No, that isn't the thinking. It simply shows you have no convincing argument for how the shoes make runners faster because you have no data comparing the use of different shoes in the same runners.
Funny, you never asked me "how", and I did not argue "how", although the Impact Magazine article touched on some of the "how". Instead, you speculated that the benefits from all these technological advancements were marginal, compared to doping. I said that this is your own personal belief, based on no facts, data, or evidence, and that a "less than" operator requires two numbers while you have provided none.
You claim these various factors are the reasons times have improved. That is mere guesswork in your part because you cannot show how they will have done so. You might just as well argue that it was brought about by "the rain in Spain falling mainly on the plain".
"I've competed against dopers around the turn of the century and there was just no comparison. Several categories better, Olympic finalist versus club hobbiest. When they were clean, they were mortals, and very beatable. When "on" it, just no chance to even stay close".(quote)
But it wouldn't have worked on altitude-trained Kenyans. And it could only have been a "placebo effect" based on the naive and ill-informed "belief" those athletes had that drugs are performance enhancing. Belief is a powerful thing, is it not?
2 years off from drug testing because of covid. Not shoes or light. Steroids and cheating. This generation doesnt even question if they should cheat, they just do it. Low integrity, microwave society. Side note: track has the dumbest fans on the planet. Nothing athletes can do for us to collectively say we are in a steroid era. High schoolers are beating pros regularly, records are being broken and re broken then broken again. 40 year records broken 3 times in a month
These threads prove your point about fans. Denial is the cause.
2 years off from drug testing because of covid. Not shoes or light. Steroids and cheating. This generation doesnt even question if they should cheat, they just do it. Low integrity, microwave society. Side note: track has the dumbest fans on the planet. Nothing athletes can do for us to collectively say we are in a steroid era. High schoolers are beating pros regularly, records are being broken and re broken then broken again. 40 year records broken 3 times in a month
This hits it.
They act like all to new performances are somehow better and cleaner than the past.
News flash - Nutrition isn't better. Coaching isn't better. The shoes provide mechanical assistance. The drugs are still being used.
2 years off from drug testing because of covid. Not shoes or light. Steroids and cheating. This generation doesnt even question if they should cheat, they just do it. Low integrity, microwave society. Side note: track has the dumbest fans on the planet. Nothing athletes can do for us to collectively say we are in a steroid era. High schoolers are beating pros regularly, records are being broken and re broken then broken again. 40 year records broken 3 times in a month
This is pure conjecture. It makes a good story, but there is no proof. If someone could provide performance drug sales information showing a significant increase during/after covid, this would be the beginning of proof, but we saw supply shortages of everything (insulin, tylenol, baby formula, car parts, etc.). These supply chain issues are still a problem.
It is very unlikely that a large percentage of HS and college athletes are doping. It is too expensive and not readily available. The race time shift goes too deep into the lists for this to be a serious factor. When prize money is involved, that makes it more prevalent. So for the pros, this may be true, but again we have no proof.
The data makes it obvious. At all levels of competition (HS, college, club, national, international), there was a distinct drop in race times deep into the lists with the introduction of the shoes. People have accepted this for road shoes, why not track shoes? Tracks did not change, coaches did not drastically turn over or suddenly change their training philosophies. The shoes changed. All other things in the past 5 years are minimal contributors with the possible exception of PEDs at the pro level.
2 years off from drug testing because of covid. Not shoes or light. Steroids and cheating. This generation doesnt even question if they should cheat, they just do it. Low integrity, microwave society. Side note: track has the dumbest fans on the planet. Nothing athletes can do for us to collectively say we are in a steroid era. High schoolers are beating pros regularly, records are being broken and re broken then broken again. 40 year records broken 3 times in a month
This is pure conjecture. It makes a good story, but there is no proof. If someone could provide performance drug sales information showing a significant increase during/after covid, this would be the beginning of proof, but we saw supply shortages of everything (insulin, tylenol, baby formula, car parts, etc.). These supply chain issues are still a problem.
It is very unlikely that a large percentage of HS and college athletes are doping. It is too expensive and not readily available. The race time shift goes too deep into the lists for this to be a serious factor. When prize money is involved, that makes it more prevalent. So for the pros, this may be true, but again we have no proof.
The data makes it obvious. At all levels of competition (HS, college, club, national, international), there was a distinct drop in race times deep into the lists with the introduction of the shoes. People have accepted this for road shoes, why not track shoes? Tracks did not change, coaches did not drastically turn over or suddenly change their training philosophies. The shoes changed. All other things in the past 5 years are minimal contributors with the possible exception of PEDs at the pro level.
How did the shoes change? And how did that change make people so much faster? There is very little to a track shoe - it is designed to be super-light. So how does some necessarily minimalist feature give so much extra speed? And why are so many athletes of the past still faster in "old" shoes than athletes are today?
How did the shoes change? And how did that change make people so much faster? There is very little to a track shoe - it is designed to be super-light. So how does some necessarily minimalist feature give so much extra speed? And why are so many athletes of the past still faster in "old" shoes than athletes are today?
The advancements in track shoe technology, including lightweight materials, improved cushioning, energy return systems, and aerodynamic designs, have unequivocally contributed to enhanced speed and performance.
Do u understand how much high school parents in the burbs will pay to make their child good? Private coaches, strength coaches and yes roids. High school has become and arms race especially with nil. Would u put ur high schooler on roids for a million dollar nil?
Funny, you never asked me "how", and I did not argue "how", although the Impact Magazine article touched on some of the "how". Instead, you speculated that the benefits from all these technological advancements were marginal, compared to doping. I said that this is your own personal belief, based on no facts, data, or evidence, and that a "less than" operator requires two numbers while you have provided none.
You claim these various factors are the reasons times have improved. That is mere guesswork in your part because you cannot show how they will have done so. You might just as well argue that it was brought about by "the rain in Spain falling mainly on the plain".
You are just changing the names to muddy the fact that you cannot do more than share your personal beliefs based on no facts, no data and no evidence, despite your five decades of "observation".
And you are quite wrong. My claims are not my claims per se, but the claims of others with experience and data. For example, the benefit of the supershoes worldwide across the board has been extremely well documented -- not only from product marketing, but in studies, and testimonies by athletes. Nick Willis "reckons the new spike technology, ... is worth between one to three seconds a mile."
For tracks, Ron Clarke says modern tracks are worth 1 second per lap. Roger Bannister too.
Do u understand how much high school parents in the burbs will pay to make their child good? Private coaches, strength coaches and yes roids. High school has become and arms race especially with nil. Would u put ur high schooler on roids for a million dollar nil?
Pity your parents did not spend a cent on your education.
This is pure conjecture. It makes a good story, but there is no proof. If someone could provide performance drug sales information showing a significant increase during/after covid, this would be the beginning of proof, but we saw supply shortages of everything (insulin, tylenol, baby formula, car parts, etc.). These supply chain issues are still a problem.
It is very unlikely that a large percentage of HS and college athletes are doping. It is too expensive and not readily available. The race time shift goes too deep into the lists for this to be a serious factor. When prize money is involved, that makes it more prevalent. So for the pros, this may be true, but again we have no proof.
The data makes it obvious. At all levels of competition (HS, college, club, national, international), there was a distinct drop in race times deep into the lists with the introduction of the shoes. People have accepted this for road shoes, why not track shoes? Tracks did not change, coaches did not drastically turn over or suddenly change their training philosophies. The shoes changed. All other things in the past 5 years are minimal contributors with the possible exception of PEDs at the pro level.
How did the shoes change? And how did that change make people so much faster? There is very little to a track shoe - it is designed to be super-light. So how does some necessarily minimalist feature give so much extra speed? And why are so many athletes of the past still faster in "old" shoes than athletes are today?
Funny, you never asked me "how", and I did not argue "how", although the Impact Magazine article touched on some of the "how". Instead, you speculated that the benefits from all these technological advancements were marginal, compared to doping. I said that this is your own personal belief, based on no facts, data, or evidence, and that a "less than" operator requires two numbers while you have provided none.
You claim these various factors are the reasons times have improved. That is mere guesswork in your part because you cannot show how they will have done so. You might just as well argue that it was brought about by "the rain in Spain falling mainly on the plain".
How did the shoes change? And how did that change make people so much faster? There is very little to a track shoe - it is designed to be super-light. So how does some necessarily minimalist feature give so much extra speed? And why are so many athletes of the past still faster in "old" shoes than athletes are today?
The advancements in track shoe technology, including lightweight materials, improved cushioning, energy return systems, and aerodynamic designs, have unequivocally contributed to enhanced speed and performance.
Did you get that off a publicity blurb or just make it up yourself? What is the scientific analysis done that says any of that is true?
The advancements in track shoe technology, including lightweight materials, improved cushioning, energy return systems, and aerodynamic designs, have unequivocally contributed to enhanced speed and performance.
Did you get that off a publicity blurb or just make it up yourself? What is the scientific analysis done that says any of that is true?
I repeat; I have not seen any Green Flash at competitions.
You claim these various factors are the reasons times have improved. That is mere guesswork in your part because you cannot show how they will have done so. You might just as well argue that it was brought about by "the rain in Spain falling mainly on the plain".
"The Rain in Spain" is a song from the musical My Fair Lady, with music by Frederick Loewe and lyrics by Alan Jay Lerner. The song was published in 1956. The song is a turning point in the plotline of the musical. Professor H...
You claim these various factors are the reasons times have improved. That is mere guesswork in your part because you cannot show how they will have done so. You might just as well argue that it was brought about by "the rain in Spain falling mainly on the plain".
You are just changing the names to muddy the fact that you cannot do more than share your personal beliefs based on no facts, no data and no evidence, despite your five decades of "observation".
And you are quite wrong. My claims are not my claims per se, but the claims of others with experience and data. For example, the benefit of the supershoes worldwide across the board has been extremely well documented -- not only from product marketing, but in studies, and testimonies by athletes. Nick Willis "reckons the new spike technology, ... is worth between one to three seconds a mile."
For tracks, Ron Clarke says modern tracks are worth 1 second per lap. Roger Bannister too.
Did they say how much doping has contributed per lap? Or is that not part of the equation?
The key lyric in the song is "The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain",
Marvellous; fell for a grammatical wind up with some reference but anything to do with science or medical matters you just runaway and contribute zilch .
Did they say how much doping has contributed per lap? Or is that not part of the equation?
Recall you said: "That is mere guesswork in your part because you cannot show ...". Now we can plainly see that you are once again wrong, because you are ignorant about the history of track and field you grew up watching.
Any contribution from doping is your mythology. You claim doping is the reason times have improved. That is mere guesswork on your part because you cannot show how it will have done so. You might just as well argue that it was brought about by "the rain in Spain falling mainly on the plain".
The key lyric in the song is "The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain",
Marvellous; fell for a grammatical wind up with some reference but anything to do with science or medical matters you just runaway and contribute zilch .
Now ; why is that ?
Because you are scientifically illiterate. Actually, that isn't quite right. You are just generally illiterate, as you showed with your confusing "plane" with "plain".
