Athing Mu now running the mile at Millrose - let the predictions begin

everyone's dad wrote:

I just don't see why she would be different than a guy running those times. Forget other women and just imagine if we placed her in decent D3 school with their mid D group that has a handful of guys who have PRs around 49-1:55-4:20. Would they drop her on workouts? Which workouts? And she would be even with them in races of 400, 600, 800, 1000 but then you think they would run 4:00 for 1500 while she runs 4:10? I just don't see it.

You realize that the very fact that no woman, including doped Russians full of steroids who were as fast as Mu in the 800m has ever done it, is a good argument for it's extreme improbability? It's not that women haven't trained with men before. Koko used to run some workouts with men at former NOP (and supposedly dropped them in strength based ones because she is also a freakish endurance outlier).

Mu has already the second or third best 400+800m combo in history. To run also world class 1500m she basically would have to be the most exceptional runner in history, full stop. Of course, that's not impossible, but it's unlikely.

In any case, it would be something in the future. If she runs 4:19 on saturday I'll tend to cry foul...

You went right back to women. Why would her times in 1500/mile be different than 19 year old guys with the same 400/800 times? I can find many who meet the criteria. Too many approach this the way people did forever. No man can break 4 in the mile. Women can't run a marathon. Maybe you are correct that she can't run 4:20 but nobodybseems to be able to explain why a woman who runs the same times as a man, wouldn't run more times the same as a man. Muscle, strength, testosterone, etc., just don't enter the discussion because I am asking about guys who run the same 400/800 times.

I am not a physiologist, so I cannot explain it, except pointing out that this is a stable difference in over 50 years of professionalized athletics, including eras with women who took large amounts of steroids to improve performance.

The tendency is also pretty clear for men (and here we have more data since the early 20th century), that there is one type of 800m runner who might still do o.k. in 1000m but gets much worse in the 1500m and the 800/1500m guy with mediocre 400m.

And the fact that the DSD athletes like Semenya and Niyonsaba are also much closer to typical male ranges, i.e. sub 50 + sub4 in the first case and the ease to go from world class 800m to 10k in the second, also points towards a gender difference.

It's not that there were not a few sub 50 sub 1:56 women and a few more sub 1:56 sub 4 ones, so either half of the task is rare but possible (although I think most of these case, except Mu, are highly likely to have been doped in Eastern bloc fashion). But nobody ran sub 50 AND sub 4 1500, except Semenya.

I doubt it always was for lack of trying, although this might have been a factor.

It seems that every other woman who ran 49-1:55 was either doped or DSD so we should not look to them to predict a mile for MU. I stick with my contention that if trained, she can run a 4:19 mile. I predict that I will come back to this post when people are shocked that she is also a great miler.

Mu is a huge talent, maybe once-in-a-generation, we shall see over the coming years. But the problem with being a huge talent is people throw superlatives at you, that are just not realistic.

I'm old enough to remember back to 1986, when Soviet LJ coach and former Olympic medalist Igor Ter-Ovanesyan said Heike Drechsler was capable of jumping over 8m. Yes, he said that. That same year, it was speculated she might be the first woman to run under 47 seconds in the 400m. All, in hindsight, quite ridiculous, but at that time, the hype was huge.

We have the hype now with Mu. Predictions for her aren't quite that outlandish yet, but they're getting there. She will not break the 400m WR. Nope. 800m WR? Maybe. She still has 1:76 to find, which is huge. Add to that the fact that all the women above her on the World lists were either doped or had a form of DSD, then that shows what a task she faces. But she is only 19, and she runs the distance, not just runs for places.

I have no idea why she is entering the mile. Personally, this leads me to believe she will only run the 800m at the Worlds this summer. If she wanted to do the 400/800, I'd expect to see her maybe running a 200m outdoors at some point, but not 1600's. There is nothing to gain from running a 1mile race if you want to run 400m at the Worlds. But hey, stranger things have happened - 100mhurdler Cindy Roleder (GER) opened her 2022 indoor season with a pentathlon, for fun, I might add - so maybe this is just to help her racing brain for the 800m.

Time-wise, I doubt she will be much under 4:30. I watched her 4:37 on YouTube, and while it appears she could have gone a bit harder over the first 1200m, 10 secs faster over the whole distance is a huge ask. She ran this race as she pleased, there was no scrap for the front at the gun, which is what will happen at Millrose. She ran a consistent pace, with no interference from others. Again, that wont happen at Millrose. She will, however, be dragged to a good time. I'm plumping for a 4:28.

everyone's dad wrote:

You went right back to women. Why would her times in 1500/mile be different than 19 year old guys with the same 400/800 times? I can find many who meet the criteria. Too many approach this the way people did forever. No man can break 4 in the mile. Women can't run a marathon. Maybe you are correct that she can't run 4:20 but nobodybseems to be able to explain why a woman who runs the same times as a man, wouldn't run more times the same as a man. Muscle, strength, testosterone, etc., just don't enter the discussion because I am asking about guys who run the same 400/800 times.

Men and women don't share the same physiology. That is why they perform so differently in so many sports. It isn't a valid comparison.

everyone's dad wrote:

But there are many boys with 49-1;55-4:19. Why would Mu be different?

Because they are male. They have physiological advantages (such as muscle mass, bone structure, and cardio vascular capacity, including a higher red blood cell count) females don't have.

KSTJ wrote:

Maybe Athing Mu took some inspiration from Sifan Hassan? It didn't seem possibe to be world class in the 1500m and the half marathon simulaneously until Sifan Hassan proved it is. It still seems impossible that this also works with the 400m/1500m, and should it be a long-term goal of Athing Mu to prove that it does, then she must start somewhere.

I would expect Hassan is doped. It is virtually impossible to catch top athletes now.

everyone's dad wrote:

Maybe Mu is a distance runner who has never trained.

Maybe she's also a weightlifter who has never trained.

everyone's dad wrote:

I just don't see why she would be different than a guy running those times. Forget other women and just imagine if we placed her in decent D3 school with their mid D group that has a handful of guys who have PRs around 49-1:55-4:20. Would they drop her on workouts? Which workouts? And she would be even with them in races of 400, 600, 800, 1000 but then you think they would run 4:00 for 1500 while she runs 4:10? I just don't see it.

You are writing from a position of ignorance about the physiological differences between males and females.

everyone's dad wrote:

So women who are slower in the 400 are faster in the mile? You made no point by merely being insulting. Fast boys are fast at multiple distances just like fast women are fast at multiple distances. These are basic facts that every human except you seems aware of.

Yes, to the above. Athletes who are closer to sprinters - which is what the fastest 400m runners are - do not have the aerobic capacity to run at a similar competitive level over middle distances. Conversely, aerobically based athletes (as milers are) will be comparatively slower over the 400. Basic facts that have eluded you.

Yes males have that advantage. So by having that advantage, I am asking about the males who with that advantage, run 49-1:55. I am not asking about the ones who run faster. The males who can only run 49-1:55-4:20 are comparable to Mu and you have no logical explanation as to why to why they aren't.

+1

Do you know that the B10 runner of the week who ran the fastest mile in the conference was 2nd at the state meet in Ohio in the 110 hurdles. Houlihan used to be a 400/800 runner. Mu is a very fast runner. She is not a sprinter. She just happens to be faster than other women.

everyone's dad wrote:

Yes males have that advantage. So by having that advantage, I am asking about the males who with that advantage, run 49-1:55. I am not asking about the ones who run faster. The males who can only run 49-1:55-4:20 are comparable to Mu and you have no logical explanation as to why to why they aren't.

The point I have tried to make repeatedly is that the males who run 49/1.55/4.20 have a different physiology than women of a comparable level over any of those events. It gives them advantages women don't have.

For a start, a 49sec 400 is in the realm of a sprinter for a woman while it is quite achievable by a middle-distance exponent amongst males; hence the male will have more stamina. Thus a 1.55 male who is also an endurance type can easily run 4.20 whereas for a 400/800 female runner that is exponentially more difficult, because they are less endurance-based. And that is Mu.

everyone's dad wrote:

Do you know that the B10 runner of the week who ran the fastest mile in the conference was 2nd at the state meet in Ohio in the 110 hurdles. Houlihan used to be a 400/800 runner. Mu is a very fast runner. She is not a sprinter. She just happens to be faster than other women.

The faster you are over a shorter distances the less likely you are an endurance athlete. A world class 400m athlete, as she is, is not an endurance type. The male equivalent to Mu is a Juantorena 400/800 exponent. He was never a miler.

everyone's dad wrote:

It seems that every other woman who ran 49-1:55 was either doped or DSD so we should not look to them to predict a mile for MU. I stick with my contention that if trained, she can run a 4:19 mile. I predict that I will come back to this post when people are shocked that she is also a great miler.

I have no easy way to do this but I believe that if one plotted the 400/800/1500m marks of the top 100 women and men, or some other sample, maybe not necessarily world elite but only college athletes or so, one would see correlations and groupings that roughly correspond to the somewhat traditional types of 400/800 (+400 hurdles) type, the 800/1500 type and the1500/5000 type. That is, from a certain level upwards, virtually nobody is (almost) equally good at 400 and 1500m. Of course there is some flexibility and some athletes move up/down events during their careers and some have huge ranges (like Hassan or Aouita).

I'd guess that one will also find the 800m sticking out with many athletes dropping off sharply BOTH in the 400 AND 1500m because this seems also to be the case anecdotally from the marks of elites in the last decades, take Kipketer who almost only ran and excelled at 800m.

And phyiologically it has also long been known that the 800m has a precarious balance of three energy systems, so it is a special distance.

That would be another reason why it is already hard for top 800m runners to be good at *either* 400m *or* 1500/mile (whereas anything lasting more than about 6 min. or so is so dominated by aerobic ability that it's not a mystery to have great 1500-HM or 3000-M runners).

Mu is already an exceptional talent with the combined 400+800 marks in the all time top 3 females or so. Now one could argue that this exceptionality would make it likely that she could even more exceptional and get the for women unprecedented combination of sub 50 sub 4. One could also argue that this clearly shows her to be a 400/800m type and thus not to expect too much in the 1500/mile.

Rewatch the video again with the race splits on hand:

Seems pretty likely that the plan was for her to run fairly even 35s for 200s through 1309m.

At that point on the video, when she gets to 300m to go, there is a notable shift in cadence and she finishes that penultimate lap almost two seconds faster than the previous lap as a result. She continues at about that same cadence through the bell and then when she reaches the same spot on the backstretch as her prior uptick (100m to go), there is another notable switch up in cadence and arm action and as a result she finishes the last lap 3.5 seconds faster than the prior fastest lap (despite only really shifting to faster speed with 100m to go). I don’t know what her official final 100 split would be, but I would not be surprised if it was sub-14 given the total lap being 30 seconds and the quite notable shift faster with 100 to go.

Given that absolutely nothing in the race itself necessitated these choreographed moves (she had no competitors anywhere near her), what’s the best interpretation of the splits and the timing of the upticks?

I would submit that what we saw was a controlled time trial/workout. The team was likely considering the Millrose switch prior to that race (she did switch from a planned and apparently solo 1000m race to the B-heat mile kind of last minute) and wanted to give her a chance to feel out the distance again, but in a controlled way. Run even splits @ roughly 4:40 pace until 300 to go, then a controlled surge for 200m, and then close faster over the final 100m. (I prescribe similar efforts regularly to a few athletes that I coach. A controlled versus all-out time trial gives a solid indication of fitness and starts to callous the mind and body for racing but deliberately avoids going to the well and helps to remove a bit of pressure and manage the athlete’s reactions afterwards depending on how it goes.)

There is no basis at all for thinking that what she ran last week was an all-out effort.

And certainly no reason to think that she’s injured or would be unable to win the 800 against women who are likely to also be at similar points in their training build-up for July WCs. You don’t run 48.32 and 1:55.04 in August and then forget how to run fast enough to beat this particular field five months later. When she ran her similar 1500 last April, she went on to run her 1:57.7 CR in cold and very windy conditions with no competition only TWO WEEKS later.

One other point that no one else has made yet: Mu not only ran her own controlled time trial/workout last Saturday, but she also watched two of the better women in this Millrose mile field compete in the 3000 (KoKo and Jessica Hull). She knows exactly what kind of mile talent she’s going to face on Saturday. And she decided that she’s up for the challenge.

It is certainly possible that she has fundamentally misjudged her ability to compete in this quality field.

But it may also be that a woman who broke 5 minutes for the mile as a 14-year old, finished 2nd at the AAU Nationals XC 5K (off of pure natural talent) as a 15-year old, set an American record (running .11 off the WR) of 1:23 for 600m as a 16-year old, and lost all of ONE race against the best collegiate and international competition last year maybe has another trick or two up her sleeve…

everyone's dad wrote:

I just don't see why she would be different than a guy running those times. Forget other women and just imagine if we placed her in decent D3 school with their mid D group that has a handful of guys who have PRs around 49-1:55-4:20. Would they drop her on workouts? Which workouts? And she would be even with them in races of 400, 600, 800, 1000 but then you think they would run 4:00 for 1500 while she runs 4:10? I just don't see it.

No, you don't. What you don't get is that 49/1.55 for a woman requires she be a speed-based athlete whereas that can easily fall within the compass of a male md runner with superior aerobic capacity (as males typically have). That means a 4.20 mile will easily be within their reach in a way it won't be for a woman who is speed-based.