Guilty as charged, however, everything has to go just right not only in the race itself, but leading up.
I think you can be in X shape for quite a few marathons and miss by a little (or more of course) each time simply because of the effect of the distance combined with pace/effort. There is no race quite like it.
A 50K is often an easier distance, simply because the pace is slower by just enough to take the edge off, a 30K is short enough that you don't get that 32K-plus effect, of course....the dreaded wall.
This is one reason why I wonder if 2:00:00 could come sooner than people think, other than being a red flag for drug use, which I suppose might prevent someone from making it happen, but really, look at the 2:02:57 to 2:06 finishers, they typically don't look like they went to the well in a marathon - not like a 2:30-ish runner....could the Kimettos and Kipsangs and Keitanys have gone faster? Radcliffe look like she went to the well....
Anyway it is very hard to master exactly right. Ask all the elites. A small percentage will say they did as well as their potential allowed when looking back on their careers. They will almost always suggest they could have gone just a little faster.
Coolsaet has shown the signs of being able to run 2:08-high to 2:09-something, but to get it exactly right is probably more rare than we realize...maybe a little luck is involved too?
I'd like to see him do it and really nail it. Like a 2:07-high...just get the exact right day....