11 of the 20 fastest 800m in history have been set in the last month or so

JRinaldi wrote:

The biggest difference I've noticed with the recent sub 1:42s is in the first lap of the race, even the first 200m.

Looking at the data of all the 27 sub 1:42's, the average first 200m of the recent races is 0.4 slower (24.44 vs 24.04) and the first laps is similarly slower (50.0 vs 49.3). This is producing less deviation between each 200m split with Hopple's 1:41.67 only having an average
deviation of 0.25 (8 of the 10 smallest AVEDEV have come from 2024). Rudisha's 1:40.91 WR has an AVEDEV of 0.975

Examples:

Hopple 24.9, 25.6, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.67 (0.25)

Rudisha 23.5, 25.8, 25.0, 26.6 for 1:40.91 (0.975)

Wanyonyi 24.5, 25.5, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.11 (0.3875)

So it can't just be the shoes as they wouldn't be 'slowing' the athletes down in the first 200, nor could it be the track. Bicarb helps in the last 200 and that may explain them holding the pace better than they have in the past, or maybe it is just as simple as 'even paced' running produces the best results over 800m rather than the old theory of +2 sec between first and last laps. Or..... maybe I just spend too much time looking at data :)

JRinaldi wrote:

The biggest difference I've noticed with the recent sub 1:42s is in the first lap of the race, even the first 200m.

Looking at the data of all the 27 sub 1:42's, the average first 200m of the recent races is 0.4 slower (24.44 vs 24.04) and the first laps is similarly slower (50.0 vs 49.3). This is producing less deviation between each 200m split with Hopple's 1:41.67 only having an average
deviation of 0.25 (8 of the 10 smallest AVEDEV have come from 2024). Rudisha's 1:40.91 WR has an AVEDEV of 0.975

Examples:

Hopple 24.9, 25.6, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.67 (0.25)

Rudisha 23.5, 25.8, 25.0, 26.6 for 1:40.91 (0.975)

Wanyonyi 24.5, 25.5, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.11 (0.3875)

So it can't just be the shoes as they wouldn't be 'slowing' the athletes down in the first 200, nor could it be the track. Bicarb helps in the last 200 and that may explain them holding the pace better than they have in the past, or maybe it is just as simple as 'even paced' running produces the best results over 800m rather than the old theory of +2 sec between first and last laps. Or..... maybe I just spend too much time looking at data :)

JRinaldi wrote:

The biggest difference I've noticed with the recent sub 1:42s is in the first lap of the race, even the first 200m.

Looking at the data of all the 27 sub 1:42's, the average first 200m of the recent races is 0.4 slower (24.44 vs 24.04) and the first laps is similarly slower (50.0 vs 49.3). This is producing less deviation between each 200m split with Hopple's 1:41.67 only having an average
deviation of 0.25 (8 of the 10 smallest AVEDEV have come from 2024). Rudisha's 1:40.91 WR has an AVEDEV of 0.975

Examples:

Hopple 24.9, 25.6, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.67 (0.25)

Rudisha 23.5, 25.8, 25.0, 26.6 for 1:40.91 (0.975)

Wanyonyi 24.5, 25.5, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.11 (0.3875)

So it can't just be the shoes as they wouldn't be 'slowing' the athletes down in the first 200, nor could it be the track. Bicarb helps in the last 200 and that may explain them holding the pace better than they have in the past, or maybe it is just as simple as 'even paced' running produces the best results over 800m rather than the old theory of +2 sec between first and last laps. Or..... maybe I just spend too much time looking at data :)

Armstronglivs wrote:

XDFXDFXDF wrote:

The world record for the 800m in 1981 was 1:41:73, and has improved by less than a second since then. For comparison, in 1981 the 10000m world record was 27:22, in the same amount of time it has improved by over a minute (the 5K time has improved by 30sec since 1981). We can debate the role of supershoes, training, pacing lights PEDs etc... but I do not think it should be surprising that several athletes are now running times that were run over 40 years ago. To me it was more surprising that a few years ago 1:43 could win a major championship.

You have missed the point. It isn't that there has been little improvement in the event since Coe, it is that, as the OP says, 11 of the 20 fastest times have been set in the last month or so. That is incredible. It is like a mass stampede through a doorway. It isn't explained by changes in tracks, shoes, or training in that period. Those have long been a constant. That leaves one thing. This sudden out-of-nowhere surge in performances is being observed throughout the sport. It speaks of a kind of "breakthrough".

ColinRyan&Dad wrote:

There's one aspect that no one seems to be giving any thought to: the psychology of breaking the 1:42 barrier.

Wanyoni broke it! Once he did that - becoming the 1st this season to run 1:41, he set the bar - and showed that it was possible. Then 3-4 guys ran 1:41 in same race (they new it was now possible - and if you cant run that fast, you are not worthy); next thing you know Marco Arop runs 1:41.20 (a PB by 1.5 seconds); Hoppel runs 1:41.67 - a PB by a second, and a NR by 0.67). Then Crestan, PATTISON, run low 1:42s, and 2 other Kenyans run 1:42.08.

Back in the day - when Bannister first broke the 'impossible 4minute mile' - suddenly others came out of the woodwork and did it. Within 4 years it was 3:54.5. The 'psychological barrier was broken.

Back in July, when Arop's PB was 1.42.85 from 2023 (remember he was world champ that year) - he watched 6 runners run between 1:41.48-1:42.43. Imagine what must be going thru his mind.

Bottom line is ... he had to re-set in his mind to what was possible - and raise the bar of what he had to do - and he did it - running 1:41.20.

Was he fitter than he was in 2023? Of course, he must have been, BUT - the psychology of the mind has to account for some (a lot ?) of that improved times - not just for him but for Hoppel and all the others.

Was better drugs a factor? I don't think so - otherwise, why did it impact ALL these runners in the same 2 months this year, but not other years? I don't buy it.

Also - look at the 400m hurdles. Check the top 8 times from each of the last 10 yrs - they were crap times 8-10 yrs ago (few sub 48s), then all of a sudden, these last 4-5 yrs there's 3 guys regularly running 46s.

Karsten broke the barrier, then De Santos + Raj accepted the challenge and upped their game.

supershoe fanbois...your narratives make no sense wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

You have missed the point. It isn't that there has been little improvement in the event since Coe, it is that, as the OP says, 11 of the 20 fastest times have been set in the last month or so. That is incredible. It is like a mass stampede through a doorway. It isn't explained by changes in tracks, shoes, or training in that period. Those have long been a constant. That leaves one thing. This sudden out-of-nowhere surge in performances is being observed throughout the sport. It speaks of a kind of "breakthrough".

Lol

He just told you how 800 progression has been behind the curve of other records, so slower rate of change.

This makes a "regression towards the norm rate of change" appear like a breakthrough...it's not. At all.

Lol it's funny how easy the mouth breathers on here can latch onto conspiracy theories when literally nothing is there. Such a weird urge to be addicted to. It gives you a rush I'm sure. But go back to your Alex Jones or whatever, it's tired on here.

Armstronglivs wrote:

ColinRyan&Dad wrote:

There's one aspect that no one seems to be giving any thought to: the psychology of breaking the 1:42 barrier.

Wanyoni broke it! Once he did that - becoming the 1st this season to run 1:41, he set the bar - and showed that it was possible. Then 3-4 guys ran 1:41 in same race (they new it was now possible - and if you cant run that fast, you are not worthy); next thing you know Marco Arop runs 1:41.20 (a PB by 1.5 seconds); Hoppel runs 1:41.67 - a PB by a second, and a NR by 0.67). Then Crestan, PATTISON, run low 1:42s, and 2 other Kenyans run 1:42.08.

Back in the day - when Bannister first broke the 'impossible 4minute mile' - suddenly others came out of the woodwork and did it. Within 4 years it was 3:54.5. The 'psychological barrier was broken.

Back in July, when Arop's PB was 1.42.85 from 2023 (remember he was world champ that year) - he watched 6 runners run between 1:41.48-1:42.43. Imagine what must be going thru his mind.

Bottom line is ... he had to re-set in his mind to what was possible - and raise the bar of what he had to do - and he did it - running 1:41.20.

Was he fitter than he was in 2023? Of course, he must have been, BUT - the psychology of the mind has to account for some (a lot ?) of that improved times - not just for him but for Hoppel and all the others.

Was better drugs a factor? I don't think so - otherwise, why did it impact ALL these runners in the same 2 months this year, but not other years? I don't buy it.

Also - look at the 400m hurdles. Check the top 8 times from each of the last 10 yrs - they were crap times 8-10 yrs ago (few sub 48s), then all of a sudden, these last 4-5 yrs there's 3 guys regularly running 46s.

Karsten broke the barrier, then De Santos + Raj accepted the challenge and upped their game.

The "Bannister effect" happened once, 70 years ago. The effect of boosts from drugs has been continuous since the '70's. That isn't the "Bannister effect".

JRinaldi wrote:

The biggest difference I've noticed with the recent sub 1:42s is in the first lap of the race, even the first 200m.

Looking at the data of all the 27 sub 1:42's, the average first 200m of the recent races is 0.4 slower (24.44 vs 24.04) and the first laps is similarly slower (50.0 vs 49.3). This is producing less deviation between each 200m split with Hopple's 1:41.67 only having an average
deviation of 0.25 (8 of the 10 smallest AVEDEV have come from 2024). Rudisha's 1:40.91 WR has an AVEDEV of 0.975

Examples:

Hopple 24.9, 25.6, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.67 (0.25)

Rudisha 23.5, 25.8, 25.0, 26.6 for 1:40.91 (0.975)

Wanyonyi 24.5, 25.5, 25.4, 25.7 for 1:41.11 (0.3875)

So it can't just be the shoes as they wouldn't be 'slowing' the athletes down in the first 200, nor could it be the track. Bicarb helps in the last 200 and that may explain them holding the pace better than they have in the past, or maybe it is just as simple as 'even paced' running produces the best results over 800m rather than the old theory of +2 sec between first and last laps. Or..... maybe I just spend too much time looking at data :)