abbenormal wrote:
Last time I checked Ritz beat Hall when it mattered at the Olympics.
Nonsense.
They don't give prizes for 9th or 10th at the olympics. It did not matter.
abbenormal wrote:
Last time I checked Ritz beat Hall when it mattered at the Olympics.
Nonsense.
They don't give prizes for 9th or 10th at the olympics. It did not matter.
Ritz is the tougher racer and the larger talent, he just doesn't train cautiously enough and gets injured way too often.
And whoever said that Ritz had a good race and Hall didn't at the Olympics is an idiot. Ritz literally stopped racing for like a minute, he barely finished the race. Quite simply put Ritz prepared far better and raced harder. period.
Antony wrote:
I LOVE statements like that: "without the cramps he would have been 7th or better." Why don't you say, Without all the guys in front of him, he would have won? Or, if he hadn't run that slow, he would have run faster? F^cktard.
Doc Holliday wrote:Ritz stopped in the Olympic marathon because he was having cramps. He had to stretch out his legs for a minute. He was not happy about the Olympics because without the cramps he would have been 7th or better. Head to head Hall has beaten Ritz only two times. One of those times Ritz was very sick and had walking Pneumonia. I'd say they are on level ground in terms of success in their careers. Ritz has the hardware, and Hall has the times.
I have been fans of them since 2001 and that was the year I began my switch from soccer to running. I hope to see many more races of these two for years to come. I want to see more races like that 03` NCAA xc race where it came down to a long 400 meter kick by both of them with Ritz barely coming out on top. God I love these two!! However, I'm more of a fan of Ritz.. GO RITZ!!!
Without all the guys in front of him, he would have won? Or, if he hadn't run that slow, he would have run faster...
Now, I say 7th or better because I believe he was in 8th when he stopped. The guy who he was running with got 6th or 5th I believe. People were dropping like flies the last 4 miles. Back to the point... Ritz still beat Hall despite stopping and stretching.
Ritz beat Hall at the 2008 CC nationals by the way, their last CC meeing
No. 10th at the olympics was NOT competitive. Ritz was never within 100ft of the leaders except at the starting line. How was he competitive? Wanjiru, Merga, Gharib, etc never even knew Ritz was in the race so I think that is pretty definitive that Ritz wasn't competitive.
what is with everyone thinking he got 10th?
My bad he was 9th, Hall was 10th.
top 10 in the world is competitive in any race. PERIOD.
10th place at the Olympics isn't competitive? I think you should ask who finished 11th, 12th, 13th, and so on. I'd say if only 9 people in the world beat you, then you're pretty damn competitive in the marathon.
you forgot it wrote:
2:06:17
5th place
rabbits
course designed to be fast
Why is Ritz going to london ?
people run fast there
people he has beat got wicked pr's there
ritz is going for a taste
The better question is who will run faster, Ritz at the very fast, ultra-competitive London or Hall at the slow, less competitive Boston this year? Or will Ritz be able to equal Hall's 2008 London time? My sense is that Hall is in tremendous shape now and he struggled at the Olympics because he didn't take enough recovery time after his great London effort last April. But Boston is a slow course.
I think it will actually be close. Both should run in the 2:07-2:08 range.
I read some comments by ritz a while back saying he was going to go out with the B team pacers and not the guys rabbitting lel and wanjiru. I think the B guys aim for 2:07-2:08 pace while the A guys go around 2:04-2:05.
Doesn't matter who is better, all that matters is they both do not where the girly-man Solinsky Socks !
They both do not what?
so do people think that Hall will run a faster time at Boston than Ritz in London? That is an extremely tough order to ask on that course, if it does happen is Hall the " best " ?
If Hall is in the condition of his London 2008, he has a great shot at the Boston course record. Judging by the weather up in Burlington, it seems like it might be a bit warm conditions for Boston. (It would be excellent if they ran the thing at 8 a.m.).
Antony wrote:
I LOVE statements like that: "without the cramps he would have been 7th or better." Why don't you say, Without all the guys in front of him, he would have won? Or, if he hadn't run that slow, he would have run faster? F^cktard.
Doc Holliday wrote:Ritz stopped in the Olympic marathon because he was having cramps. He had to stretch out his legs for a minute. He was not happy about the Olympics because without the cramps he would have been 7th or better. Head to head Hall has beaten Ritz only two times. One of those times Ritz was very sick and had walking Pneumonia. I'd say they are on level ground in terms of success in their careers. Ritz has the hardware, and Hall has the times.
I have been fans of them since 2001 and that was the year I began my switch from soccer to running. I hope to see many more races of these two for years to come. I want to see more races like that 03` NCAA xc race where it came down to a long 400 meter kick by both of them with Ritz barely coming out on top. God I love these two!! However, I'm more of a fan of Ritz.. GO RITZ!!!
Jeez... Do you NOT want Ritz to succeed? I'm sure he lost a good amount of ground because he had to stretch. I want to see Hall do well in Boston just as much as I want to see Ritz do well in London. The order doesn't matter. They're both great runners, but it's just a shame how Ritz's career has been hampered by injuries.
I do not feel people do not want to see Ritz succeed, do you think Hall is the best American regardless?
strike that reverse it, I do not feel that people want to see Ritz fail, but do you they think Hall is the best American regardless?
I feel Ritz does not answer with a monster time then we can safely say Hall is the better american marathoner.