o'hanlon article

jimpeters

Anyone got a link to the article Gary O'Hanlon mentioned on his FB page yesterday - about him and his dad?

Can't find it myself.

Thanks

rom

maybe

http://www.independent.ie/life/health-wellbeing/fitness/gary-ohanlon-proves-himself-a-truly-modern-fitness-guru-30489350.html

menoscemo

rom wrote: »

maybe

http://www.independent.ie/life/health-wellbeing/fitness/gary-ohanlon-proves-himself-a-truly-modern-fitness-guru-30489350.html

A well known poster in that picture, Can you guess who it is??

rom

menoscemo wrote: »

A well known poster in that picture, Can you guess who it is??

Do I win a prize?

Ososlo

menoscemo wrote: »

A well known poster in that picture, Can you guess who it is??

who?

menoscemo

Ososlo wrote: »

who?

That's TbL on the right.........









(Joke)

Ososlo

pconn062 wrote: »

Our own XX, famous he is. Not everybody gets one of the Amphibian King singlets easily!

ah cool!

pconn062

Too slow with my delete, deleted just in case he wasn't happy with me revealing his identity!

Some Kind of Wizard

Will be interesting to see if O'Hanlon can go sub 2.20. No doubt he has the talent I just wonder how much his intensive racing schedule will effect him come October.....What to people think?

rom

pconn062 wrote: »

Too slow with my delete, deleted just in case he wasn't happy with me revealing his identity!

Bruce Wayne?

rom

Some Kind of Wizard wrote: »

Will be interesting to see if O'Hanlon can go sub 2.20. No doubt he has the talent I just wonder how much his intensive racing schedule will effect him come October.....What to people think?

Going sub 2:20 in DCM is a tall ask when he ran 2:22:52 in Rotterdam. DCM is probably at least 2+ min slower than Rotterdam so thats like 5 mins. That would be a big jump.

Netwerk Errer

rom wrote: »

Going sub 2:20 in DCM is a tall ask when he ran 2:22:52 in Rotterdam. DCM is probably at least 2+ min slower than Rotterdam so thats like 5 mins. That would be a big jump.

Yeah. I can't see Gary going sub 2.20. Especially when he races nearly every week.

dublin runner

God, that fella to the left is handsome....wowser! :pac::pac:

I wouldn't back against him. He is easily running sub 70 halfs week after week with usually very little competition. Essentially a long solo run. Not easy to do. A bit of luck and support (get in a group) and anything can happen. Rotterdam was a 'bad' race for him so with a good race he will be thereabouts.

thirstywork2

I think he will go sub 2.20
Be interesting to see how he goes in Athlone three quarter as he usually races that one.

Sharkey47

I suspect there are an awful lot of people who would love it if he was to break 2.20 in Dublin. I wouldn't know much about running but GO'H did look very comfortable at the finish of the 1/2 marathon on Saturday.

walshb

To go sub 2.20 surely a 69 HM time is too slow?

dublin runner

walshb wrote: »

To go sub 2.20 surely a 69 HM time is too slow?

It would be but he used it as a good hard run on tired legs. He didn't race it.

ThebitterLemon

menoscemo wrote: »

That's TbL on the right.........









(Joke)

Feck you Meno,

my tats are in much more discrete places

TbL

walshb

dublin runner wrote: »

It would be but he used it as a good hard run on tired legs. He didn't race it.

He tell you this?

Didn't he also run 69 the week before?

dukeraoul

walshb wrote: »

He tell you this?

Didn't he also run 69 the week before?

Ignore the troll DR

walshb

dukeraoul wrote: »

Ignore the troll DR

Why get involved in a simple two way posting if that's the best you have?

The man ran 69.5 a few weeks back and then ran another 69..

That's two 69 runs. I would have thought that a bit slow for a 2.20 marathon time, hence the question. I was told it was because he didn't race that time. Plus, he is 40 now, 3 years past his 2.26. Gotta' be a big ask to run 2.20. If both those 69 runs were him not at full effort then great, he could well be on for 2.20

No need for your smart alec hijacking. It's a forum for discussion and questions.

RayCun

He's well capable of running faster than 69, he ran fast enough to win the race.

DarByrne1980

dublin runner wrote: »

It would be but he used it as a good hard run on tired legs. He didn't race it.

Has he raced a half marathon recently? He should have went to Charleville instead of the phoenix park. Times in cork looked very fast

walshb

RayCun wrote: »

He's well capable of running faster than 69, he ran fast enough to win the race.

He was 2-3 mins clear of his nearest competitor I think. That would make sense I guess. For 2.20 you should be aiming for low 67s maybe for HM?

RayCun

walshb wrote: »

He was 2-3 mins clear of his nearest competitor I think. That would make sense I guess. For 2.20 you should be aiming for low 67s maybe for HM?

at that level you don't plug times into MacMillan. He'd know himself how his buildup is going.

dublin runner

DarByrne1980 wrote: »

Has he raced a half marathon recently? He should have went to Charleville instead of the phoenix park. Times in cork looked very fast

True. I guess it's about what the individual athletes wants from each race. Sometimes a person wants a fast time and other times its about creating a training stimulus. For example, running on fatigued legs. And lastly, sometimes it's about pacing/winning!

dublin runner

walshb wrote: »

Why get involved in a simple two way posting if that's the best you have?

The man ran 69.5 a few weeks back and then ran another 69..

That's two 69 runs. I would have thought that a bit slow for a 2.20 marathon time, hence the question. I was told it was because he didn't race that time. Plus, he is 40 now, 3 years past his 2.26. Gotta' be a big ask to run 2.20. If both those 69 runs were him not at full effort then great, he could well be on for 2.20

No need for your smart alec hijacking. It's a forum for discussion and questions.

He ran 2.22 in Rotterdam this year.

walshb

dublin runner wrote: »

He ran 2.22 in Rotterdam this year.

That is a good time on what I believe to be a more forgiving course to Dublin. Maybe I am wrong, but would Dublin be considered only a fair course? I assume he wants a 2.20 in the DCM?

menoscemo

dublin runner wrote: »

He ran 2.22 in Rotterdam this year.

Yes indeed; 5 weeks after winning a 50k in 2:59 (through mara in 2:29) and 3 weeks after winning a hilly tralee Marathon in 2:26 (while running an extra half mile due to Marshall error). I think he had particular problems in Rotterdam which meant he was unable to perform at his best, he was gunning for sub 2:17 there.

DarByrne1980

menoscemo wrote: »

Yes indeed; 5 weeks after winning a 50k in 2:59 (through mara in 2:29) and 3 weeks after winning a hilly tralee Marathon in 2:26 (while running an extra half mile due to Marshall error). I think he had particular problems in Rotterdam which meant he was unable to perform at his best, he was gunning for sub 2:17 there.

really? wow! I'm guessing this is not something most marathon runners would do? especially the bit about the Tralee marathon. That extra half mile would give him a 2.23/24 finish time by my sums. I looked at the resultsb and he seemed to be running alone too. In that article it mentions he coaches people, do they do those sort of distances in training to

dublin runner

DarByrne1980 wrote: »

really? wow! I'm guessing this is not something most marathon runners would do? especially the bit about the Tralee marathon. That extra half mile would give him a 2.23/24 finish time by my sums. I looked at the resultsb and he seemed to be running alone too. In that article it mentions he coaches people, do they do those sort of distances in training to

As he says himself, we wouldn't advise anyone to do what he does! He uses most races as training runs. He very rarely targets times.

Like all good coaches he adapts his approach to each individual athlete.