Cain

How far back you are from the person in second to last.

Rockgip wrote:

Even if she comes in dead last in the final, she can say that she is one of the top twelve 1500m runners in the country. That's nothing to be ashamed of.

Not ashamed but very disappointing considering where she was two years ago

ROFLL wrote:

Nothing wrong with having some normal fat on you most of the time, BUT for championship and olympic racing you must engineer your body fat down to almost nothing in order to run fast.

Very precise dieting is necessary to drop all the fat and even some lean mass, while still hitting that sweet spot where you still maintain necessary strength and speed but have dropped 5, 10, or 20 pounds of unnecessary mass.

If you are in the 5k final, a 5 lb difference in weight can be monumental--medal or no medal, or make the final or dont make final.

A 10 lb difference basically moves you from front pack to rear pack.

Almost gaunt and extremely cut is what wins.

Yes, MEN can get their body fat to very low levels-single digit body fat%. However, women NEED sufficient body fat for their body to ensure regular menstruation occurs.[/quote]

What makes you think elite runners have or want to have regular cycles?

It's simple, Cain needs to stop stuffing her pie hole and to start training hard.

Props to thread starter for the combo of title and handle.

I don't think any of these women are thinking about making a baby in the next couple months.

As for Cain, she did not look as springy as she did a couple years ago. She has a long career ahead of her though.

Any skinnier people would be accusing her of an eating disorder.

It's not about making babies at this point, it's about maintaining a regular menstrual cycle for good bone density that will keep from stress fractures derailing their careers.

If Cain looks a little un-chiseled compared to the rest of the women in the field, I think that just speaks to her enormous talent, that she can still be competitive with them without the weight advantage.

stuck the fork back then wrote:

Mary Cain was done a couple of years ago. You can't reheat meat and expect a good result.

yep, she peaked early

she's rapidly approaching her hobby jogger life

What makes you think elite runners have or want to have regular cycles?[/quote]

they may be willing to trade performance for ultra-low weight and no menstruation, which means they are messing with their hormones and risking healthy bone density. as a result, stress fractures abound.

not making a judgment. football players put their brains at risk. all elites performers put themselves at risk.

reg wrote:

Nothing wrong with having some normal fat on you most of the time, BUT for championship and olympic racing you must engineer your body fat down to almost nothing in order to run fast.

Very precise dieting is necessary to drop all the fat and even some lean mass, while still hitting that sweet spot where you still maintain necessary strength and speed but have dropped 5, 10, or 20 pounds of unnecessary mass.

If you are in the 5k final, a 5 lb difference in weight can be monumental--medal or no medal, or make the final or dont make final.

A 10 lb difference basically moves you from front pack to rear pack.

Almost gaunt and extremely cut is what wins.

You are pretty much correct.

Fat and weight in general is not good for long distance runners and the longer the distance the more it becomes an issue. It's a fine line, you want to be as thin and fit as you can get away with; however, if your BMI drops too low, it's not a matter of if you will get injured, it's how long you can go before it happens. No pun intended, professional female long distance runners will cycle on and off of their menstrual cycle, but they usually can't go more than a year or so with no menstrual cycle. Where females get themselves in trouble is becoming almost addicted to being thin and running PRs that they go over board. Too low of a BMI seems to be more of an issue for young female athletes (21 and under) than for older athletes. When I see a 'super thin' post puberty star H.S. and even an NCAA athlete, 90% of the time injury is just around the corner. Obviously, when you are fit, you are going to be thin, but when a 19 year old, looks smaller than pre puberty middle schooler, something is not right. Also, when people say an athlete has always been thin and/or is naturally thin, that's a myth. While a female may be true ectomorph and will never be fat, at some point in H.S. or college, a female athlete should show some weight gain. During that period, their performance will stagnate or even decline, but in a year or two they can bound back.

A seasoned professional distance runners' bodies over the years will adapt to a low BMI, these athletes have learned to ride that thin line with the help of nutritionists and endocrinologists, etc. A world class marathoner, running 100mpw, a month leading up to a major event is going to be unnaturally thin and is not going to have a menstrual cycle, but they can't stay that way for long. Weight gain and menstruation is the body's preparation for the possibility of getting pregnant. In addition to being the precursor to creating human life, menstruation is very important for overall health, the female body needs the nutrients and hormones the monthly cycle provides. Notwithstanding the weight gain, the monthly cycles provides benefits to female athletes as well. Stronger bones, higher oxygenated blood, stronger muscles, etc. A monthly cycle without the weight gain for a female would be like a PED. In fact, in the 1980s Eastern Bloc athletes would purposely get pregnant and have an abortion leading up to global championships. Some female athletes did this several times in their career.

With all of that said, you can't beat Father Time or fool Mother Nature, they always win in the end.

reg wrote:

Nothing wrong with having some normal fat on you most of the time, BUT for championship and olympic racing you must engineer your body fat down to almost nothing in order to run fast.

Very precise dieting is necessary to drop all the fat and even some lean mass, while still hitting that sweet spot where you still maintain necessary strength and speed but have dropped 5, 10, or 20 pounds of unnecessary mass.

If you are in the 5k final, a 5 lb difference in weight can be monumental--medal or no medal, or make the final or dont make final.

A 10 lb difference basically moves you from front pack to rear pack.

Almost gaunt and extremely cut is what wins.

The existence of Brenda Martinez and her utterly un-Uceny body on the Olympic team (along with lots of other accolades) says that your assertion is too extreme ("engineer your body fat down to almost nothing").

And I'm pretty sure that Cain looked about the same when she was running a lot faster.

And I think that we may be, to an extent, confusing current leanness with current weight/resistance training. Mary Slaney and her contemporaries were probably similarly lean, but they apparently weren't working on 6-packs and doing a decent number of lateral raises like today's women are (and I AIN'T complaining). So, PERHAPS, when we see someone perhaps a little less lean than most AND without a lot of definition, we're fooled into thinking that they're considerably less lean than they really are(?).

800 dude wrote:

reg wrote:

If you are in the 5k final, a 5 lb difference in weight can be monumental--medal or no medal, or make the final or dont make final.

A 10 lb difference basically moves you from front pack to rear pack.

It's worse than that, actually. Two pounds can be the difference between medaling or not. Five pounds could be the difference from front the back of the pack. Ten pounds could be the difference between an Olympic medalist and someone who didn't qualify for the trials.

If this were broadly true, Brenda Martinez would be in 3:55 territory by losing 2-5 pounds, which looks like it might be fairly easy. Have her and her coach not thought of that?

I'm guessing "No," of course, and that folks are making overly-strong assertions about what is known about weight-vs-running performance.

Oh, and for an example at the other end of the distance running spectrum, check out the great Joan Benoit's "tone" at ANY point in her career !!!