Even Steve Holman...

[MJD]

...responds to the dumbing down of the marathon.

He went 2:30 and change at Twin Cities.

http://www.onlineraceresults.com/race/v ... ype=result

The Gallowalker and RR types must have finally worn him down. "But I've broken 3:50 in the
mile...". Now he can REALLY impress people at parties.

"SD: Do you ever do anything fast now?

SH: I haven't done a single track workout or tempo run, because I'm not training for anything. I simply love to run. I may jump in a marathon
eventually to say I did it, because everyone asks, but right now, my running is purely recreational."


http://www.mensracing.com/athletes/keep ... olman.html

Eddy H won in 2:12:47 in his 43rd year.

Re: Even Steve Holman...

What is wrong with Holman enjoying running. He has made his mark. His quotes about Webb have been used on this forum before and they are very informative. Basically he predicted all the problems Webb would face.

BTW.
Gabe won some small cross country race this week.

Webb tripped and twisted his ankle in his first cross country this week.

[MJD]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

>What is wrong with Holman enjoying running.

Nothing. Obviously. But(to spell it out for you), this quote looks like someone who is running the marathon for at least one other reason:

" may jump in a marathon
eventually to say I did it, because everyone asks,"

It sure isn't why I ran one. Elite non-marathon runners get asked this question all the time if they have the handicap of excelling in something that Joe Public doesn't understand.

Re: Even Steve Holman...

>>What is wrong with Holman enjoying running.
>

Nothing. Obviously. But(to spell it out for
>you), this quote looks like someone who is
>running the marathon for at least one other
>reason:

" may jump in a marathon
eventually
>to say I did it, because everyone asks,"

It
>sure isn't why I ran one. Elite non-marathon
>runners get asked this question all the time if
>they have the handicap of excelling in something
>that Joe Public doesn't understand.


I don't understand why people can't let other people do things for their own reasons.

Yes, marathon running is participative sport rather than competitive sport for about 95 to 99 percent of the people who do it. Why do so many here (and elsewhere) find this to be a sign of the apocalypse?

Holman is aware, if others are not, that his shoe contracts were paid for by the many thousands of purely recreational runners. Openly professional track is based on them, even if they are unaware of it.

Furthermore, I doubt that the people who Holman hangs around with are completely unaware of what he did with his life during the 1990s. They'd be pretty bad friends if they were totally clueless.

There are going to be over 100,000 people who run marathons in the USA this fall. Most of them have a life and see running as just something fun and healthy to do. Give them a break.

[blacklily]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

Squire is right. It's sheer snobbery. Given USA's obesity rates, people should be glad that more people are running marathons. Most recreational runners don't strive to be Paul Tergat, but to finish a marathon. A worthy goal, & I'm no distance nut. People are having fun, getting healthy! If running snobs spent even 50% of the time they spend bashing recreational runners (whose consumer purchases & USOC contributions fund the elites' training) on actually making track & field a more popular sport & fun for spectators, we'd actually get somewhere.

Re: Even Steve Holman...

Holman has put in his competitive efforts. Let him do some fun running!

[gh]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

I, for one, am most impressed that a speed-based miler (a 1:44.98 guy, after all) can run a 2:30 while apparently not really training for a competitive race. Anybody doubt that with a year's concentration he could be U.S.-Ranked in the event?

(ps--in looking at Steve's bio, I'm pleased to note that he and I share the same bd!)

Re: Even Steve Holman...

Many of the people who criticized Holman during the 90's now realize that he was along with Kennedy one of the last truly competitive US distance runners.
At 33 he could make a comeback but it would probably mean sacrificing other aspects of this life.

[MJD]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

>I, for one, am most impressed that a speed-based
>miler (a 1:44.98 guy, after all) can run a 2:30
>while apparently not really training for a
>competitive race. Anybody doubt that with a
>year's concentration he could be U.S.-Ranked in
>the event?

We(the NA distance fraternity) are doomed if even the great gh thinks that. I'm going with the stirring up the pot theory. What is with this marathon obsession? Compared to the world record, it would be like him running about 31:50 for a 10km. Would that raise any eyebrows? Galloway and his types are going to win this battle yet Jesse(slightly tongue in cheek). The training isn't that much different really. If you can run some distance from 1500 to the marathon at a world class level, you should be able to run any of the others at a national class level. Anything less than that barely requires showing up for someone like Holman.

[MJD]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

>Squire is right. It's sheer snobbery...If >running snobs spent even 50% of the
>time they spend bashing recreational runners...

I'm sure not bashing them-I am one. My point is the perception of the achievement by the public(even gh was impressed) compared to an actual elite performance. Many don't know the difference(or perceive finishing the marathon as something better because of the distance-after all anyone can run 1500 meters) and they are the ones who were likely asking Holman when he was going to run a marathon.

[steve]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

>>Squire is right. It's sheer snobbery...If
>>running snobs spent even 50% of the
>time they
>spend bashing recreational runners...

I'm sure
>not bashing them-I am one. My point is the
>perception of the achievement by the public(even
>gh was impressed) compared to an actual elite
>performance. Many don't know the difference(or
>perceive finishing the marathon as something
>better because of the distance-after all anyone
>can run 1500 meters) and they are the ones who
>were likely asking Holman when he was going to
>run a marathon.

How does gh (or anyone else) being impressed with what Steve Holman ran in the marathon contribute to people in general being less impressed with his performances (or other athletes performances) as an elite runner (Was that your point)? 2:31 is a good time for someone who was an elite 800/1500m runner and no longer runs (or trains) competitively. Lighten up.

Re: Even Steve Holman...

You want misunderstanding of marathons? On the Red Sox-A's game I just heard the announcer say that Trot Nixon wasn't even the best athelte in the family: his sister "ran faster than 3:52 in the marathon"!!!!! And the other talking head said somehting like "wow"

[MJD]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

>How does gh (or anyone else) being
>impressed with what Steve Holman ran in the
>marathon contribute to people in general being
>less impressed with his performances (or other
>athletes performances) as an elite runner (Was
>that your point)?

It obviously doesn't contribute to it. It just is an indication about the extent of the misunderstanding of the event.

>You want misunderstanding of marathons? On the >Red Sox-A's game I just heard the announcer say >that Trot Nixon wasn't even the best athelte in >the family: his sister "ran faster than 3:52 in >the marathon"!!!!! And the other talking head >said somehting like "wow"

Q. E. "gd" D. That was on a national broadcast. Think about the media being that impressed because someone ran 20 seconds in the 100 and talked about it in front of 20 million people. What would the sprinter types think?

Re: Even Steve Holman...

Those two fox announcers are pretty stupid. A .350 batting average is probably equivalent to running a 2:07 marathon. A 3:52 marathon is not a elite time so it cannot be compared to any professional athlete statistics.

Running a 3:52 Marathon is probably no more of accomplishment than running a 6:30 mile.

[6 5.5hjsteve]

Re: Even Steve Holman...

Hey everyone, we cannot have it both ways. We all frequently bemoan the fact that the general sporting public knows nothing about our sport. But "The Marathon" IS in the general sporting public's world of awareness toa decent degree, and John Q. Public perceives anyone that has the determination and dedication to run a marathon as a dynamite athlete. And in many ways they are. It's lot easier to train to run a 65 second 400 at, say, 50, than it is to train to run a 3:50 marathon. Equally mediocre but the marathiner is being rewarded by the public far more, and fairly so.

So relax and enjoy the comments about run of the mill recreational marathoners. Would you rather the media criticized them for being "no good", or worse, saying nothing ?