How would Scott Bauhs and Luke Puskedra have faired in the US Marathon trials had they ran that instead of the Houston Half the next day?
This is a very interesting question. Many were skeptical of both of their decisions to run this race. Many were skeptical of Bauhs because they thought he belonged in the trials with the big boys. I think he proved in this race that he did belong there. Others were skeptical of Luke because this is a hard effort before an NCAA track season that can already get long and stressful. Many expected Luke to run 63-65 minutes but nobody saw him running this fast. Scott ran 61:30 and Luke ran 61:37 for the half-marathon. Those times roughly convert to low-2:09 times. Just the times it would have taken to qualify for the Olympics. Other half-marathon PRs of trials competitors:
Hall 59:43 (American Record)
You get the picture, these two men ran the half-marathon faster than all but the top 4 in the trials race. I know basing a marathon prediction on a half-marathon is a big leap but it at least shows potential in Bauhs and Puskedra. I doubt Luke is doing marathon training in Eugene right now but he probably is doing fairly high miles and would just have to tweak here and there to get ready for a big marathon. I assume Scott was more fit than he thought otherwise he might have taken a crack at the marathon as well.