Jacob Kiplimo 26:33 NOT in super spikes

dsrunner wrote:

No.

The real barriers were very few athletes w <3:52 mile speed focusing on the 10000 and also the fixation with long slow distance in place of work.

Mills started the trend back towards quality + miler speed applied to long distance.

In 1964 he ran guys doing nearly twice the volume straight into the ground.

Now you don't win anything without 22-23s 200m capability and quality work in the training.

probably the dumbest post I've seen today.

Clueless, as always.

There's been Moses Kipsiro, Jackson Kiprop, Stephen Kiprotich and many others. Kipsiro could have handed it to Bekele and, later, Farah, with better training and facilities -- which've always been our greatest shortcomings. It's until recently, following the foundations laid by Kipsiro and Kiprotich, that we had our altitude guys (a miniscule proportion of the population in Uganda, whereas in Kenya they're the third biggest ethnic community) pay more attention to running -- that's how you get an education student called Kiprotich shifting his focus, and a budding teenager known as Kiplimo turn his vision to athletic greatness.

You'd have to live here, always in the shadow of the Kenyans and with hapless authorities to know what it is like. But after Kiprotich, Musagala, Nakaayi, Cheptegei & Kiplimo, there's no turning back. The Kenyans will get the competition they've always needed.

And, of course, clean times can only be run by Europeans and Americans. Slow, clean times, that is.

African? They are either lying about their age or doping.

barney23 wrote:

And, of course, clean times can only be run by Europeans and Americans. Slow, clean times, that is.

African? They are either lying about their age or doping.

+1

That's the excuse they find for the East African greatness.

Go Uganda!

oldschoool wrote:

Yes you may be right about the Mambas. Either way, not done in the new "super shoes". Perhaps we need to give more credit to athletes and less to the shoes these days

A single good performance from one of the most dominant runners in the world does not counter the mountains and mountains of data which show a clear performance boost just from wearing the shoe. It's literally the reason Nike called them 4%'s.

[3.1]Miles Davis wrote:

oldschoool wrote:

Yes you may be right about the Mambas. Either way, not done in the new "super shoes". Perhaps we need to give more credit to athletes and less to the shoes these days

A single good performance from one of the most dominant runners in the world does not counter the mountains and mountains of data which show a clear performance boost just from wearing the shoe. It's literally the reason Nike called them 4%'s.

Going to be pedantic here, but there isn't a mountain of evidence yet for the spikes. We haven't had a complete, non covid disrupted season with next gen spikes.

Road shoes yes - studies of road times pre and post introduction of next gen road shoes shows a 1-2% increase in times across the board (remember the 4% isn't a 4% time increase).

New spikes came in 2019 for top NB and Nike pros. 2020 was disrupted/not a good year for data. We can crunch the numbers at the end of 2021 to see if the advantage of new spikes is more or less definitive as the new road shoes.

Just wanted to make a point - and I'm not even taking a stand for or against the "it's all about the shoes" narrative - but it doesn't make sense to say that because an elite runner just ran maybe the #10 (or so) performance of all time in old-style shoes, then the new shoes aren't having an effect.

In other words, to spell it out: the WR was 26:17 BEFORE there were "super-shoes". So we already knew that a 26:33 was possible without super-shoes.

Except that there is. The number of athletes to break 14:00 in D1 has more than doubled in a single year (the exact same year super spikes became available). This trend applies to all divisions. Now you can argue that "its because you can train harder with plated shoes", but this has a few significant problems.

1.) These shoes have been available since 2017, why would we only start to see bumps when super spikes hit the market if it was from the super trainers?

2.) This assumes every one of these athlete is training in these shoes week in and week out which is absolutely not the case. It is highly unlikely that every college runner (especially D2 and D3) can afford to buy a $200+ super shoe just for training on top of a $200 spike for racing.

3.) A similar sudden bump was seen in pro times last year when they started using the Nike spikes. Both pro's and plebs had access to Next% from 2017-2020, yet for bother groups we only see a significant bump in averages AFTER each group began using super spikes.

If that's not enough, there are like 3 different studies which have all shown around a 2.1% boost from the spikes alone.

i think people are more focused on their running and training with covid.

more than the spikes

my two pennies wrote:

Looked like Mamba Vs to me. Who could've guessed the super spikes are not as important as rojo would have you believe?

Or he would have set a NEW world record if he had the super spikes! He'd run 26:05 today with super spikes. And Cheptegei ran 7:33 today for 3k with super spikes, if he would've worn old spikes he would only be a 7:42 guy now.

All just joking. You are right, the spikes don't really matter. If they do matter then there are a lot of people having their worst seasons in several years, because they're wearing the super spikes and not running any PRs

I think this solidifies that Farah has zero chance in Tokyo. I've thought that's been the case for some time, but now I don't see how with all the guys who can run 26:10-26:40, Farah is going to be in the mix with 400 to go.

Shabadon't wrote:

Just wanted to make a point - and I'm not even taking a stand for or against the "it's all about the shoes" narrative - but it doesn't make sense to say that because an elite runner just ran maybe the #10 (or so) performance of all time in old-style shoes, then the new shoes aren't having an effect.

In other words, to spell it out: the WR was 26:17 BEFORE there were "super-shoes". So we already knew that a 26:33 was possible without super-shoes.

The point is that this is a world lead, and there are tons of other people capable of the world lead out there who haven't touched this type of time. If the super shoes really make that big of a difference then anyone at the top end of the sport would need to be wearing them to stay close. All of the people previously running around 27:00 on any given year should be running 26:30's now if they make a big difference, yet we only have this one guy who has done it this year. We have a bunch of low 27's this year, but we often have a bunch of low 27's. So people aren't suddenly running WAY faster. Slightly faster, maybe. But people are always getting slightly faster. The amount of people running under 27:00 for 10k should be more now than in 1960, and 1980 since we have waaaay more people in the world seriously training to run fast. The shoes probably help a little bit, but it's not like they suddenly take a 27:30 person and make them a 26:50 person. Maybe they go from a 27:30 person to a 27:26 person.

Aren't the shoes checked before/after the race? They must follow the available to all rule - meaning no modifications allowed except for special upper colors or wider fit etc? Surely extra plates or thicker foam would be checked for and the athlete DQ'd.

As someone who owns the Mamba V they’re quite special. The aggressive plate gives you a lot of support and very responsive. I’ve ran plenty of 1500s in them and done plenty of workouts. I haven’t used them in a 5000m I prefer the Next % more because of the energy return.

I believe the spike plate comes from the original victory. Not just for the steeple lol.

Prefacing with - I think the spikes give an advantage.

However I think your post is a bit off the mark. One NCAA season is a very limited viewpoint, and in terms of comparing how much of an impact it has compared to the road shoes it is almost useless given the road shoes aren't really relevant to the NCAA.

Second, much of your post is a strawman argument. In all my conversations with the "the spikes don't help" crowd, I've never heard someone say "we can train harder in the road shoes so our spiked up races are faster." The one I do hear, is "the new spikes don't trash your calf muscles as much so you can train in spikes more than you otherwise would." That's a more viable counter since the spikes have only been publicly available in Nike's case since late 2020 in serious numbers. With NB, it's still virtually impossible to get a hold of the spike.

RE: the 3 different studies which have shown a 2.1% boost from spikes alone - I'd genuinely love to know which studies you're talking about. There are plenty of studies which give that kind of figure for the road shoes, but as far as I have seen there are no studies that look exclusively at the new spikes that has been published yet. You got links to these studies?

Anyway, I would still advise the "spikes give an advantage" crowd to wait until the end of the season globally so we can have some real numbers and statistical analysis of times rather than relying on one event and one season in the NCAA.

Your reasoning is so full of flaws, I don't know where to start. So I'll just restrict my reply to your first couple of sentences. You say that if the super-shoes made a big difference, then elite runners would need them just to stay close. But that does nothing to address my original point: the WR for 10,000m was 26:17 long before super-shoes. Therefore 26:33 is clearly possible without super-shoes. I'm not sure exactly what you mean other runners needing super-shoes to stay close; in this particular race; clearly if a race was run that ended up being a 26:33 (which is considered a very fast time), then Kiplimo, for one, would not need super-shoes to stay close.

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

I think this solidifies that Farah has zero chance in Tokyo. I've thought that's been the case for some time, but now I don't see how with all the guys who can run 26:10-26:40, Farah is going to be in the mix with 400 to go.

Don't be goofy. Do you think Kiplimo or Chetegei are going to go run 26:30 or faster in the Olympics? Because I don't ... It's going to come down to last 4 laps, maybe even just last lap. Farah will get a medal, maybe even gold. He has the kick, he has the experience. All he needs is for it to be a 27:xx race.

Oh Please wrote:

Don't be goofy. Do you think Kiplimo or Chetegei are going to go run 26:30 or faster in the Olympics? Because I don't ... It's going to come down to last 4 laps, maybe even just last lap. Farah will get a medal, maybe even gold. He has the kick, he has the experience. All he needs is for it to be a 27:xx race.

In 2019, the winning time was 26:48 and that was with fewer guys to push the pace than now. The two Kenyans in Rhonex Kipruto and Kandie want a fast pace. If Kamworor is there too, he would like a fast one as well. Cheptegei wants a fast pace. We'll see who Ethiopia sends, but that could be part of their tactics as well. I do think the last 1600 will be very fast, but I am expecting barring very hot conditions a race in the 26:35-26:50 range. I don't think Farah will be there.

2019 wasn't Olympics, either. Since 2000, the winning times are:

27:18, 27:05, 27:01, 27:30, 27:05. All won with a tremendous kick (duh).

In fact Uganda having maybe the top two guys is going to be counter-productive to them. You think either one (Kiplimo or Cheptegei) will want to sacrifice themselves for the other? I think not ... the race will probably be another 13:45/13:15 split type of race, winning time right at 27 flat.