What Will It Take To Run a 2-Hour Marathon?

HughPickens.com writes Alex Hutchinson writes at Runner's World that runners have cut the distance to the sub-two marathon in half since 1998, but it will get progressively harder to trim the remaining seconds. Still, the physiologists tell us that it's not impossible, meaning it is possible. Hutchinson says it will take several things: a cold day in March or November; a straight, flat course that is mind-numbingly boring; pacemakers who will shepherd leaders around the course cutting the wind and setting the pace; and a runner with a frame of about 5'6", weight of about 120 pounds, and towering self-confidence.The road is so flat and straight, you can see them coming from a mile away. Six runners flow in arrowhead formation around the Canadian city of Saskatoon. The early November air is still and dry, the sky overcast, and the temperature hovers a bit above freezing, just as predicted. All in their early 20s, they've been training together for this moment for years; only in the last month did their coach select which three will go for the record. The remaining three form the front of the arrowhead, blocking the wind and enduring the mental effort of controlling the pace. Should one of them cross the finish line in two hours—or faster—all six will share equally in the $50 million jackpot promised by the heirs to the Hoka One One fortune. The pot of money is up for grabs, for any runner, anywhere in the world. The chase is on. So, will they make it? And what year is this? I'm saying the year is...2075—and they make it.

Comments

Summary

[Dan East]

Alex Hutchinson writes at Runner's World that runners have cut the distance to the sub-two marathon in half since 1998, but it will get progressively harder to trim the remaining seconds.

Writing fail. Don't use the term "distance" to discuss intervals in time, especially when the topic specifically involves covering a specific distance as fast as possible. At first I thought they meant that the distance the runners have to race has been reduced in order to be able to run it in two hours.

Re:Summary

[petes_PoV]

It is a clumsy piece or writing. It may well make sense to the tiny minority of people who know (or care) what a "sub-two" marathon refers to.

However without the reference to Runner's World it's not even clear that the piece is about athletics. It could have meant any sort of marathon: watching a TV series, eating long sandwiches: anything.

Wouldn't it have been simpler, clearer to write something like:
In the past 16 years, marathon runners have cut the world record from 2hr 06:23 to 2hr 03:23. But as they get closer to the 2 hour mark, further improvements will become progressively harder to achieve.

Re:Wind, not still air.

[itzly]

Wind at the runners' backs, on the other hand, obviates that issue entirely.

Except that for the record to be accepted, start and finish of the race cannot be further apart than 50% of the total distance. That means that at least for part of the race, the wind cannot be consistently from their back (unless it happens to be turning at the right time). In that case, a strong wind is most likely a disadvantage overall.

Sorry but...

[OpenSourced]

Please explain me what would be the point of that. If you want to break the arbitrary 2 hours limit in a Marathon, you should run the course between Marathon and Athens, with no water except what you can get from streams, and alone. That should be something, perhaps, specially if you drop dead in the end, proving you really had given your all.

If you are allowed to changing the route and having helpers, both in route and as water-offering minions, you can choose a route that slowly descends for most of the course (ideas?), or where winds are always favorable.