Walmsley just had a crazy week of training

BL3737 wrote:

Latest sesh from the Walms (from his strava): 10x800m with 400m jog:

2.20 first 6, then 2.16, 2.15, 2.14, 2.10.

Analyze + Discus.

Love me some good Yasso 800s! What is the average on those, about 2:17ish, though that final one is definitely quick.

Anyways, if that translates to the marathon time, a 2:17 is not quite equivalent to a sub 1:05.

But, Jim's workouts have been looking better the last couple of weeks. Still, not a whole lot of time left. I do hope he gets it. And I actually thought the standard was sub 1:04, but I guess it is sub 1:05. I am liking his chances a little bit more. But I think it is more likely he doesn't get it.

Still, a kickass 800s workout is noooooo predictor of distance fitness.

You’re correct in saying that he’s not raced Smyth or Wacker in a shorter mountain race, but he did better Joe Grays CR at the Kendall Mountain Run by 3 minutes. Joe Gray is no slouch. Walmsley actually ran a bit slower than Joe to the summit but Walmsley ran the 5.4 mile downhill at 4:36 pace which is absolutely insane.

But I agree with you that Walmsley hasn’t done much other to show he can run a sub 64.

I agree with all what reed said.

I remember this run for Gray. I actually was there in Colorado during the week and can tell you Gray didn't run hard down at all. He also had come from sea level for that event which tops out over 13k feet! Gray would have smashed Jim in any shorter trail race! Gray has a long list of accomplishment against stellar fields not simply ultra fields where there are few professional athletes.

Anyway I do think Jim cracks the otq if only narrowly, he will.

You guys forget that Walmsley recently ran 13:33 for 5km, that certainly indicates sub-1:04, mr. reed.

My bad, 13:34

https://www.strava.com/activities/1936819595/overview

jklj wrote:

You guys forget that Walmsley recently ran 13:33 for 5km, that certainly indicates sub-1:04, mr. reed.

That was a down hill 5k.

reed wrote:

Additionally, I'll stand by my comment that he probably wouldn't have set the CR in 2015, the year he made a wrong turn. He was losing a ton of ground on CR pace and was obviously not mentally in a good spot. I could pull up splits for you if you want more details.

So everything you've said has been wrong. Thank you, please come again.

I would disagree about the course record. The 10 miles before stopping were at a pace faster than course record pace. His problem when going off course was no nutrition which he would have had staying on course.

Miles 83 to 92 took 84 minutes or 8:24 pace. 8:24 pace is 13:45 for 100 miles.

yassocowboy wrote:

BL3737 wrote:

Latest sesh from the Walms (from his strava): 10x800m with 400m jog:

2.20 first 6, then 2.16, 2.15, 2.14, 2.10.

Analyze + Discus.

Love me some good Yasso 800s! What is the average on those, about 2:17ish, though that final one is definitely quick.

Anyways, if that translates to the marathon time, a 2:17 is not quite equivalent to a sub 1:05.

But, Jim's workouts have been looking better the last couple of weeks. Still, not a whole lot of time left. I do hope he gets it. And I actually thought the standard was sub 1:04, but I guess it is sub 1:05. I am liking his chances a little bit more. But I think it is more likely he doesn't get it.

Still, a kickass 800s workout is noooooo predictor of distance fitness.

It is 1:04:00

This thread is hilarious!!!!!! wrote:

Walmsley is living the DREAM and you pathetic keyboard jockey losers are wasting your time denigrating him on a message board. I doubt any of you could even run a 44 miler or a 2:10 800.

I'll be cheering for Walmsley to make the trials.

Agreed. The feeling of being able to run down and up the Grand Canyon with friends is worth a training log entry that doesn't align with a traditional road racing plan. Plus, 5,000 feet of climbing will give a guy some pretty good power. It's not like he's losing strength by doing that run.

I personally hope he gets that OTQ, mostly to shut up the peanut gallery.

Jim's a great guy, and incredibly talented. I'd love to see him on the Comrades starting line...

Look guys... I get that Walmsley hasn't exactly torn it up in training, but I still think he gets the OTQ

Why? The guy is an absolute physical freak and when he sets his sights on a goal.. he usually gets it, as evidenced by the runs below.

The run at Sonoma and Tarawera are particularly impressive... even ~2 years ago, he was capable of running 7 minute miles for over 62 miles with 9K of vert.

The guy is a MUCH better athlete now than he was 2 years ago too.

Long story short: I think he has the engine to get it done in Houston.

https://www.strava.com/activities/1508960134

https://www.strava.com/activities/862139531

https://www.strava.com/activities/1660214471

He’ll run 1:04:46 and miss the OTQ

No discredit to Jim. He is a fantastic athlete in his own right, but those faster workouts dont indicate anything spectacular. OP probably has no idea what it takes to be fast. I ran a handful 65-66 halfs off of workouts like those. Im not special by any means but those workouts dont indicate OTQ unless he breezed through them without any real effort.

Like others have said - he has a way better chance at marathon q than HM q...

It IS on strava......... wrote:

Miles 83 to 92 took 84 minutes or 8:24 pace. 8:24 pace is 13:45 for 100 miles.

earlier mile splits aren't that reflective of what you'd split in the last 10 miles. especially in the last 10 miles of a 100 mile race. miles 82 to 91 are very smooth and runnable. you can run 6:00 miles in there if fresh. the last 9-10 miles are constantly climbing or descending, on trashed legs.

he was faltering and falling off CR pace. but don't just believe my word, here are the splits:

Mile......Jim......Tim

80........11:23......11:49

85.........12:15.......12:35

90.........12:57........13:14

so you can see that Tim made up 6 minutes from 79.8 to 85.2 and then he made up another 3 minutes from 85.2 to 89.9.

Yes, I'm making the assumption that Jim would have continued to fade (relative to Tim in 2012). However, nobody knows for sure what would have happened. I'll admit that I haven't exactly proven my point by providing actual splits, but I'm trying to be as honest as possible. Tim closed incredibly well in 2012 and not many people have matched his final 10 miles (92 minutes). In fact, I've compiled splits in a spreadsheet and can tell you all exactly who has!

I only looked at data from runners who ran under 16 hours, so could be missing something, but unlikely.

fastest last 10.3 miles:

Rob Krar, 91 minutes 2013

Tim Olsen, 93 minutes 2012

Tim Olsen, 96 minutes 2013

4 other guys ran 98-99 minutes

most were 105-110 minutes

you'd expect that Jim would be around 105 minutes for the final 10.3 miles. that would be 12:57 + 1:45 = 14:42. record is 14:46. but that's so close that you can't really call it. one poop-stop and he could lose it.

24 runners were used in my spreadsheet, from non-snow course years.

anon_hobby_jogger wrote:

With his kind of base of longer miles, why is he going for the half marathon qualifier instead of the marathon qualifier?

In an interview with Ben Rosario, coach of Hoka NAZ Elite, Walmsley explained that he wants to run the half qualifier to see if he has what it takes to have a serious shot at being a contender for a spot on the Olympic Team which he thinks will be around a 2:11. He is not just trying to get an OTQ — I don’t think anyone who is not a troll thinks Walmsley can’t run a sub 2:19.

I just don't get the hate some of ya'll have of Jim. He seems to have personally offended many of you.

With that out of the way, I hope he goes sub-1:04 but it's going to be tough. Those workouts look good but not great but they are all done at altitude. The high mileage and super long runs could come back to bite him. He is, however, heading to the right race for this. He'll, at the very least, get to sit in a pack for most of the race if he can hit 4:50s. I hope he gets it. It's a good story line and debate for the sport if he doesn't run a road marathon before the Trials but is on the start line.

NewtotheSouthSide wrote:

I just don't get the hate some of ya'll have of Jim. He seems to have personally offended many of you.

It was the disrespect for other runners and their achievements which created that. Announcing that he brought speed to ultras didn't help as well. He is a good runner but he is not better than other good runners on a lot of days.