and in my head, stuff like the S African marathon program and the Fila program and the logs from Shorter, and Clayton and stuff like that. What I don't have is hard factual data on what the guys/gals from the rising sun do. Sure I've read the online interviews with Morris, but I wanted to see an actual annual outline with annual and seasonal progressions, workout paces, etc. It would be great if it was accurate and from the source, but if someone can just give me the nuts and bolts of it, I'd appreciate it. Heck I'm even half Japanese and I don't know what they're doing. Joe ps. And please don't say they run a lot of miles each week. I got that much of it, but wanted some specific and detailed insight if it's available. alan tobin wrote: We see what you are saying about commitment and training levels, etc. and improvements in those things would help the US situation. But 150, 180 or 200 mpw isn't really what is gonna get this done /Brian McEwen 100 is better than 70, 130 is better than 100, 160 is better than 130.. The Japanese seem to do quite well with ultra high mileage do they not? If you are running sub 2:13 on 100-120 miles a week then good for you, but if you are not then might as well jump up the mileage. If 150, 180, or 200 mpw isn't going to get it done then what will? 50? 70? 80? Of course mileage is only one issue here. 1. Run a lot of mileage (read: could be only 100, could be 150 could be whatever...it's a personally thing ,but you won't know what will work until you try it...who knowsmaybe Malmo would have been 2:09 with weekly doses of $1.50...then again maybe he would have been ran into the ground...again...who knows) 2. More longish runs at marathon pace. Monkey see, Monkey do. Japanese seem to have success with it, as do the Kenyans. Have we forgotten how to play follow the leader? 10-15 miles at marathon pace. I've heard that a staple of some of the Ehiopian marathoners (or maybe used to be) is a 20 mile run with the last 10 miles at marathon pace. Who said 10 miles at marathon pace is not a workout? It's better than 10 miles at a jogging pace. 3. Fast young runners running the marathon. The post about track credentials shows that the young fast runners don't move up to the marathon. We have a couple potential sub 2:10 marathoners out there, but they are running 10ks. The marathon in this country almost seems like a second string race now. Recap: There needs to be more young fast runners racing the marathon. Running higher mileage (100-200mpw), and running more longish tempo runs that are specific to the race distance instead of the usual 10k man workouts. Alan _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Rubio raises some interesting questions. I think one of the big problems with U.S. marathoning is that they do not train like marathoners. They train like 5K/10K runners who put in a few 20-milers and then try to do the marathon. Training for the marathon isn't just about mileage. It's also about long runs. Jack Daniels' long tempo runs have come into vogue, and these are important, but I think we've gotten away from just running long. Don't worry about the pace. It doesn't have to be 6-minute pace (3:45/Km). Run 6:50 (4:10/Km), but do it for 3:00-4:00. I believe U.S. marathoners have gotten too cute in their training. Yes, they need to do some workouts like 6 x 1 Mile, and 10-mile runs at marathon pace, but it should not be at the expense of mileage and 3:00 runs in the hills. Another problem is obviously the lack of desire by many 28:50 10,000 runners to run the marathon. This baffles me, since a 2:15 marathon these days will get you a lot more notoriety/money than a 28:50. sideshow
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Number of factors: 1. Young runners wait to long to start the marathon mambo. Todd Williams could have broke the US record6 years ago. Look at the marathon men of the 70s/80s...lotta youngsters putting away the miles, not worried about losing track speed. We have 3 or 4 sub 2:10 marathon right now, but they are running 10ks on the track. In 5 years when they decide to move up they'll be also-rans. 2. Not enough group training. This is changing though. Back in the day you had the Squires/Boston mafia, the Colorado mafia, and the Athletic West mafia plus scores of other local clubs that were emphasising competition rather than completition. Most of the clubs today focus on just getting the masses out to the races, while clubs of yesteryear focused more on winning races and team competitions. I can see this in my own area. We have 4 or 5 clubs in the area who used to be all about running fast, but now they seem to be about just running. 3. Too little mileage. This too is changing. Our two best marathoners going into the 2000 marathon trials both made large gains in performance after they upped their mileage ante. Personally I think we have too many runners plugging away 100-130 and not enought plugging about 150-180. 20 miles a day used to be pretty normal. OK...so how do we change this??? 1. The problem of youth: Have an NCAA marathon. The NAIA has one and JUCO used to. If you are one of the last to qualify in the NCAA 10k why not just forgo the 10k and take a stab at the marathon. Have coaches push their seniors into taking a stab at the marathon after college, just for shits and giggles. 2. The problem of groups: This is already beginning to work itself out. If you are a decent (1:05/2:20) long distance runner then you have a few training groups that will be happy to have you. Then possibly work your way down to 1:02/2:10. What about the not so decent? The 1:08/2:25 types? These are the guys that need the most development, these are the guys that will make up the large second tier, the guys who could possibly run 2:12-15. This is where the more competition clubs would come into play. 3. The problem of mileage: This too is working itself out. Still, there needs to be more high school and college coaches pushing 100+ mileage. Who cares if you get injured? You'll heal, you'll learn, you'll get better. Alan http://www.geocities.com/runningart2004 _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Rubio raises some interesting questions. I think one of the big problems with U.S. marathoning is that they do not train like marathoners. They train like 5K/10K runners who put in a few 20-milers and then try to do the marathon. I agree with this statement, but. . Training for the marathon isn't just about mileage. It's also about long runs. Jack Daniels' long tempo runs have come into vogue, and these are important, but I think we've gotten away from just running long. Don't worry about the pace. It doesn't have to be 6-minute pace (3:45/Km). Run 6:50 (4:10/Km), but do it for 3:00-4:00. I believe U.S. marathoners have gotten too cute in their training. Yes, they need to do some workouts like 6 x 1 Mile, and 10-mile runs at marathon pace, but it should not be at the expense of mileage and 3:00 runs in the hills. This is crazy. There is no need for a 2:15 marathoner to run for 3:30 in training. It would be a huge waste of time. The problem is that people are doing 18-24 milers relatively easy (and even close to 6:00 pace is relatively easy if you are a 2:15 marathoner) and NOT doing the 13-20 mile hard runs at marathon pace, which will total 18-25 miles with a few miles of buildup and cooldown. 10 miles at marathon pace is not a workout, it's just a moderate training run. 10 miles at marathon pace is something that should be incorporated into longer runs during the base period and thats it. As you get into the last 2-3 months before a marathon anything less than 13 miles or so run around marathon pace is just a waste of effort. But the 13-20 mile marathon pace runs are exactly what the typical 10K schedule with a few long runs is missing. Folks, it's mileage AND effort. Long slow distance makes long slow runners. Shorter fast distance makes shorter fast runners. Long fast distance makes long fast runners - last time I checked running 4:45 per mile for 26 miles qualifies as long and fast! I believe Dr. Rosa is on the right track with his philosophy (what I know of it). 120-160 miles per week with over half of it moderate to hard. No killer workouts, except the occasional race or very long run building up to just faster than marathon pace. Very few easy days. Fartlek, track, and hill work whose average pace including recovery is slower than MP but whose effort is somewhat harder than MP. There is a legitimate argument that this type of training can result in burnout/injury, but the fact remains that it also gets results - better results than anything w're doing. An interesting note is that 30-25 years ago, Derek Clayton's training had a lot of similarities to this - and he ran a WR that lasted for 15 years (yes I know the WR is subject to a bit of controversy but his 2 or 3 best races were way above what others were doing at the time). He also got injured a lot! Another problem is obviously the lack of desire by many 28:50 10,000 runners to run the marathon. This baffles me, since a 2:15 marathon these days will get you a lot more notoriety/money than a 28:50. First, we don't have that many 28:50 10K runners, really. Second, while 28:50 probably does translate to close to 2:15, plenty of runners of this ability will not be as good at the marathon (some will be better of course). The marathon is a little bit more of a crapshoot than the 10K in terms of getting the training right and performing on the day that counts. I bet if every current sub 28:50 runner spent 6 months training for a marathon using typical American training methods, maybe 20% of them would run close to 2:15. Some do try it and this is about what we see. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
In a message dated Tue, 2 Oct 2001 9:10:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is downright EMBARASSING!! Hey, Michelle Rohl is No. 6 among American men in the 20W. gh
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
I wonder where 2:19:46 would have been 15-20 years ago? 100th?...maybe? Oh how the mighty have fallen. If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. Alan From: Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Martin J. Dixon [EMAIL PROTECTED], Track Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED], Track Field List [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bruce and Rosemary Deacon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:46:47 -0700 Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBD83ADBE00804004310A80DF8E0DF17F0; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:58:53 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f930sV918454for t-and-f-outgoing; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com [207.46.181.87])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f930sUA18448for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from c1721414b ([24.254.11.149]) by cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:53:45 -0700 From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:59:46 -0700 Message-ID: 000f01c14ba4$e1ecd940$[EMAIL PROTECTED] References: 015101c14b9f$974131c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2001 00:53:45.0406 (UTC) FILETIME=[DAB4E5E0:01C14BA5] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is downright EMBARASSING!! Mike Fanelli your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. (415) 447 - 6254 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.SFabode.com www.MarinHouseHunting.com Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:54:40 -0400 From: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia Trivia answer: 11th place Trivia question: Where would Naoko Takahashi stand on this year's U.S. marathon list ... for men. 2:12:41 - Rod DeHaven 2:16:17 - Josh Cox 2:16:48 - Eddy Hellebuyck 2:17:24 - Eric Polonski 2:17:47 - Kevin Collins 2:18:13 - Mike Dudley 2:18:34 - Matt Capelouto 2:18:57 - Danny Gough 2:18:58 - Mark Coogan 2:19:42 - Dennis Simonaitis (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) And in Canada-2nd just barely: 2:18:54, Bruce Deacon (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) Regards, Martin _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
In 1983 Tom Ratcliff ran 2:19:51 at Boston, the year Greg Meyer won in 2:09, and placed 83 with only 4 non USA in the top fifty. - Original Message - From: alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 1:11 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! I wonder where 2:19:46 would have been 15-20 years ago? 100th?...maybe? Oh how the mighty have fallen. If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. Alan From: Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Martin J. Dixon [EMAIL PROTECTED], Track Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED], Track Field List [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bruce and Rosemary Deacon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:46:47 -0700 Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBD83ADBE00804004310A80DF8E0DF17F0; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:58:53 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f930sV918454for t-and-f-outgoing; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com [207.46.181.87])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f930sUA18448for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from c1721414b ([24.254.11.149]) by cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:53:45 -0700 From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:59:46 -0700 Message-ID: 000f01c14ba4$e1ecd940$[EMAIL PROTECTED] References: 015101c14b9f$974131c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2001 00:53:45.0406 (UTC) FILETIME=[DAB4E5E0:01C14BA5] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is downright EMBARASSING!! Mike Fanelli your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. (415) 447 - 6254 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.SFabode.com www.MarinHouseHunting.com Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:54:40 -0400 From: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia Trivia answer: 11th place Trivia question: Where would Naoko Takahashi stand on this year's U.S. marathon list ... for men. 2:12:41 - Rod DeHaven 2:16:17 - Josh Cox 2:16:48 - Eddy Hellebuyck 2:17:24 - Eric Polonski 2:17:47 - Kevin Collins 2:18:13 - Mike Dudley 2:18:34 - Matt Capelouto 2:18:57 - Danny Gough 2:18:58 - Mark Coogan 2:19:42 - Dennis Simonaitis (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) And in Canada-2nd just barely: 2:18:54, Bruce Deacon (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) Regards, Martin _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. I think we would have a lot of dead runners. I keep hearing this again and again but 200 mile weeks are not the answer because I don't believe there are any runners really running 200mpw. Some say so but Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, TF Mansfield University
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Clarification: We need more runners running around 150 miles a week with flirtations with the 200 mile mark Read: Runners averaging 130-160 with a couple one time shots at much higher mileages (170, 180, dare I say 200?) Proof of Success: Japanese, numerous American runners of the 70s/80s, numerous African runners. Never said we need more people running 200mpw. Just more people flirting with that number. Flirting with 200 and running 200 are two entirely different concepts. Running 20 miles a day used to be the norm for marathoners in this country, now it is not. Alan From: Michael Rohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Michael Rohl [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 18:41:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBD84E01B00864004388B80DF8E0DFA950; Wed, 03 Oct 2001 15:46:05 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f93MjEx09169for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 15:45:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wheat.mnsfld.edu (wheat.mnsfld.edu [157.62.50.149])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f93MjDA09131for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 15:45:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mrohl [157.62.145.199] by wheat.mnsfld.edu with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.03) id A5843B00072; Wed, 03 Oct 2001 18:47:32 -0400 From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 03 Oct 2001 15:47:23 -0700 Message-ID: 3BBB5BDE.19805.B19CC0D@localhost In-reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. I think we would have a lot of dead runners. I keep hearing this again and again but 200 mile weeks are not the answer because I don't believe there are any runners really running 200mpw. Some say so but Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, TF Mansfield University _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
I know better than to comment on Garry's observation regarding Michelle Rohl...shooot all hell could break out on the list over something like that ;} Mike Fanelli your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. (415) 447 - 6254 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.SFabode.com www.MarinHouseHunting.com - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In a message dated Tue, 2 Oct 2001 9:10:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is downright EMBARASSING!! Hey, Michelle Rohl is No. 6 among American men in the 20W. gh
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
So what the heck are we gonna do about this? Lots of complaining, not a lot of people taking the lead and showing the way...Heck I don't know what to do, so I'm part of the problem. I mean I was not very good and neither was my old roommate, but we ran 2:18 and 2:19. I based the not very good on the fact that in our little town I had a diffrenet roommate at 2:12 (28:32), plus some other local at 2:13 (8:16 Steeple), plus another 2:13 (28:26 10k) guy in our club. So a bunch of knuckleheads running 2:12-19 here local and the thing was, 2:13 wasn't a big deal. It was the type of time you'd say, yeah, that's decent but a guy under 29:00 should be able to run 2:13 in his sleep. Thing is I only broke 30 once for 10k and got a 2:18. My buddy ran a 30:08 best and got a 2:19:26. I mean even Joe Karnes and Dave Frank made the damn Trials (exactly, who are Joe Karnes or Dave Frank?) and Frankie was a 29:52 guy turning out a 2:18:36. I just don't get it why we have 28:XX guys running 2:17's and above. I know too many guys who were sorry 10k runners who ran sub 2:20 years ago. No way we trained harder than the current crop, maybe different but not harder. And definitely no way we were faster cause their 10k times are something I only dreamed of approaching. Yet I read what these guys are doing today and just can't figure it out. Why are they faster at all distances except the marathon? I looked at my old logs and I'm pretty sure I never took drugs, so it ain't that either (beer and coffee yes, drugs no). Simply put we were 30 flat guys running 2:18/19 and now we have 28/29 flat 10k guys running the same times for 42k. Something ain't smelling right. But what's your opinion on US marathoning needs? Is it more stuff like the Fila or the Team USA camps? Is is moving to Japan and running for a corporate team over there? Alan thinks it's flirting with 200 MPW. People are training in the good ol' US of A and running sub 2:20 for women and sub 2:08 for men. Has anyone every approached the Japanese in Boulder and asked, can I train with you for a few months to help figure it out? What's Kahlid doing in Central Park? What are they doing in S Korea, S Africa, Spain, Japan that we can steal and use here I don't know, but I want to know. Tell me what they're doing and what we're not because I want the data so I can form an opinion. What in the name of Buddy Edelen is wrong here? We used to know how to get it done. I mean Squires had a steady stream of guys running sub 2:10 at Boston. Thomas, Rogers, Meyer and a young Salazar ain't a bad crew to have helped developed. Sev knows how to get it done, he had some lady from Maine running 2:22 and taking a victory stroll around the track in LA. Guys used to run around 28:xx and get sub 2:11's, maybe sub 2:13 at worst. Now we have the 28:xx's, we're getting nothing close to 2:12. We are starting to see plenty of sub 29's again. Hate to see it turn into 2:17's. Diver down flag here. Help me out cause I'm just don't get it. Joe alan tobin wrote: I wonder where 2:19:46 would have been 15-20 years ago? 100th?...maybe? Oh how the mighty have fallen. If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. Alan From: Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mike Fanelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Martin J. Dixon [EMAIL PROTECTED], Track Canada [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED], Track Field List [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bruce and Rosemary Deacon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:46:47 -0700 Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBD83ADBE00804004310A80DF8E0DF17F0; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:58:53 -0700 Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id f930sV918454for t-and-f-outgoing; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com [207.46.181.87])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f930sUA18448for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from c1721414b ([24.254.11.149]) by cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:53:45 -0700 From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:59:46 -0700 Message-ID: 000f01c14ba4$e1ecd940$[EMAIL PROTECTED] References: 015101c14b9f$974131c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2001 00:53:45.0406 (UTC) FILETIME=[DAB4E5E0:01C14BA5] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is downright EMBARASSING!! Mike
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
--- Joe Rubio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why are they faster at all distances except the marathon? Seems like a pretty straight forward issue. The marathon, for all intents and purposes, is a rather extreme outlier in terms of distance, when compared to the all [other] distances. To be as fast or faster at other distances, it would make sense that the endurance would be sacrificed somewhat in favor of speed, which could easily result in what we're seeing today. I'm probably starting to sound like a broken record, but the marathon is not the holy grail for *all* distance runners. Same for the commonly held belief that you should keep moving up in distance until you win... Some people are quite happy in the event they're currently in, which may well be the 10k (plenty long for most folks). Dan = http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Free Contests... @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] |\/ ^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (lifetime forwarding address) / / (503)370-9969 phone/fax __ Do You Yahoo!? NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is downright EMBARASSING!! Mike Fanelli your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. (415) 447 - 6254 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.SFabode.com www.MarinHouseHunting.com Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:54:40 -0400 From: Post, Marty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia Trivia answer: 11th place Trivia question: Where would Naoko Takahashi stand on this year's U.S. marathon list ... for men. 2:12:41 - Rod DeHaven 2:16:17 - Josh Cox 2:16:48 - Eddy Hellebuyck 2:17:24 - Eric Polonski 2:17:47 - Kevin Collins 2:18:13 - Mike Dudley 2:18:34 - Matt Capelouto 2:18:57 - Danny Gough 2:18:58 - Mark Coogan 2:19:42 - Dennis Simonaitis (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) And in Canada-2nd just barely: 2:18:54, Bruce Deacon (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) Regards, Martin
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Embarassing..but not surprising. NeTrack
