Genzebe Dibaba 3:55.17 indoor WR

oldie wrote:

this is just the beginning

expect 'unexpected' times across the board

igf-1 r3 + hematide + resveratrol

it's going to be a big year..

Last 400m in 59s and not 56, like sb said here!!

Also very funny how 3:55 (which is a super performance, no doubt, but not so far from her old pb of 3:56 (?)) becomes 3:49 in just three posts of ventolin....

AHAHAHHA

* wrote:I thought indoors was slower than outdoors

yes, it is probably about 2 - 3s for 1500

How could she run faster than any non-chinese/ruskie time outdoors ever?

because if you knock off coupla secs irretrievably thrown away for a 2'09 split compared to a 2'05 for even-pace-3'55, then even up the splits which woud knock off another coupla secs & then knock off another 2 - 3s for an indoor/outdoor conversion, you are looking at outdoors current shape of

~ 3'49

3:57.77 was her former pr. To drop 2.6 seconds off a slow 2:09 first 800m and indoors in her first race of season doesn't seem possible to me without a little bit of enhancement. Hmm, something is suspicious here.

Dibaba's Progession

Outdoor

2013 3:57.54 Doha 10 MAY

2012 3:57.77 Shanghai 19 MAY

2011 4:05.90 Rieti 10 SEP

2010 4:06.10 Doha 14 MAY

Indoor

2014 3:55.17 Karlsruhe 01 FEB

2013 4:00.83 Birmingham, GBR 16 FEB

2012 4:00.13 Karlsruhe 12 FEB

2010 4:04.80 Gent 14 FEB

3:57.54 for Dibaba in Doha, but ok 3:56 was Arigawi. So, it's 2.37s faster. I also have to admit it's astonishingly fast, always thought about 3:56 was the cut-off.

Btw just goes to show again that indoor tracks have improved massively!

not a very interesting WR as it is clearly chemically assisted. zzz....

this is nonsense.

52.43 wrote:Btw just goes to show again that indoor tracks have improved massively!

tell that to ndiku who ran 7'31i last year in stockholm & today coud only manage 7'36i in a nicely paced race

he seems to be a tall dude compared to Lagaht?

Those Dibabas are all so damned cute!

At least we can only cast doubt on the cleanliness of this performance, unlike surety of all the ones that are faster.

ventolin^3 wrote:

i have to have a laff !!!

i've been saying for years that women's 1500 was p!ss-weak

not like you to blow your own trumpet!

watchman wrote:

Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL_mRBl8LVA

Doesn't even look tired... is this the face of the new endurance drug?

Is anyone else entertained by the German-like precision and emotionless clapping with the noisemakers going on in the video?

52.43 wrote:

3:57.54 for Dibaba in Doha, but ok 3:56 was Arigawi. So, it's 2.37s faster. I also have to admit it's astonishingly fast, always thought about 3:56 was the cut-off.

Btw just goes to show again that indoor tracks have improved massively!

There is little if any difference between indoor and outdoor tracks. The spring and banked bends actually enables some to run faster than outdoors.

Salazar and several elite runners of late have even stated that some indoor tracks are faster than outdoor ones. They should know, being as they are performing on them at the highest level.

This 2-3 sec conversion from indoor to outdoor is a nonsense. It may have been the case 30 years ago for the old wooden tracks that had little banking, but it is not the case for a modern, top notch indoor track of today.

Given the same early pace on an outdoor track today, I seriously doubt Dibaba would have been any faster.

Converting this to a 3:49 is ridiculous.

just sayin wrote:not like you to blow your own trumpet!

i have said numerous times that diby or defar couda won 1500 golds ( even in '12 ) off just their 5k ( or 5k/10k training )

call their peak 5k : 14'10 at even-pace

they likely had 55/56 speed simultaneously

from :

14'10 with

56.0 ->3'53.6 , 8'11.8

55.5 ->3'52.7 , 8'11.1

55.0 ->3'51.8 , 8'10.3

the little sista is running slightly better than the big sista coud have for 1500, the little sista having advantage of actually training for 1500 whereas big sista wouda been running above off 5k ( or 5k/10k ) training !

big diby above for "mo-ing it" over 1500...

given how previous womens records are bogus I shall personally consider this time the new WR

ventolin^3 wrote:

52.43 wrote:Btw just goes to show again that indoor tracks have improved massively!

tell that to ndiku who ran 7'31i last year in stockholm & today coud only manage 7'36i in a nicely paced race

Everybody in that race looked pretty weak. But they still got a month before they absolutely have to be in good shape.

I definitely accept a couple seconds for pacing, but I'm still unsure what to believe about banked indoor tracks, especially the newer ones with the most modern surfaces.

A fair number of notable runners and coaches recently have weighed in on indoor tracks, most saying they think they are of similar speed to outdoor ones, at least until you start to get to well below 60s per lap.

I assume you reject that assertion? For now I'm going with what some of the athletes or coaches say, that the speed is similar..but still open to the idea they don't necessarily have it right. If people like Dibaba start droppin 3:50 outside, or Rupp goes 12:40 low or better that'll probably change my mind a bit the other direction.

watchman wrote:

Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL_mRBl8LVA

Doesn't even look tired... is this the face of the new endurance drug?

you'll soon know ..

keep an eye on the rest of hermens ethiopian crew

Today's indoor track are very comparable to an outdoor track. On a perfect day, outdoor tracks are quicker - if for no other reason than there are half the curves and a greater percentage of races are on the straight away versus the curves (most indoor tracks have @ 74 meters of straightaway and @ 126 meters of curve per lap). But many days are not perfect outside - meaning the runner has to deal with winds or sometimes less than ideal temperatures. And on those days I think we can say a very good indoor track is better than an outdoor track.