RE: RoJo 20 years from Sub2 / Dr. Joyner and Rojo share their thoughts on what Eliud Kipchoge's 2:00:25 means

rojo wrote:

oh please wrote:

Exactly. I think a similar effort in Berlin might yield close to same results, mostly thanks to potentially even better weather by 5F or so, plus the added benefit of a race instead of a time trial. It would take money, but it shouldn't be totally out of the realm to get a team of guys to pace as long as they can at 60/half pace and see where it goes..

So do you want to bet on Berlin or not?

The idea that he'd run better in a "race with competition" is laughable. I saw some variant of that theory being proposed before the race. A woman on facebook on Sage Canaday's page was saying he wouldn't do as well because there was no "crowd." Go read "Scorecasting" people. Crowd doesn't have anything to do with it.

Does anyone remember London in 2016? The guys slowed down as they were worried about racing each other and cost themselves the world record.

The idea that a guy needs "a real race" to be motivated is laughable. I can only imagine the financial incentive he was going to get from Nike if he had broken 2:00:00. David Monti estimated he'd get between $1 and $1.5 million if he'd done it.

So you really think Kipchoge was racing at like 95% but then decided, "You know what I won't give it 100% because it's not a real race?" That's laughable. The idea that guys can simply try harder is laughable. If it's just a matter of willpower why wasn't everyone on this board a pro runner?

If a real race and crowd were factors, then a bunch of collegians wouldn't have run 3:37 in front of 50 people at Swarthmore last night.

You often run faster in time trials/practice than you do in a real race.

too legit to forgit wrote:

rojo wrote:

So do you want to bet on Berlin or not?

The idea that he'd run better in a "race with competition" is laughable. I saw some variant of that theory being proposed before the race. A woman on facebook on Sage Canaday's page was saying he wouldn't do as well because there was no "crowd." Go read "Scorecasting" people. Crowd doesn't have anything to do with it.

Does anyone remember London in 2016? The guys slowed down as they were worried about racing each other and cost themselves the world record.

The idea that a guy needs "a real race" to be motivated is laughable. I can only imagine the financial incentive he was going to get from Nike if he had broken 2:00:00. David Monti estimated he'd get between $1 and $1.5 million if he'd done it.

So you really think Kipchoge was racing at like 95% but then decided, "You know what I won't give it 100% because it's not a real race?" That's laughable. The idea that guys can simply try harder is laughable. If it's just a matter of willpower why wasn't everyone on this board a pro runner?

If a real race and crowd were factors, then a bunch of collegians wouldn't have run 3:37 in front of 50 people at Swarthmore last night.

You often run faster in time trials/practice than you do in a real race.

So you think it's laughable?

Who are these people who often run faster in time trials or practice? Elites?

Kipchoge is a competitor. To some degree this was a race between the three and the fact that Kipchoge won the race before halfway and still mustered that amount of effort shows that he would certainly have dipped under 2 if he'd had even a bit more competition.

The fact that you don't think so is laughable.

zxvxzcv wrote:

Yes, the windscreen made a huge difference and there was the psychological factor of going after the goal, plus the superior athlete who'd never at full strength gone for time alone in a marathon. However, I am convinced that a huge psychological hurdle has been knocked down, just as with Mutai and Mosop in the wind-aided Boston marathon of 2011 when they ran low 2:03 and then in the next few years all kinds of nobodies ran better times than Geb, a 26:22 guy, ever ran. I wouldn't be shocked at all to see Kipchoge break 2:02 this year at Berlin and low 2:01 wouldn't surprise me within a year or two. I'm assuming he is not shot by that race and that the experience of running that pace has prepared his cns and muscles to do something much closer to it than to the current WR. Psychological hurdles are huge in distance running.

oh please wrote:

Um wha? wrote:

I think rojo needs to realize that his professional credibility was never there and plummeted even farther after this performance.

Exactly. I think a similar effort in Berlin might yield close to same results, mostly thanks to potentially even better weather by 5F or so, plus the added benefit of a race instead of a time trial. It would take money, but it shouldn't be totally out of the realm to get a team of guys to pace as long as they can at 60/half pace and see where it goes.

We just had a guy time trial a 2:00:25. Ok, call it 2:01:40 or which ever "real worth" you'd like to call it. Add in an actual race and similar pacing, you might be cracking 2:01.

Kind of reminds me of the 2008 Olympic marathon where for 2/3rds the race the announcers were saying Wanjiru is crazy and no way this can work and this isn't how you run a championship race. But then it does work and he does win and then all of a sudden it took 205 to win a major, then 204, now 203.

rojo wrote:

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM wrote:

Couldn't disagree with you more. This will happen within 5 years. If I was a RD for Berlin or Chicago I'd find a sponsor to pay a $5m bonus for going under 2 hours. That's how it will happen.

So you think someone just hasn't done it now simply because they haven't offered $5 million? That makes no sense. If offered you $100 million, could you break 4 minutes in the mile

I'm assuming a) sheos don't get ridiculous and b) no new doping comes on board.

I hate to admit but the arrival of the EPO and the huge drop in track records sure is strong related.

Phil me In wrote:

I agree. The WR has been fairly stagnant for the last decade.

Unless some of the numbnutz think the advertising unsactioned side show taught them something.

Fairly stagnant?

From 2007 to 2017: The WR has come down by 1:58 in the last 10 years. That's a lot.

From 1997 to 2017- 20 years - it only came down 2:17.

Sub-520 miler wrote:

LRC is such a strange place. Nothing like the Sub-2 event has ever been done in the history of running, and since ONE guy didn't achieve it on the first try, despite coming extremely close to hitting 1:59:99, there are still large quantities of people saying it CANNOT be done.

I'm not saying it CANNOT be done. I'm just saying it won't be done anytime soon. Your comment about ONE guy trying it is absurd.

The VERY best guy in the world couldn't get it done. So if he can't , then no one else can.

It wasn't his first try. He's run a ton of marathons. He's failed to break 2:00 in all of them.

And if you read my article, I"m talking about in normal races.

But your one guy comment is laughable. If I take Usain Bolt down to the local track with everyone here in Baltimore and have him try to run 8.9 for 100 meters and he doesn't, does it really matter if I don't line up the other million people behind him have them race as well?

rojo wrote:

oh please wrote:

Exactly. I think a similar effort in Berlin might yield close to same results, mostly thanks to potentially even better weather by 5F or so, plus the added benefit of a race instead of a time trial. It would take money, but it shouldn't be totally out of the realm to get a team of guys to pace as long as they can at 60/half pace and see where it goes..

So do you want to bet on Berlin or not?

The idea that he'd run better in a "race with competition" is laughable. I saw some variant of that theory being proposed before the race. A woman on facebook on Sage Canaday's page was saying he wouldn't do as well because there was no "crowd." Go read "Scorecasting" people. Crowd doesn't have anything to do with it.

Does anyone remember London in 2016? The guys slowed down as they were worried about racing each other and cost themselves the world record.

The idea that a guy needs "a real race" to be motivated is laughable. I can only imagine the financial incentive he was going to get from Nike if he had broken 2:00:00. David Monti estimated he'd get between $1 and $1.5 million if he'd done it.

So you really think Kipchoge was racing at like 95% but then decided, "You know what I won't give it 100% because it's not a real race?" That's laughable. The idea that guys can simply try harder is laughable. If it's just a matter of willpower why wasn't everyone on this board a pro runner?

If a real race and crowd were factors, then a bunch of collegians wouldn't have run 3:37 in front of 50 people at Swarthmore last night.

You often run faster in time trials/practice than you do in a real race.