8:44.33 WR, 3:31.18 by 17 yr old: Monaco doing TOO much

broken arrow wrote:

VIPAM wrote:

Hello MAPIV

No Im not the only one shocked by tghe ABUNDANCE of super fast time in EVERY middle distance race in Monaco. People smashing their personal best by large amounts or great improvement on seasonal bests as well. Look at Beatrice, Jakob, Gouyle in womens 800m. Every race was insane and pretty deep.

Something is amiss, Beatrice running 2:55-2:54-2:55 1k splits and finishing smiling and not out of breath after annihilating the WR in the steeple????

I noticed the same . Not the slightest bit tired after it .

Hounddogharrier wrote:

broken arrow wrote:

Something is amiss, Beatrice running 2:55-2:54-2:55 1k splits and finishing smiling and not out of breath after annihilating the WR in the steeple????

I noticed the same . Not the slightest bit tired after it .

Have you ever seen Sebastian Coe finishing his World Records? In most of them he looks as fresh as if he's just done a walk in the park. He obviously wasn't that fresh. But I agree that Chepkoech probably could have run one or two seconds faster.

Subway Surfers wrote:

ex-runner wrote:

No because Holland has good testing procedures.

Coevett thinks Kenyans living in America are likely to be doping because they are Africans.

Outlier performances by ANY athlete are suspicious. Like Coe's 1:41 in 1981. For him it's suspicions if any African athlete runs any half decent time like 3:33

Not a single point you made was correct, I destroyed every point.

Have an open mind. Steeplechase is the weakest event. The women that run it aren't good enough for the 5k.

Why should the steeple be like 40 seconds slower than the open event?

VIPAM wrote:

She and others who watched the race think she could go faster, in fact she stated she now wants sub 8:40. Which is the better performance 8:44.32 or Paula's 2:15 marathon WR?

WRs are not equal. Many Women's distance races are soft.

The steeple was one of them Soft Like Margarine

The thing that makes this suspicious isn't the 8 second trashing of the WR (though in and of itself that's so good it's unreal). The thing that really makes this suspicious is the 15 second (ie effectively 2 seconds per lap) improvement in Chepkoech's PB in 12 months at 27. When Bulut improved her 1500m PB by 16 seconds in 2012, there was a collective wailing and gnashing of teeth. Why not here?

Jacklovelock wrote:

The thing that makes this suspicious isn't the 8 second trashing of the WR (though in and of itself that's so good it's unreal). The thing that really makes this suspicious is the 15 second (ie effectively 2 seconds per lap) improvement in Chepkoech's PB in 12 months at 27. When Bulut improved her 1500m PB by 16 seconds in 2012, there was a collective wailing and gnashing of teeth. Why not here?

I have no opinion on the overall topic here but the steeple is twice as long and the margin of improvement is about equal so Chepkoech’s improvement is roughly half that of Bulut’s. Half is enough to totally change the response.

How much was Courtney Frerich’s improvement at the worlds last year?

I'm not convinced by your logic. Whilst I accept the maths of it and that Bulut's progress was utterly absurd, this is still way way past the boundaries of what yearly progress in a mature athlete should look like. Two seconds a lap improvement in twelve months in the destruction of a WR set by somebody who had been found guilty of doping? This smells like Grimsby docks on a hot summers day to me and should do to you too.

I take no pleasure at all in pointing this out, by the way. I would LOVE to feel that this was legit. But I simply cannot bring myself to celebrate it given what the figures say to me. It looks FAR to good to be true and as we all know, especially in distance events, if it looks too good to be true, it almost always is.

Well just at a glance wrote:

Jacklovelock wrote:

The thing that makes this suspicious isn't the 8 second trashing of the WR (though in and of itself that's so good it's unreal). The thing that really makes this suspicious is the 15 second (ie effectively 2 seconds per lap) improvement in Chepkoech's PB in 12 months at 27. When Bulut improved her 1500m PB by 16 seconds in 2012, there was a collective wailing and gnashing of teeth. Why not here?

I have no opinion on the overall topic here but the steeple is twice as long and the margin of improvement is about equal so Chepkoech’s improvement is roughly half that of Bulut’s. Half is enough to totally change the response.

Ok but have an open mind and forget everything you 'know' about the steeple.

How fast could Helen Obiri or Hassan or Muir run in the steeple?

Except the steeple is weak. The commentators in Monaco said it themselves, not many of the women in that field couldn't run 8:44 for a flat 3k. That's a problem. The weaker athletes run the steeple. Other women can run 8:20.

Subway Surfers wrote:

said88 wrote:

What are you talking? Your numbers are ridiculous

WTH are you talking about? Here's the official table equivalent

1061 7:59.18 8:44.18 8:36.30 13:41.99 28:47.04

1060 7:59.35 8:44.42 8:36.49 13:42.28 28:47.71

1059 7:59.52 8:44.65 8:36.67 13:42.57 28:48.38

The women’s barriers are shorter and so the men’s equivilant isn’t comparable.

To some extent, how strong or weak the women's steeplechase WR is is neither here nor there. My concern lies principally with the progress of a mature athlete (26 years old when she ran 8.59 and 27 when she ran 8.44 12 months later). That is the kind of improvement that only really comes about with young athletes when they undergo a growth spurt from one year to the next. It does not generally happen with a mature athlete. The question to ask is, what has changed since last year to prompt such a dramatic improvement (approximately 70-80 metres!)? What is the variable? The event hasn't changed, upping the training load is extremely unlikely to effect that kind of change in a mature athlete, the athlete in question's hurdling technique has not radically improved since last year. The answers lie elsewhere, I suspect.

Look to her face in Monaco, just back in puberty

Jacklovelock wrote:

The thing that makes this suspicious isn't the 8 second trashing of the WR (though in and of itself that's so good it's unreal). The thing that really makes this suspicious is the 15 second (ie effectively 2 seconds per lap) improvement in Chepkoech's PB in 12 months at 27. When Bulut improved her 1500m PB by 16 seconds in 2012, there was a collective wailing and gnashing of teeth. Why not here?

The easy explanation is that Chepkoech is rather new to the event and probably the most talented flat runner to ever take a serious go at the steeplechase and actually develop good hurdling form. Strong improvement is likely when a person takes up a new event. I think she saw the writing on the wall with her flat PRs and decided to try her hand at the steeplechase. It has worked out well for her.

In addition, those steeple barriers look like small bumps for taller women runners and will not slow them down as much as other women.

jeff tallon wrote:

theyre both drugged up to the eyeballs.definatly not clean.

There are performances worth questioning by a convergence of dots, but we can't question every great performance. Great performances are what we want to see, why bother watching if all we are going to do is call someone out whenever they give us what we want to see. If you follow T&F, you should have known for quite some time that, Chepkoeh and young Ingebrigtsen are extremely talented. Chepkoeh ran an 8:28 3K last year and Ingebrigtsen is young as has been improving by leaps and bounds every year since age 14. With that said, the Monaco performances where off the charts performances, but in the world of T&F, there is at least one off the charts performance every year. This is not to say that these athletes are without a doubt clean, but you need more to go on than a great performance before inditing them.

You and track coach make interesting points.

VIPAM wrote:

You and track coach make interesting points.

So did this poster...way back!

MAPIV wrote:

No clue who you are and I don't hate you in the least, but I still question your initial post and stand by mine. You need to do something better with your time if complaining about runners going fast bugs you enough to post about it. This is what we want and hope for when we watch races, no?

I agree with this 100 percent.

Womens equivalent by iaaf:

Points * 2000m SC * 3000m * 3000m SC * 2 Miles * 5000m * 10000m

1285 * 5:45.62 * 8:08.58 * 8:44.46 * 8:44.46 * 13:58.91 * 29:20.32

https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/scoring-tables-2017

try this wrote:

Womens equivalent by iaaf:

Points * 2000m SC * 3000m * 3000m SC * 2 Miles * 5000m * 10000m

1285 * 5:45.62 * 8:08.58 * 8:44.46 * 8:44.46 * 13:58.91 * 29:20.32

https://www.iaaf.org/news/iaaf-news/scoring-tables-2017

Totally pointless comparison.

The women's steeple is weak because the stronger athletes run the 1500 or 5k.

That skews the statistics recorded by the IAAF from which they make their tables