Professor at Jos Hermens' gala says sub-2 hour marathon could happen with 5 years

broken arrow wrote:

no way. I think the clean world record right now is around 2:06, I am not believing all of these 2:03-2:05 performances, many by runners that have seemingly come out of nowhere to run these times. we have be tricked and lied to too many times by these PEDs users, it is unfortunate but now it is hard to believe these times.

Some of it's real, some of it's bs.

2:00 isn't happening. Wake me up when someone runs that pace for 30km or even 25km.

Agreed. No chance in that time frame. There is ZERO indication it could happen. If this prof had watched the last Dubai marathon, he'd realize it won't happen on a legit course.

bingo!

...Go Paula!!!...

casual obsever wrote:

rojo wrote:

My thoughts. No chance. None (unless you count running down a mountain with a tail wind)

We are already at 2:02:57. So all one needs is a clean, hard working Brit who beats everybody else by three minutes. That sounds doable.

rojo wrote:

http://www.athleticsweekly.com/blog/galaxy-of-stars-attend-global-sports-communications-anniversary-41484/

AW says:

Prof Pitsiladis described the ways you could theoretically bring Gebrselassie’s marathon best of 2:03:59 down to 1:59:59. “It is no longer a matter of if but rather when,” he said, adding that the barrier could be broken, in his opinion, in five years’ time.

My thoughts. No chance. None (unless you count running down a mountain with a tail wind)

Given the current state of cheating in the sport, Dr. Pitsiladis is right. What we're seeing now is a last ditch effort for the IAAF to make it look like antidoping is relevant in the sport and above corruption. Its not, but once the IAAF has given up on trying to save face we'll see illegal doping go to new heights. Track and field athletes and coaches have no morals. We even let an Italian coach who lies to the public and tells them doping won't improve the top athletes to post on letsrun nearly unchecked.

letsracer wrote:

Given the current state of cheating in the sport, Dr. Pitsiladis is right. What we're seeing now is a last ditch effort for the IAAF to make it look like antidoping is relevant in the sport and above corruption. Its not, but once the IAAF has given up on trying to save face we'll see illegal doping go to new heights. Track and field athletes and coaches have no morals. We even let an Italian coach who lies to the public and tells them doping won't improve the top athletes to post on letsrun nearly unchecked.

But you've never known a track athlete in any capacity so there's no basis for your ramblings.

Why have Wang Junxia's 8:06.11 3k and 29:31.78 10k world records set in 1993...lasted for 23 years? Why has Paula's 2:15:25 marathon lasted 13 years?

Where is the progress in female distance running...by all of the top tier, clean, naturally talented Kenyan and Ethiopian runners BORN, LIVING, and performing SUPER-ELITE TRAINING at ALTITUDE?

I have not seen any progress in records... by any women... in the 3k, 10k, or marathon...in a long time.

Did you know that after Paula developed anemia in Jan. 1992...she went on to win the World Junior Cross Country Championships in March, 1992?

Did you know that at that 1992 race...in 2nd place...5 seconds behind Paula Radcliffe...was Wang Junxia from China?

rojo wrote:

http://www.athleticsweekly.com/blog/galaxy-of-stars-attend-global-sports-communications-anniversary-41484/

AW says:

Prof Pitsiladis described the ways you could theoretically bring Gebrselassie’s marathon best of 2:03:59 down to 1:59:59. “It is no longer a matter of if but rather when,” he said, adding that the barrier could be broken, in his opinion, in five years’ time.

My thoughts. No chance. None (unless you count running down a mountain with a tail wind)

I don't know if you can get four full minutes, but it's clear to me that Geb (or Kimetto or Kipsang or Mutai) could have run a lot faster had you done the following:

1. Run the race at night instead of in the morning

2. Run on a perfectly flat criterium-style loop

3. Run in colder conditions

4. Better (more precise and longer-lasting) pacers

5. Delineate the perfect tangent lines on the course with a visible paint strip

6. Spend a lot of money to attract the best talent

Here's a vision for how to do it:

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

sub-2h estimator wrote:

2:06:05 Ronaldo da Costa Brazil September 20, 1998

2:04:55 Paul Tergat Kenya September 28, 2003

2:03:59 Haile Gebrselassie Ethiopia September 28, 2008

2:02:57 Dennis Kimetto Kenya September 28, 2014

(All Berlin Marathon)

It's been roughly 1 minute down each 5 years. So sub-2h around 2030 would be a fair estimate. But it all depends on doping, some freakish talent coming along, and the course/organization/race.

That only works to a point then you reach human limit. For example track times steadily improved but for the most part have plateaued. The marathon was behind the curve because it took longer to gain the same attention from elites as the track. We're very close to the plateau. We'll see the record broker a few more times but not significant chunks coming off.

There's nothing that indicates that "we're very close to the plateau". That's what they said before the sub-4min mile too. According to the rule of 1 min faster every 5 years we would guess that the WR in 1968 was 2:12. Morio Shigematsu ran 2:12 in 1965. Pretty close.

Of course it's not strictly a linear progression, but we're not fading off yet. Quite the contrary. With the massive interest/prize money in the marathon it's getting even more likely that genetic freaks around the world (like Kimetto) come out of nowhere to run a WR.

My thread on diet has established that nobody on this site knows much about elite marathon runners.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

My thread on diet has established that nobody on this site knows much about elite marathon runners.

Your stupid thread has established that diet fads are irrelevant to running WRs.

All performance calculator's showed the men's marathon wr was behind the other distance wrs until recently. Now it has caught up. Now that guys are focusing on it at the peak of their primes rather than past peak, tergat and geb, we're seeing what the top level of the marathon is. It's more likely it doesn't drop a minute in the next ten years rather than continue a minute a year.

Comparing it to the 4 minute mile is absurd. That era training, nutrition, elite lifestyle, etc. we're all way behind modern athletics standards. We know how to train and what they eat now. Any breakthroughs in those area's are going to be marginal gains. And increasing money further won't make people faster. The money available at majors is a huge amount to a Kenyan. Put it this way look how much MLB salaries have gone up the past decade. This didn't inspire ball players to get better, in fact baseball players have bigger beer guts than ever. More money in the marathon would be great but it's not going to inspire a drastic increase in performance.

Northern Star...Thanks for the analysis - good stuff. Wonder if the painted strip that shows the shortest path could be made wide enough to run on and painted with a non-slip material for improved traction.

Northern Star wrote:

rojo wrote:http://www.athleticsweekly.com/blog/galaxy-of-stars-attend-global-sports-communications-anniversary-41484/

My thoughts. No chance. None (unless you count running down a mountain with a tail wind)

I don't know if you can get four full minutes, but it's clear to me that Geb (or Kimetto or Kipsang or Mutai) could have run a lot faster had you done the following:

1. Run the race at night instead of in the morning

2. Run on a perfectly flat criterium-style loop

3. Run in colder conditions

4. Better (more precise and longer-lasting) pacers

5. Delineate the perfect tangent lines on the course with a visible paint strip

6. Spend a lot of money to attract the best talent

Here's a vision for how to do it:

http://www.runningwritings.com/2016/01/how-to-break-marathon-world-record-in.html

To respond to your innovative ideas

1. I doubt this would help and might just screw with the body clock.

2. Could definitely help. But there's not the money to build this. A course like Berlin is close enough I doubt this would make a significant difference.

3. They already run races in ideal temperatures. Obviously not every race is going to have perfect conditions.

4. I mean yeah this would be nice butwhat are we talking a guy going to 22 to 24 miles pacing? Anyone in that kind of shape is capable of winning a major or setting the wr themselves. They're basically going to be sacrificing a marathon that season to pace. It's going to take a lot of money to get them to do that. And it's not like there's an abundance of guys capable of that. Plus rabbits will have off days just like the guys going for the record. As far as even pacing there are notable instances where rabbits have done a bad job.

5. I've seen this at some races but I think the top guys generally do a decent job of running tangents when chasing times.

6. It would be interesting if Berlin had the same money as London to attract that quality of a field.

Overall the pursuit of the wr makes the racing less compelling to me. The reality is conditions and courses play such a big factor. I think the sport would be better off if there was more focus on competition rather than time. Think of all the most exciting races you've watched track or roads. How many have been wr attempts. A couple of my favorite races like the world's 03 5000m was very fast and a championship record, but the fast time was achieved by racing not chasing time. The only wr attempt I can think of that was a truly great race was when El g held off Ngeny when he ran 3:26.

To put things in perspective:

These are the equivalents at other distances.

5K 0:12:20

5M 0:20:21

10K 0:25:50

10M 0:42:38

Half Marathon 0:57:17

Marathon 1:59:59

I think we all agree that times will continue to fall. An interesting question is what does the WR have to be before it is generally accepted that the 2:00 Marathon is likely. I think 2:01:20. That probably happens in the next decade.

Balian wrote:

To put things in perspective:

These are the equivalents at other distances.

5K 0:12:20

5M 0:20:21

10K 0:25:50

10M 0:42:38

Half Marathon 0:57:17

Marathon 1:59:59

There are no "equivalents". There are only opinions on which times that are equivalent.

Southern star wrote:

2. Could definitely help. But there's not the money to build this. A course like Berlin is close enough I doubt this would make a significant difference.

Berlin has lots of zigzags and turns. And even some slopes. In any case, that can get further improved:

2a) "Run on a perfectly flat criterium-style loop" for the first half and a few steps, then run 13 miles gently downhill (40 meters, keeping the course record-eligible) to the east in a west-wind zone.

2b) "Run on a perfectly flat criterium-style" downhill half-circle, where the finish lies 13 miles east of the start in a west-wind zone (keeping the course record-eligible).

1a) In addition to 2a, start early in the morning with less wind, then have a stronger tailwind for the second half. Where (gentle) head wind is expected, have the course protected by tall buildings or a forest.

And

7) Use a cushioned surface so that the runners may wear lighter shoes.

I consider all your suggestions cheating.