Mile/1500m record stagnation--all more than TEN YEARS old!

Perhaps we now have reached the point where we can't find any new improved training methods.

mopak wrote:

Perhaps we now have reached the point where we can't find any new improved training methods.

that doesnt mean that faster times cant still be produced off of the same training. it comes down to who can stay healthier, who sleeps and eats righter, and who starts training at the earliest age.

furthermore, have raining methods really changed that much in the last 40 years?

There have been advances in sports medicine and psychology since the 80's not to mention the emegence of EPO, which definitely had an effect on times in the 90's. Tracks are also getting faster all the time. The new mondo tracks are probably 0.2-0.3 secs faster per lap in some cases, compared to the old synthetic ones. Yet, still the current crop fall FAR short of what athletes were achieving 10 years ago.

Training has become more intensive and there was a definite focus on fast time runs in the 90's whch overshadowed the emphasis on actually winning races. Back then the pace making seemed far more organised and successful too. Nowadays, the emphasis has swung back to winning, though probably because the top guys know there is no point chasing 3:26 and falling way short!

hmm now wrote:

mopak wrote:

Perhaps we now have reached the point where we can't find any new improved training methods.

that doesnt mean that faster times cant still be produced off of the same training. it comes down to who can stay healthier, who sleeps and eats righter, and who starts training at the earliest age.

furthermore, have raining methods really changed that much in the last 40 years?

Training methods have been fine tuned over the last 40 years but basically not any radicla changes. The sport became professional during the 70s and this led to faster times. Ovett, Coe and then Cram and Aouita pushed it down from low 3.30s to sub 3.30 in the mid 80s. The current bunch are not running any faster than those 2 were 25 years ago. It seems like 3.30 is generally about what the best talent can run. It would seem to take something very, very special to go much faster. Be that freakish outlier talent or drugs.

mopak wrote:

hmm now wrote:

that doesnt mean that faster times cant still be produced off of the same training. it comes down to who can stay healthier, who sleeps and eats righter, and who starts training at the earliest age.

furthermore, have raining methods really changed that much in the last 40 years?

Training methods have been fine tuned over the last 40 years but basically not any radicla changes. The sport became professional during the 70s and this led to faster times. Ovett, Coe and then Cram and Aouita pushed it down from low 3.30s to sub 3.30 in the mid 80s. The current bunch are not running any faster than those 2 were 25 years ago. It seems like 3.30 is generally about what the best talent can run. It would seem to take something very, very special to go much faster. Be that freakish outlier talent or drugs.

Generally agree with all this. Would say though that strictly speaking athletes weren't really professional until trust funds were established in 82 (though I'm sure there were a few back hander payments before then). Not really anyone making a living from track (at least in Europe) during the '70's.

Even after 82, there wasn't really "Big" money to be made until the end of the decade, and then it really exploded in the 90's. I'm sure this had an effect in more nationalities getting involved, but ironically aslo had an effect in making PED's more sophisticated and widespread.

There was also a definite change in emphasis on time and use of pacemakers in the 90's. The top guys could almost be guaranteed to have the exact pace per lap they wanted. EL G's mile record a case in point. In the 80's it had been a lot more hit and miss.

You are all forgetting one thing. The 1500/mile doesn´t have the same status as it had pre Carl Lewis. Before him it was the number one running event. After Lewis, it´s the 100 m.

Another thing: why has marathon times improved so rapidly in just a few years, if the tests are so much better today?

Answer: because the marathon status has increased a lot the last 10 years.

This is a bvmp, because I couldn't post the link in the other thread.

it reeks of drug use. That or total dominance of El G. But really it doesn't make sense, not just that the record has been stagnant, but that no one has gotten close.

Accusations of PEDS aside- I hate pacing, too. But, there has to be some incentive for someone looking for a break through race to go for it. Bonus $ for lap times (cumulative?), prize money based on finishing time?

While I love a good race, that debacle of a National Championship 1500 this year was a joke. The race was barely better than the NY State high school championships.

How does one run 4:43 for a mile without pacemakers?

There isn't much money in track races anymore. I think a lot of Africans who could have been decent milers are now going straight to the marathon, because running a 3:29 just isn't worth that much.

El G and Bolt have something in common: a very protective federation. Anymore, it's not just the drugs, but the defensive system that is in place (Compare Landis v. Lance)