|
Post by burgrunner on May 17, 2008 19:35:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kevinspradlin on May 17, 2008 21:02:59 GMT -5
I interviewed Michael Wardian a few years ago in his first attempt at the JFK 50-miler. The distance, of course, was nothing new to him. But the terrain and distance combined was, perhaps. The JFK is a unique set of challenges, even the final, and relatively flat, 8 miles into Williamsport.
Wardian is amazing in his own right and in his own way. But it kills me, from the perspective of a common runner looking up to an elite runner, what COULD BE if he didn't race so much. I have no idea, of course, what his training regimen consists of but it can't be the basics - endurance, strength, speed, taper, race and recovery - since he races ALL THE TIME at such distances.
What could be if he were to focus on just 2-3 marathons a year while still in his prime? We'll likely never know...
|
|
|
Post by flyinghighrunner on May 17, 2008 23:45:05 GMT -5
maybe 5 min faster for the marathon is my guess.....is that going to get him close to any prize money in "majors"....heck, say 10 minutes.......no. Is he doing what he wants to as far as being a runner.....I would say yes, or he wouldn't be doing it. He actually probably makes a heck lot more money doing it the way he is....get comped into smaller minor money races, take the small prize money and run another race tomorrow. It also could be that the method of his madness is why he does as well as he does and if he followed a different regime, he may not be any better........makes interesting convo tho
|
|