It will surely be argued that 90 years ago the tracks / shoes / training methods / financial supports were absolute shyte compared with today for the 1930s Men running at/near 4:07 Miles and 3:49 1500m.
Therefore, my aforementioned 21 years could easily be cut in half? Two thirds?
Pretty sure all those developments in the 90 years have the opposite effect: there won’t be such rapid progress attributable to all-weather tracks, training methods, financial support etc.
And there’s the fact that it’s taken 27 years for the women’s record to improve by 4.8 seconds, and 30 years for the mile record to improve upon Yunxia’s 1500-mile-conversion by about a second. Even 43 years ago Kazankina was running a 4:11.0 mile equivalent. I see no reason that the rate of improvement would increase.
Women are not men living some 60-100 years in the past…
But if all of those shyte things 90 years ago and before were much improved, then 3:49/4:07 might have occurred 120 years ago vice 90 years ago? And the men might have broken 4min in the 1930s instead of 1954? Then we might suppose that the Women's sub 4 min Mile is closer than 21 years from now?
Of course it is all conjecture, and we cannot rewrite history, like the GOP tries to do. (Political commentary, that!) What happened has happened.
I see no reason why Women won't go sub 4 in 14-21 years from now.
Kipyegon might even do 4:04 in the next couple of years.
Does anyone else think that Kipyegon could've run like a 4:04 today with an INEOS / Nike Breaking 2 setup (rotating shield of male pacers with perfect drafting until the very end)? Of course then the question is where the last few seconds would come from... every second as you get closer and closer is a lot to ask for.
The men’s record has not budged in 24 years and counting. Jakob is not likely to get it and so nobody is likely to get it anytime soon. So is Kipyego a Hicham like runner who is going to hold the record for a long time? Possibly. I would not bet on sub 4 for a woman in your lifetime if you are at least 40. Having said that, it could happen but not likely before 2050. There are variables such as genetic engineering, AI, PEDs, shoe and track technologies which make forecasting this nearly impossible.
To run a sub-4 mile a runner would need an 800 PR no slower than 1:52. Presently, not even 800 specialists can run that fast. It won't happen anytime soon. It took men 21 years to go from Jack Lovelock's 4:07 to Roger Bannister's 3:59. Men's running is much deeper than women's so it will likely take much longer for a woman to run sub 4.
But if all of those shyte things 90 years ago and before were much improved, then 3:49/4:07 might have occurred 120 years ago vice 90 years ago? And the men might have broken 4min in the 1930s instead of 1954? Then we might suppose that the Women's sub 4 min Mile is closer than 21 years from now?
Of course it is all conjecture, and we cannot rewrite history, like the GOP tries to do. (Political commentary, that!) What happened has happened.
Possibly. Maybe more like 2035-ish. But I think it'll take a 800m superstar to step up...someone who has the raw speed + strength. I don't think Mu's doing it, so how often does a generational talent come along in the 800m?...then give them time to mature into a miler. Also, wave light tech makes these record attempts just that much easier (not in terms of the actual effort—still have to run—but in the ability to have non-stop feedback on where the runner stands in relation to the record time).
You have to look at progression in the 1500m, since that is the event in which the record has more accurately reflected what the top women have been capable of because it is far more commonly run. In the 1980s a small number of women who were not on state sponsored doping programs were running high 3:50s and now it is much more common for women to break 4. There are still very few who break 3:55. The very top times for men have not improved remarkably from the 1980s at 1500m and below, but the depth has improved a great deal, suggesting to me that there are limits being approached. I would suggest that there are probably limits being approached for women as well, and while 3:49 may not ultimately be the limit, the idea of someone running 3:42 in the near future seem as unlikely as a man running 3:20. It is far more likely that we see more and more women running in the 3:50 to 3:54 range, as we have seen that 3:30 to 3:34 performances for men have become commonplace.
Semenya is intersex, meaning she exhibits some male traits and some female, e.g. she has a vagina (or at least vulva), not a penis or descended testicles. However she does not appear to possess ovaries, instead having undescended testicles producing high levels testosterone, and there is some evidence she has XY chromosomes (although as far as I am aware, that has never been officially confirmed, merely insinuated). Regardless, she is incapable of breaking 4:00 in the mile and unrelated to this discussion.
Personally I think it will take much longer than 20 years for a woman to break 4:00. The progression of the mile world record is fairly erratic because it is not often run. The women’s record for 1500m has progressed 7 seconds over the last 47 years. Even if we assumes linear progression, it will take at least 50 years. I expect it may take much longer.
Semenya is now the father of 2 children and you still dont understand the difference between male and female ?
If women can break the 4min barrier that suggests an athlete like Kipyegon is not training to her maximum potential. She is - quite apart from the fact she is doped to the gills. How is training going to change so that the fastest women - like Kipyegon - can take another 7 seconds off their best mile time? It will be like a male runner clocking 3.36. It will never happen.
Only doping will improve on 4:07x for a woman - and it took doping to get there.
This post was edited 33 seconds after it was posted.
3:50 for the 1500 was achieved in 1993, so the record effectively hasn't moved much in 30 years (we all know how doped that mark was, but still). Not saying it'll never happen, I don't think anyone ten years ago could've anticipated the kind of improvement we've seen in the marathon for example. But sub-four will take a tech breakthrough far beyond the current shoes, and I'm not confident I'll see it in my lifetime (I'm 26).
This caused me to ponder how many years it has taken for W to catch up to M over a wide range of events. For example, when was the Mile WR 4:07 for M? When was the 10000m WR 29:01 for M? Etc etc.
This exercise might inform when we shall see a W sub 4min Mile.
I'll work on this and report back.......
***Quotes himself. Bad form. Sue me.***
Very roughly speaking, Women are "behind" (terrible word - I can't think of a better phrasing right now) Men by anywhere from 51 years (3000m) to 90 years (1500m/Mile). I think the median of the lag from M to W over 100m to 10000m is around 73 years.
But, it was about 90 years ago that M were running what the W are now doing (ie Kipyegon) in the 1500m/Mile.
It was 69 years ago that M did sub4min Mile.
90 minus 69 = 21.
I say 21 ish years until we see a W sub4min Mile. 2044.
Whatever the Science, ie the Left, says it is. Got it?
Science isn't political but the right is doing its best to make it so and always has.
Science has always been political. It's been political for far longer than the current "left" and "right" existed. See Kepler, for example. It's been political since the word science was invented and will continue to be so until humans are extinct.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.