| |
Main
Date: 20 Oct 2006 06:57:46
From: LSmith
Subject: Chicago Marathon
|
Aren't there some people other than Donovan running in this event this
weekend? Can we get a roll call going? Bib numbers? Is the race
streamed or live chip updates on the course or something?
Good luck Donovan.
|
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 10:36:07
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
> #943
_
okay, now we know you've been busy with all sorts of stuff and life has
gotten in the way with running. your goals in the race are your goals.
but out of curiousity, can you tell us what you're taper was like?
just wondering what kind of taper you implimented. and diet. i think
you're a mircobiotic vegan or something close. any particular
loading? I mean you are racing in less than 48 hours....
salt tabs? do you hit the water or gatorade or a mix'em at the
stations? weather forecast?
|
| | |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 18:14:21
From: Elflord
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
On 2006-10-20, LSmith <Digisend@gmail.com > wrote:
>
>> #943
> _
>
> okay, now we know you've been busy with all sorts of stuff and life has
> gotten in the way with running. your goals in the race are your goals.
> but out of curiousity, can you tell us what you're taper was like?
Taper involved less running (very little, maybe not enough), the usual speed
work, and the odd trip to the track for some strides.
I'm still going to go out at 6:30mpm, and see what happens. If all goes well,
I run a 2:50. If it doesn't, I'll suck it up and take what comes. It's really
hard to know exactly how fit I am, because my mileage dropped off a little before
the scheduled taper (so by the time I lost fitness from the dropoff, it was too
late to give myself an all-out test)
> just wondering what kind of taper you implimented. and diet. i think
As of last night, I'm getting a lot of carbs. Got a pack of muffins,
low fat yogurt and pasta.
> salt tabs?
nah, looks like it will be fairly cool. Don't think there's much point for the
sub 3 crowd anyway (I ***hope I'm still in the sub 3 crowd!!!).
> do you hit the water or gatorade or a mix'em at the
water and gel.
> stations? weather forecast?
Cool, cloudy. I will need some extra layers at the start, I get really cold
really easily. According to my read of weather.com this morning, it doesn't
look like it's going to rain.
Cheers,
--
Elflord
|
| | | |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 17:48:34
From: Doug Freese
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Elflord" <abuse@aol.com > wrote in message
news:slrneji4ft.sad.abuse@panix2.panix.com...
> On 2006-10-20, LSmith <Digisend@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm still going to go out at 6:30mpm, and see what happens. If all
> goes well,
> I run a 2:50.
From 2:58 to 2:50 is big chunk of improvementy at that level. My swag
without knowing all the specifics is 2:55 but I hope you do hit your
2:50 even 2:49:59.
-Doug
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 00:07:39
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Doug Freese" <dfreese@hvc.rr.com > wrote:
>From 2:58 to 2:50 is big chunk of improvementy at that level.
2:58 was his first ever, and not done with optimal training IIRC and
definately not done with enough humility :-)
I figure Donovan is "worth" better than 2:48 in peak condition and on a
good course.
|
| | | |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 18:24:58
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Elflord <abuse@aol.com > wrote:
>nah, looks like it will be fairly cool. Don't think there's much point for the
>sub 3 crowd anyway (I ***hope I'm still in the sub 3 crowd!!!).
I don't there's much point in the sub-4 crowd
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 09:54:44
From: Charlie Pendejo
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Donovan wrote:
> I think there's some tracking facility, because teammates have also
> asked for my bib #
That's because they want to tell their BQ-hopeful friends whom to pace
off of, having read on wreck.running that you had a pretty good shot of
going sub-3:10. ;-p
Best of luck, and don't slip and fall in the snow!
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 14:59:48
From: Daniel-San
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"LSmith" wrote ...
> Aren't there some people other than Donovan running in this event this
> weekend? Can we get a roll call going? Bib numbers? Is the race
> streamed or live chip updates on the course or something?
>
> Good luck Donovan.
>
#31401
Back-uh-da-pack slowpoke. And proud of it.
Dan
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 21:24:20
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Daniel-San" <qnaoehafsylsvfu@tznvy.pbz (Rot13) > wrote:
>#31401
>
>Back-uh-da-pack slowpoke. And proud of it.
Well done Dan :-) 4:41:43
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 21:13:47
From: Daniel-San
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"steve common" wrote ..
> "Daniel-San" wrote:
>
>>#31401
>>
>>Back-uh-da-pack slowpoke. And proud of it.
>
> Well done Dan :-) 4:41:43
I guess it worked out to be more of a middle of the pack slowpoke, eh?
That last 10K is a bitch.
Hell of a lot of fun. Weather sucked, but who cares.
Dan
..who's self impressed with the half time...
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 14:19:46
From: Elflord
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
On 2006-10-20, LSmith <Digisend@gmail.com > wrote:
> Aren't there some people other than Donovan running in this event this
> weekend? Can we get a roll call going? Bib numbers? Is the race
> streamed or live chip updates on the course or something?
>
> Good luck Donovan.
#943
I think there's some tracking facility, because teammates have also asked for my
bib #
Cheers,
--
Elflord
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 19:42:29
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Elflord <abuse@aol.com > wrote:
>#943
START 5K 10K 15K 20K HALF
7:59:21 0:20:07 00:40:00 00:59:51 01:19:48 01:24:10
25K 30K 35K 40K FINISH
01:39:51 02:00:10 02:20:51 02:42:27 02:51:52
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 19:45:18
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
steve common <stevenZ.common@wanadoo.fr > wrote:
>START 5K 10K 15K 20K HALF
>7:59:21 0:20:07 00:40:00 00:59:51 01:19:48 01:24:10
>
>25K 30K 35K 40K FINISH
>01:39:51 02:00:10 02:20:51 02:42:27 02:51:52
He was on schedule for ~4'/km = 2:48:xx or so until sometime around 35k.
Probably when the wind struck?
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2006 19:18:35
From: Elflord
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
On 2006-10-22, steve common <stevenZ.common@wanadoo.fr > wrote:
> steve common <stevenZ.common@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
>>START 5K 10K 15K 20K HALF
>>7:59:21 0:20:07 00:40:00 00:59:51 01:19:48 01:24:10
>>
>>25K 30K 35K 40K FINISH
>>01:39:51 02:00:10 02:20:51 02:42:27 02:51:52
>
> He was on schedule for ~4'/km = 2:48:xx or so until sometime around 35k.
> Probably when the wind struck?
The wind was pretty gusty all the way, though with a field as deep as it
was, there were packs to hide behind for some of it. Conditions were pretty
good overall, it was cool and the course was fast. I went out a bit faster
than planned, because there were some teammates who wanted to hit about 20:00
on each 5k split, and I figured it would be best to run with them.
I slowed down, but it didn't feel like a catastrophic crash, just out of
"oomph".
Cheers,
--
Elflord
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 22:18:00
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Elflord <abuse@aol.com > wrote:
>I slowed down, but it didn't feel like a catastrophic crash, just out of
>"oomph".
An approx 3' positive for a 3h finisher, when the winning runner did an
approx 1:30 positive for 2:10-ish, is far from catastrophic and is barely
even "out of the ordinary". Maybe you could have done a minute better, but
What the hell, I'd take a 2:51 anyday :-)
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 10:43:32
From: Doug Freese
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"steve common" <stevenZ.common@wanadoo.fr > wrote in message
news:o2tsj2tlr83q529c9uhs8a2qa3ulpp8t1r@4ax.com...
> Elflord <abuse@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>I slowed down, but it didn't feel like a catastrophic crash, just out
>>of
>>"oomph".
>
> An approx 3' positive for a 3h finisher, when the winning runner did
> an
> approx 1:30 positive for 2:10-ish, is far from catastrophic and is
> barely
> even "out of the ordinary". Maybe you could have done a minute better,
> but
> What the hell, I'd take a 2:51 anyday :-)
From a local very experienced runner who ran 2:40
======================================
" the conditions were exactly as you said kevin, cold and raw which i
generally like, but the wind was a bit much. we spent a good bit of
the race running with either a strong crosswind or headwind,
including straight upwind the final 4 miles. windchill was about 30
degrees.
i was hoping to run 2:35 and think i probably would have without the
wind.
=========================================
This guy knows his racing and if he suggests the wind was a significant
factor then I would believe him, unlike Lance who types at his key board
with zero knowledge. Contrary to Lance's ad nauseam claim that Donovan's
effort was sub-par, I would say he definitely over-achieved. I thought
the 2:51(love to say 2:51 just to piss off Mr. Whiny) in and of it's
self was over achieving.
I won't say that Donovan would have run 5 minutes faster but I would say
he would have cracked 2:50.
-Doug
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2006 05:42:22
From: Dot
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Elflord wrote:
> On 2006-10-20, LSmith <Digisend@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Aren't there some people other than Donovan running in this event this
>>weekend? Can we get a roll call going? Bib numbers? Is the race
>>streamed or live chip updates on the course or something?
>>
>>Good luck Donovan.
>
>
> #943
>
> I think there's some tracking facility, because teammates have also asked for my
> bib #
>
Good job, Donovan!
Dot
--
"Dream big and dare to fail." --- Norman Vaughan
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2006 19:41:52
From: Elflord
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
On 2006-10-23, Dot <dot.h@#duh?att.net > wrote:
> Elflord wrote:
>> On 2006-10-20, LSmith <Digisend@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Aren't there some people other than Donovan running in this event this
>>>weekend? Can we get a roll call going? Bib numbers? Is the race
>>>streamed or live chip updates on the course or something?
>>>
>>>Good luck Donovan.
>>
>>
>> #943
>>
>> I think there's some tracking facility, because teammates have also asked for my
>> bib #
>>
>
> Good job, Donovan!
Thanks! Had a great time out there.
Cheers,
--
Elflord
|
| |
Date: 20 Oct 2006 21:25:42
From: Parker Race
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"LSmith" <Digisend@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1161352666.659345.91230@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Aren't there some people other than Donovan running in this event this
> weekend? Can we get a roll call going? Bib numbers? Is the race
> streamed or live chip updates on the course or something?
>
> Good luck Donovan.
>
They don't appear to have an online tracking option but you can sign up to
have runner updates sent to you by e-mail and phone.
http://www.chicagomarathon.com/
I just signed up to receive updates for a team mate.
He's hoping to run 2:22 or better. Hopefully the third time will be the
charm.
PR
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 18:37:25
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Tom B. wrote:
> that'll be a tall
> order to hit the predictors for marathon time (around 2:43). But ya
> never know.
_
i know, he'll do it. i've seen him train & race too many times. he
leaves it all out on the course. why the hell do you think he's even
racing chicago? did you notice his low bib #? he pre-qualified and
got a seeded spot. he's up front and going balls out. i expect him
to go sub 2:43.
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 18:09:20
From: Fortunate Fool
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Tom B. wrote:
> Dan Stumpus wrote:
> > "Tom B." <tom.banchy@gmail.com> wrote
> >
> > > I've always fallen short of the race predictors going from 10k to
> > > marathon (everything else from 5k to HM lines up for me, though). The
> > > "standard" model I hear quoted the most is marathon time = 4.66 * 10k
> > > time.
> >
> > I think that's because you're a low mileage runner. I lined up perfectly,
> > as did most of my friends, and we all did 80-100 mpw, with a 18-22 miler
> > most weekends.
>
> Yep, definitely agree with this. And even though I'm already
> convinced, I'm still interested to see the theory put to the test. If
> everything works out, the result is a really damn fast marathon.
Count me in...
Orange / White Often Running Racing Team Adidas Gear ....
3:00 Pace group...
Good luck, bring your rain coats... :(
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 21:26:08
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Fortunate Fool" <rycase@gmail.com > wrote:
>Orange / White Often Running Racing Team Adidas Gear ....
>
>3:00 Pace group...
And, and, and... ? Did you get the sub 3 despite the wind?
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 17:32:16
From: Tom B.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Dan Stumpus wrote:
> "Tom B." <tom.banchy@gmail.com> wrote
>
> > I've always fallen short of the race predictors going from 10k to
> > marathon (everything else from 5k to HM lines up for me, though). The
> > "standard" model I hear quoted the most is marathon time = 4.66 * 10k
> > time.
>
> I think that's because you're a low mileage runner. I lined up perfectly,
> as did most of my friends, and we all did 80-100 mpw, with a 18-22 miler
> most weekends.
Yep, definitely agree with this. And even though I'm already
convinced, I'm still interested to see the theory put to the test. If
everything works out, the result is a really damn fast marathon.
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 17:11:15
From: Charlie Pendejo
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Dan wrote:
> -- an
You learning (or flashing back to) Morse Code, Dan? If so, I think
we're already pretty much aware of your gender, no need to remind us.
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 14:48:00
From: Tom B.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
LSmith wrote:
> Charlie Pendejo wrote:
> > Doug wrote:
> > > Donovan wrote:
> > >> If all goes well, I run a 2:50.
> > >
> > > From 2:58 to 2:50 is big chunk of improvementy at that level. My swag
> > > without knowing all the specifics is 2:55
> >
> > Here's all the specifics: his 2:58 was NYCM, his race tomorrow is
> > Chicago.
> >
> > The differences between courses and weather (NYC '04 was warm, Chi '06
> > will be mid-40s) should get him more than half of that eight minute
> > differential.
> _
>
> well plus he's faster now anyway. i gotta believe w/a runner like
> donnie, on this course & in these conditions all the race predictor
> calculations stretching out from his '06 10K times for example will
> bear out. imo 2:50 is a lock on the course drop off alone. i'll cut
> a few minutes for weather, etc. but at the end of the day, i bet he
> hits +/- 2 minutes of where the race predictors calculate based on
> some of his '06 results.
I've always fallen short of the race predictors going from 10k to
marathon (everything else from 5k to HM lines up for me, though). The
"standard" model I hear quoted the most is marathon time = 4.66 * 10k
time.
If I remember correctly, Donovan was just about to overtake me in the
10k this year (my PR is 34:26), but I don't remember him posting too
many race results. If he's in the high 34's, though, that'll be a tall
order to hit the predictors for marathon time (around 2:43). But ya
never know. Good luck Donovan.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 00:01:55
From: Dan Stumpus
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Tom B." <tom.banchy@gmail.com > wrote
> I've always fallen short of the race predictors going from 10k to
> marathon (everything else from 5k to HM lines up for me, though). The
> "standard" model I hear quoted the most is marathon time = 4.66 * 10k
> time.
I think that's because you're a low mileage runner. I lined up perfectly,
as did most of my friends, and we all did 80-100 mpw, with a 18-22 miler
most weekends.
I think someone did research and found that you need at least 70 miles/week
running for the predictions to be good for the marathon -- plus you need
to know how to run one, takes a few times to get the hang of it (something
you have no problem with).
-- an
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 13:06:00
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Charlie Pendejo wrote:
> Doug wrote:
> > Donovan wrote:
> >> If all goes well, I run a 2:50.
> >
> > From 2:58 to 2:50 is big chunk of improvementy at that level. My swag
> > without knowing all the specifics is 2:55
>
> Here's all the specifics: his 2:58 was NYCM, his race tomorrow is
> Chicago.
>
> The differences between courses and weather (NYC '04 was warm, Chi '06
> will be mid-40s) should get him more than half of that eight minute
> differential.
_
well plus he's faster now anyway. i gotta believe w/a runner like
donnie, on this course & in these conditions all the race predictor
calculations stretching out from his '06 10K times for example will
bear out. imo 2:50 is a lock on the course drop off alone. i'll cut
a few minutes for weather, etc. but at the end of the day, i bet he
hits +/- 2 minutes of where the race predictors calculate based on
some of his '06 results.
only one potential battle for him to possibly negotiate, a points on
the course there might be some wind. per AP - The forecast says the
conditions will be less than ideal, with temperatures around 40,
gusting winds and the possibility of snow. American Brian Sell
estimated a 15 mph wind adds 5 seconds per mile to the pace, so the
times may be a little higher. But he doesn't expect that to have much
impact on the leaderboard.
|
| | |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 20:55:44
From: Dan Stumpus
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"LSmith" <Digisend@gmail.com > wrote
> only one potential battle for him to possibly negotiate, a points on
> the course there might be some wind. per AP - The forecast says the
> conditions will be less than ideal, with temperatures around 40,
> gusting winds and the possibility of snow. American Brian Sell
> estimated a 15 mph wind adds 5 seconds per mile to the pace
It's worse than that. A 10 mph headwind takes something like 40 secs/mile
off your pace at 6:00/mile (11%), and gives you back only 7% as a tailwind.
See Daniels for specifics, I'm operating off of memory and experience here.
With enough people in the mix, he might find some folks to form a pace line
a-la cycling.
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 11:00:14
From: Charlie Pendejo
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Doug wrote:
> Donovan wrote:
>> If all goes well, I run a 2:50.
>
> From 2:58 to 2:50 is big chunk of improvementy at that level. My swag
> without knowing all the specifics is 2:55
Here's all the specifics: his 2:58 was NYCM, his race tomorrow is
Chicago.
The differences between courses and weather (NYC '04 was warm, Chi '06
will be mid-40s) should get him more than half of that eight minute
differential.
|
| | |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 20:27:35
From: Doug Freese
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Charlie Pendejo" <Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1161453614.491774.213070@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Doug wrote:
>> Donovan wrote:
>>> If all goes well, I run a 2:50.
>>
>> From 2:58 to 2:50 is big chunk of improvementy at that level. My
>> swag
>> without knowing all the specifics is 2:55
>
> Here's all the specifics: his 2:58 was NYCM, his race tomorrow is
> Chicago.
>
> The differences between courses and weather (NYC '04 was warm, Chi '06
> will be mid-40s) should get him more than half of that eight minute
> differential.
I know all that but he still needs to keep them legs tuning over a
little faster for the same 26.2.
-Doug
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 08:08:40
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Did he cross the line? Oh my god, what a finish, never seen
thatbefore.....Oh shit...he's
on the mat....he did not cross the mat! Where the chip detector?
HE NEVER BROKE THE TAPE!
This is unreal.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 15:13:31
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Digisend@gmail.com wrote:
> Did he cross the line? Oh my god, what a finish, never seen
> thatbefore.....Oh shit...he's
> on the mat....he did not cross the mat! Where the chip detector?
>
> HE NEVER BROKE THE TAPE!
Bizarre! They say he finished and won.
--
Phil M.
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 06:51:33
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
This live webcast is pretty cool. Always surprised me to see the
elites w/short & long sleeve shirts on under their singlets (sans
gloves too). I thought you'd wear gloves first, then if still too
cool, go w/the shirts.
Looks like it's 38F with 5 mph Wind from the West.
Saw Tergat yesteray Central Park training, he had on a complete down
vest (it was maybe 48-58F or so and sunny.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 15:10:48
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Digisend@gmail.com wrote:
> This live webcast is pretty cool.
Just watched Galina Bogomolova pass Constantina Tomescu-Dita. Galina's
style seems to be so much more efficient than Constantina's. No bouncinng,
compact stride. Very nice!
--
Phil M.
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 19:37:07
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Phil M." <pmarg@charter.net > wrote:
> Galina's
>style seems to be so much more efficient than Constantina's.
I tried to watch the webcast but was getting one image per second. Funnily
enough, they were on Tomescu-Dita and when the frame froze just as her
foot struck, it seemed tha tmaybe she overstrides? Difficult to tell if
the image froze exactly on touchdown though.
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2006 00:21:16
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
stevenZ.common@wanadoo.fr wrote:
> "Phil M." <pmarg@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> Galina's
>>style seems to be so much more efficient than Constantina's.
>
> I tried to watch the webcast but was getting one image per second.
> Funnily enough, they were on Tomescu-Dita and when the frame froze
> just as her foot struck, it seemed tha tmaybe she overstrides?
You might be able to see her better here:
http://tinyurl.com/ym7nml
--
Phil M.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 18:58:32
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Phil M." <pmarg@charter.net > wrote:
>You might be able to see her better here:
>http://tinyurl.com/ym7nml
Thanks Phil. That makes it even more amazing to see how far away from a
"marathon gait" she seems to be. Pumping and almost roping herself forward
with her arms and pounding into the ground like a sprint acceleration.
Honestly looks like she's running a 10k, not a 42.
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 22:17:15
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
stevenZ.common@wanadoo.fr wrote:
> "Phil M." <pmarg@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> Galina's
>>style seems to be so much more efficient than Constantina's.
>
> I tried to watch the webcast but was getting one image per second.
> Funnily enough, they were on Tomescu-Dita and when the frame froze
> just as her foot struck, it seemed tha tmaybe she overstrides?
> Difficult to tell if the image froze exactly on touchdown though.
Yes, the announcer (Todd Williams?) was saying overstride also. Lots of up
and down motion. She looks built more like an 800m runner w/ strong
shoulders.
--
Phil M.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 14:26:02
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Digisend@gmail.com wrote:
> This live webcast is pretty cool. Always surprised me to see the
> elites w/short & long sleeve shirts on under their singlets (sans
> gloves too). I thought you'd wear gloves first, then if still too
> cool, go w/the shirts.
>
> Looks like it's 38F with 5 mph Wind from the West.
It looks like it's more windy than that:
http://tinyurl.com/y5u4rt. If so, that could be a factor for those low BMI
types.
--
Phil M.
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 14:41:06
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
pmarg@charter.net wrote:
> Digisend@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> This live webcast is pretty cool. Always surprised me to see the
>> elites w/short & long sleeve shirts on under their singlets (sans
>> gloves too). I thought you'd wear gloves first, then if still too
>> cool, go w/the shirts.
>>
>> Looks like it's 38F with 5 mph Wind from the West.
>
> It looks like it's more windy than that:
> http://tinyurl.com/y5u4rt. If so, that could be a factor for those low
> BMI types.
According to the Wheelchair winner, "The wind was brutal." I'm guessing
this really makes it tough at the finish, since after mile 23 the course
takes a turn to the north. The wind is coming out of the northwest.
--
Phil M.
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 08:09:54
From: Anthony
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"LSmith" <Digisend@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1161352666.659345.91230@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Aren't there some people other than Donovan running in this event this
> weekend? Can we get a roll call going? Bib numbers? Is the race
> streamed or live chip updates on the course or something?
>
> Good luck Donovan.
Good luck Donovan.
Apparently live streaming from 7:30 Chicago time
(race starts at 8:00)
http://cbs2chicago.com/chicagomarathon
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 12:58:34
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
> Bizarre! They say he finished and won.
_
I noted on the webcast where the announcers were keen to characterize
and use the specific language "unofficial winner". The very language
suggest / illustrates the uncertainty of events as they played out in
real time.
If you've ever noticed, in this big money middle & long distance races,
the elites often wear 2 chips, one on each foot. Could easily mean
the difference in some very big money.
-
''He just slipped,'' race referee Pat Savage said. ''Luckily for him,
he slipped forward.''
-
I took this to read at the point of the slip, the strike that caused
the slip....he had yet to cross the line or plane. Had he fallen
forward with feet remaining in place (like in stubbing your toe), the
chip may have never registered. But he fell backwards - feet slipping
forward and thereby registering with the mat.
How wide across is that first mat? When he struck it (with a heel
strike) at the very front and crashed, it was done in such a way to
where it look like he landed with his feet with the chip approx 1/2
across that mat.
By the looks of it when he was on his back, his feet were about 1/2
across the mat (as he layed there in pain as his head hit the road).
The dignitaries holding the symbolic "tape" simply dropped it down and
seemed lost as to what to do (they were on the other side of the mat).
All the while the guy who took second place finished.
If you made this up for a movie script they'ed laugh and no one would
believe that's it's possible. Think about it....ever see a runner
win a race of any distance without crossing the mat?
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2006 00:15:05
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Digisend@gmail.com wrote:
>> Bizarre! They say he finished and won.
> _
>
> I noted on the webcast where the announcers were keen to characterize
> and use the specific language "unofficial winner". The very language
> suggest / illustrates the uncertainty of events as they played out in
> real time.
According to CBS Chicago he was "Hospitalized with severe head injury"
Video here - http://tinyurl.com/ym7nml
--
Phil M.
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2006 11:06:08
From: Doug Freese
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Phil M." <pmarg@charter.net > wrote in message
news:Xns9864CDD8F2EE5seilogramp@216.77.188.18...
> Digisend@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>> Bizarre! They say he finished and won.
>> _
>>
>> I noted on the webcast where the announcers were keen to characterize
>> and use the specific language "unofficial winner". The very
>> language
>> suggest / illustrates the uncertainty of events as they played out in
>> real time.
>
> According to CBS Chicago he was "Hospitalized with severe head injury"
> Video here - http://tinyurl.com/ym7nml
Ok shoe geeks what kicks was Cheruiyot wearing when he skated on the
painted logo.
-Doug
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 22:20:18
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Doug Freese" <dfreese@hvc.rr.com > wrote:
>Ok shoe geeks what kicks was Cheruiyot wearing when he skated on the
>painted logo.
He could probably make more by sueing somebody (everybody!) than he got
from winning :-)
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Oct 2006 11:55:07
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
dfreese@hvc.rr.com wrote:
>> According to CBS Chicago he was "Hospitalized with severe head injury"
>> Video here - http://tinyurl.com/ym7nml
>
> Ok shoe geeks what kicks was Cheruiyot wearing when he skated on the
> painted logo.
Looks like Nike Air Zoom Marathoner http://tinyurl.com/yhspst.
--
Phil M.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 23:06:36
From: steve common
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"LSmith" <Digisend@gmail.com > wrote:
>I took this to read at the point of the slip, the strike that caused
>the slip....he had yet to cross the line or plane. Had he fallen
>forward with feet remaining in place (like in stubbing your toe), the
>chip may have never registered.
The chips and mats are for mass timing, anti-cheating, mass finish order,
geek value for competitors etc, but you actually finish the race when any
bit of your torso reaches the finish line, whether the chip registers or
not.
If he'd fallen flat on his face, with legs before the line (no chip
counted), he'd still have finished as long as his torso reached the line
(plane in fact).
If he fell flat on his back, with the legs across the mat (chip counted)
but with his torso before the line, he wouldn't have finished.
See USATF rule 163, first paragraph.
http://www.usatf.com/about/rules/2006/2006USATFRules_Article3.pdf
"Competitors shall be placed at the finish in the order in which any part
of their bodies (ie the "torso" as distinguished from head, neck, arms,
hands, legs or feet) reaches the finish line."
It says nothing of wedding tackle :-)
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 11:50:16
From:
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
On 20, 4:19 pm, Elflord <a...@aol.com > wrote:
> > Good luck Donovan.#943
>
> I think there's some tracking facility, because teammates have also asked for my
> bib #
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Elflord
Well done Donovan! Nice PR.
DONOVAN REBBECHI
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 13:40:49
From: Charlie Pendejo
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Doug wrote:
> Ok shoe geeks what kicks was Cheruiyot wearing when he
> skated on the painted logo.
Aren't those Asics 2110's?
Should've gone with the screw shoes.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 21:58:59
From: Doug Freese
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
"Charlie Pendejo" <Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1161722449.596119.90210@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Doug wrote:
>> Ok shoe geeks what kicks was Cheruiyot wearing when he
>> skated on the painted logo.
>
> Aren't those Asics 2110's?
>
> Should've gone with the screw shoes.
:) :)
I see a big insurance payment to go with the prize money. ;)
-DF
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 07:24:24
From:
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
> Much of the accounting is inconsistent with the factual record of NOAA.
> Now I like a great fish tale/story as much as anyone, however who do
> you think is more accurate, the opinion of those accounts or the
> factual records that are produced from NOAA's instruments out in the
> field?
Actually, I wouldn't put too much stock in NOAA's data in terms of
running through the city. They're probably measuring out in the open
somewhere and when the wind funnels through downtown canyons, it at
least seems a lot stronger than the reported figures.
Mike
|
| | |
Date: 30 Oct 2006 16:21:22
From: Robert Grumbine
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
In article <1161786264.113022.259730@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >,
<m1ahearn@aol.com > wrote:
>> Much of the accounting is inconsistent with the factual record of NOAA.
>> Now I like a great fish tale/story as much as anyone, however who do
>> you think is more accurate, the opinion of those accounts or the
>> factual records that are produced from NOAA's instruments out in the
>> field?
>
> Actually, I wouldn't put too much stock in NOAA's data in terms of
>running through the city. They're probably measuring out in the open
>somewhere and when the wind funnels through downtown canyons, it at
>least seems a lot stronger than the reported figures.
There are assorted 'NOAA' data, and other data. Since the prior poster
didn't specify what data, we don't know. The official recording site
for Chicago is at O'Hare airport, ca. 25 miles in from the lake*. It
is quite routine for the reports from there to differ significantly
from Midway (about 5 miles from the lake) and both to disagree
significantly from 'lakefront' (formerly, at least, Miegs field).
One spectacular day was calm and cold (say 20 F) at Miegs and O'Hare
while it was 30 mph gusting to 50 and warm (say 55 F) at Midway.
Given a choice between first hand experience and an anemometer
25 miles inland, take the first hand experience.
*'the lake' is Lake Michigan. Chicagoans don't already remember about
others.
--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 07:19:12
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Doug, in regards to the content you posted....much of it is framed in
the context of personal accounts that can be fact checked as accurate
data with NOAA and any number of other services pin-pointing with
precise accuracy (live at the moment).
Much of the accounting is inconsistent with the factual record of NOAA.
Now I like a great fish tale/story as much as anyone, however who do
you think is more accurate, the opinion of those accounts or the
factual records that are produced from NOAA's instruments out in the
field?
Can you answer that one with out personal attack and the usual off
topic stuff you do? I don't believe our judgements are keen and sharp
when we're stressing our senses/body and racing a marathon. And it
cuts both ways. I've raced and had no idea it was as cold as it
factually was....and the only way I could tell was after I crossed the
finish line and others told me of the frozen saliva surrounding my
mouth / nostrils. While I was in the race, I simply could not discern
how cold it in fact was.
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2006 06:52:14
From: LSmith
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
Doug, in regards to the content you posted....much of it is framed in
the context of personal accounts that can be fact checked as accurate
data with NOAA and any number of other services pin-pointing with
precise accuracy (live at the moment).
Much of the accounting is inconsistent with the factual record of NOAA.
Now I like a great fish tale/story as much as anyone, however who do
you think is more accurate, the opinion of those accounts or the
factual records that are produced from NOAA's instruments out in the
field?
Can you answer that one with out personal attack and the usual off
topic stuff you do? I don't believe our judgements are keen and sharp
when we're stressing our senses/body and racing a marathon. And it
cuts both ways. I've raced and had no idea it was as cold as it
factually was....and the only way I could tell was after I crossed the
finish line and others told me of the frozen saliva surrounding my
mouth / nostrils. While I was in the race, I simply could not discern
how cold it in fact was.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 07:33:00
From: Tom Wheeler
Subject: Re: Chicago Marathon
|
26.2 miles and he fall under the finish line.
Sweat: Chicage...........
people do stupid things......
like side walk walking.....
r 2k.....= 6.214......
e mails sucks......
E-Mail only:
Have a gooday mate:
I am a happy camper.
ad a bodybuilder.(well trying)
|
|
