“I’m glad I’m 40 because the sport when I started? That’s a different sport,” Linden said. “If I had to peak in my career with the super shoes, maybe I’d break 2:20, which doesn’t put you in the conversation now. I don’t mean that as a knock on anyone, but if you want to be competitive, you’re going to have to level up and start believing that 2:14s are in your wheelhouse. So, I’m glad I’m 40.”
Des is realistic that 2:20 and slower women marathoners are not competitive nowadays and "doesn't put you in the conversation now". Do our younger American women marathoners listen?
Des needs to work on her grammar first. Plus, why do I suspect she’s going to be hanging out for another decade? She can be put out to pasture as far as I’m concerned.
For example, a 2:15 marathoner from 1995 might say he was a 2:12 marathoner due to not having the super shoes. I am not saying I agree with it but it will happen.
Des is grasping every time she has the mic these days. Everything she does aims to get a rise—a candy bar at the presser, didn’t know my (sponsor) GPS watch wouldn’t be accurate in Chicago, 2:20 is the new 2:whatever.
Molly Seidel and her Olympic bronze medal say hello.
Do the Kenyans and Ethiopians even care about a bronze? They race to win whereas the American women race to lose for minor placings. I don't think the East Africans even celebrate bronze like Americans do because they know it's not a gold.
Molly Seidel and her Olympic bronze medal say hello.
A quirk. Female Olympic Marathon often split 30K at 2:22:30 plus Marathon race pace. This keeps the 2:25 to 2:27:30 Marathoners in the ballgame. Have you ever allowed the first (3500 to 4000)m of 5000m race or 5K road race or 5K XC race to be split too slowly thus keeping inferior runners in the ballgame? Same thing.
Molly Seidel and her Olympic bronze medal say hello.
Do the Kenyans and Ethiopians even care about a bronze? They race to win whereas the American women race to lose for minor placings. I don't think the East Africans even celebrate bronze like Americans do because they know it's not a gold.
-kelvin scale/10
either this poster is a clinical idiot or you have to pay the troll toll to get into this boy's soul
Do the Kenyans and Ethiopians even care about a bronze? They race to win whereas the American women race to lose for minor placings. I don't think the East Africans even celebrate bronze like Americans do because they know it's not a gold.
-kelvin scale/10
either this poster is a clinical idiot or you have to pay the troll toll to get into this boy's soul
Des made a couple Olympic Teams....she's obviously great.
As a teammate of her at Hansons when that first happened (and when she got 2nd at Boston),
I would say it is fair to say if we had "super shoes" back in 2011-2012 we probably all would have been 1-3 minutes faster for a marathon. Maybe not 100% as some respond differently, but some super shoes are for sure making people (Even elites!) a few minutes faster. The science is clear on that.
As far as "legal courses" go....well, people like to discredit anyone's PR nowadays if it doesn't show up on their World Athletics Profile. I believe times/performances need to be taken into context:
Following only World Athletics, that basically means none of you can count your PR from a course like CIM, Boston, Grandmas (or in my case Rock n' Rock San Diego) either then.
But the issue with Des is that her fastest time was not so much the net downhill nature of the course (Boston)...it was more the fact that on a point-to point course you have a potential for a massive tailwind. And that's exactly what happened when she ran 2:22 there for 2nd in 2011 (remember Ryan Hall ran 2:04 in that race too?!).
Then of course when she won Boston it was a super headwind day (tough conditions!). So there's that performance also....despite the relatively slow time. It could be argued that she does really well on extreme weather days at Boston.
But I would agree there is nothing from her 5km, 10k, and half marathon PRs to suggest that she actually was a "sub 2:20" kind of runner on a flat course in normal weather conditions....even if she had super shoes back then. However, if she had super shoes on that day at Boston her time very well could have been 2:19:xx....just everyone would have also been faster and she might not have gotten 2nd then!
Our cohort is a tough one to be in though...because I look back at my prime marathon years (circa 2011-2015) and think "if only those super shoes were out back then!"... Runners drop 2:18 like it's nothing now. These are runners that used to run 2:21 before!
Des made a couple Olympic Teams....she's obviously great.
As a teammate of her at Hansons when that first happened (and when she got 2nd at Boston),
I would say it is fair to say if we had "super shoes" back in 2011-2012 we probably all would have been 1-3 minutes faster for a marathon. Maybe not 100% as some respond differently, but some super shoes are for sure making people (Even elites!) a few minutes faster. The science is clear on that.
As far as "legal courses" go....well, people like to discredit anyone's PR nowadays if it doesn't show up on their World Athletics Profile. I believe times/performances need to be taken into context:
Following only World Athletics, that basically means none of you can count your PR from a course like CIM, Boston, Grandmas (or in my case Rock n' Rock San Diego) either then.
But the issue with Des is that her fastest time was not so much the net downhill nature of the course (Boston)...it was more the fact that on a point-to point course you have a potential for a massive tailwind. And that's exactly what happened when she ran 2:22 there for 2nd in 2011 (remember Ryan Hall ran 2:04 in that race too?!).
Then of course when she won Boston it was a super headwind day (tough conditions!). So there's that performance also....despite the relatively slow time. It could be argued that she does really well on extreme weather days at Boston.
But I would agree there is nothing from her 5km, 10k, and half marathon PRs to suggest that she actually was a "sub 2:20" kind of runner on a flat course in normal weather conditions....even if she had super shoes back then. However, if she had super shoes on that day at Boston her time very well could have been 2:19:xx....just everyone would have also been faster and she might not have gotten 2nd then!
Our cohort is a tough one to be in though...because I look back at my prime marathon years (circa 2011-2015) and think "if only those super shoes were out back then!"... Runners drop 2:18 like it's nothing now. These are runners that used to run 2:21 before!
TY for posting Sage. This is great to get a professional's take on these posts, some of which are crazy. Please post more often.
Des made a couple Olympic Teams....she's obviously great.
As a teammate of her at Hansons when that first happened (and when she got 2nd at Boston),
I would say it is fair to say if we had "super shoes" back in 2011-2012 we probably all would have been 1-3 minutes faster for a marathon. Maybe not 100% as some respond differently, but some super shoes are for sure making people (Even elites!) a few minutes faster. The science is clear on that.
As far as "legal courses" go....well, people like to discredit anyone's PR nowadays if it doesn't show up on their World Athletics Profile. I believe times/performances need to be taken into context:
Following only World Athletics, that basically means none of you can count your PR from a course like CIM, Boston, Grandmas (or in my case Rock n' Rock San Diego) either then.
But the issue with Des is that her fastest time was not so much the net downhill nature of the course (Boston)...it was more the fact that on a point-to point course you have a potential for a massive tailwind. And that's exactly what happened when she ran 2:22 there for 2nd in 2011 (remember Ryan Hall ran 2:04 in that race too?!).
Then of course when she won Boston it was a super headwind day (tough conditions!). So there's that performance also....despite the relatively slow time. It could be argued that she does really well on extreme weather days at Boston.
But I would agree there is nothing from her 5km, 10k, and half marathon PRs to suggest that she actually was a "sub 2:20" kind of runner on a flat course in normal weather conditions....even if she had super shoes back then. However, if she had super shoes on that day at Boston her time very well could have been 2:19:xx....just everyone would have also been faster and she might not have gotten 2nd then!
Our cohort is a tough one to be in though...because I look back at my prime marathon years (circa 2011-2015) and think "if only those super shoes were out back then!"... Runners drop 2:18 like it's nothing now. These are runners that used to run 2:21 before!
Yeah Desi had a monster tailwind at Boston that most thought was worth 2-3 minutes. You are not entirely objective though because you are a 2:18:24 marathoner on a legal course and a 2:16:52 runner on a not legal course. Of course your non legal course was probably not 2-3 minutes fast due to a monster tailwind like Desi had. No doubt you would have run 2-3 minutes faster in the super shoes. I certainly never questioned that.
Molly Seidel and her Olympic bronze medal say hello.
Do the Kenyans and Ethiopians even care about a bronze? They race to win whereas the American women race to lose for minor placings. I don't think the East Africans even celebrate bronze like Americans do because they know it's not a gold.
Yes. East Africans are not monolithic. They are individual people just like other human beings. Some might be upset with a bronze because they feel they could have won gold, others might be disappointed but happy they at least won a medal, and many would be thrilled. Also Kenyans would be happy an Ethiopian didn’t get the bronze etc.
You would find the same mix of feelings with North American sprinters / hurdlers.
“I’m glad I’m 40 because the sport when I started? That’s a different sport,” Linden said. “If I had to peak in my career with the super shoes, maybe I’d break 2:20, which doesn’t put you in the conversation now. I don’t mean that as a knock on anyone, but if you want to be competitive, you’re going to have to level up and start believing that 2:14s are in your wheelhouse. So, I’m glad I’m 40.”
Des is realistic that 2:20 and slower women marathoners are not competitive nowadays and "doesn't put you in the conversation now". Do our younger American women marathoners listen?
“I’m glad I’m 40 because the sport when I started? That’s a different sport,” Linden said. “If I had to peak in my career with the super shoes, maybe I’d break 2:20, which doesn’t put you in the conversation now. I don’t mean that as a knock on anyone, but if you want to be competitive, you’re going to have to level up and start believing that 2:14s are in your wheelhouse. So, I’m glad I’m 40.”
Des is realistic that 2:20 and slower women marathoners are not competitive nowadays and "doesn't put you in the conversation now". Do our younger American women marathoners listen?
Molly Seidel and her Olympic bronze medal say hello.
Do the Kenyans and Ethiopians even care about a bronze? They race to win whereas the American women race to lose for minor placings. I don't think the East Africans even celebrate bronze like Americans do because they know it's not a gold.
Pretty sure they would celebrate a bronze in the 100, 200, 400, 4x100, or 4x400.
Lol, how is this "throwing shade"? Do you even know what that means? She's stating an objective truth about currently competitive times in the women's marathon and the development of shoe technology. I'm sure most American women marathoners are aware of what time they need to run to be competitive on the world stage. Their place in majors makes that quite obvious.
