Since there is really nothing to add I will vacate the ground. I did find one poster who offered an informed and intelligent response in Thoughtsleader but he left the pack far behind.
Wow you have finally conceded defeat. Progress is being made.
Remember when Armstronglivs tried the whole "cool guys don't look at explosions" thing and then proceeded to spend days of his life seething on this thread? LMAO
You also have never said, the natural limit for Kenyans is 3:35?
No, I said no clean Kenyan may have run under 3:35.
on 04/09/2019
El Keniano wrote:
Well, he’s done. Interesting it all happened the year he got overshadowed by younger athletes and couldn’t compete anymore. . What could have been a brilliant legacy ruined apparently when he realised he could no longer get out of bed or party like he used to and still beat everyone. Shame! He’s let a lot of Kenyans, including athletes, that looked up to him, down.
Coevett wrote:
Even now apologizing for his doping and claiming that all his earlier achievements were clean. Disgusting! More like the ultimate Kenyan genetic phenotype couldn't run sub 3:35 without near full throttle doping.
Wow you have finally conceded defeat. Progress is being made.
Remember when Armstronglivs tried the whole "cool guys don't look at explosions" thing and then proceeded to spend days of his life seething on this thread? LMAO
I don't think I said what you claim. In any case, I don't see what your point has to do with any discussion about Jakob. But since you are as about as bright as most of the others on the thread, choosing not to debate with plodders is not a concession of defeat. Except to a plodder.
Except most fans do. Some are vehement in their denial. Some also go to extraordinary lengths to argue it is either not prevalent or is simply not effective - as we see on these threads.
But if you believe "many athletes dope" what does that say about the athletes at the top of the sport?
Depends on the understanding of "many".
Nobody doubts doping is involved in top level sport.
The more doping the closer to the top we get? Not necessary. I wouldn't be too much surprised, if in fact the group who so far was not successfull in reaching the top dopes more.
My point of difference with you is that most fans know little about doping and prefer to believe it isn't in their sport. Secondly, since doping can enhance performance we cannot conclude that the best athletes are less likely to dope than their competitors. Everyone wants to win - whatever their level.
"If a sport such as the UFC can have individuals that don't dope, even when there was little or no testing, I'm sure there must be a few top names in athletics who don't dope."(quote)
You may be right. But that is a pretty dismal picture, is it not, that a "few top names" don't dope?
Nobody doubts doping is involved in top level sport.
The more doping the closer to the top we get? Not necessary. I wouldn't be too much surprised, if in fact the group who so far was not successfull in reaching the top dopes more.
My point of difference with you is that most fans know little about doping and prefer to believe it isn't in their sport. Secondly, since doping can enhance performance we cannot conclude that the best athletes are less likely to dope than their competitors. Everyone wants to win - whatever their level.
I don't think most fans believe this.
Yes, we cannot conlclude this. We also cannot conclude that everybody at the top is doping.
Has Jakob had any Whereabouts Failures last five years?
Jakob seems to be very accessible all year around, splitting much of his time between Sandnes and Flagstaff. His performance has been on a gradual and even trajectory with no big leaps or setbacks since age 10.
Has Jakob had any Whereabouts Failures last five years?
Jakob seems to be very accessible all year around, splitting much of his time between Sandnes and Flagstaff. His performance has been on a gradual and even trajectory with no big leaps or setbacks since age 10.
I say Jakob has run the fastest clean mile ever.
It's silly to suggest that Jakob is more likely to be clean than Crammy. Cram, like Jakob, improved from being a young prodigy to a world beater on a gradual and even trajectory.
Though I'll grant you that Jakob is likely the clean 1500m WR holder.
My point of difference with you is that most fans know little about doping and prefer to believe it isn't in their sport. Secondly, since doping can enhance performance we cannot conclude that the best athletes are less likely to dope than their competitors. Everyone wants to win - whatever their level.
I don't think most fans believe this.
Yes, we cannot conlclude this. We also cannot conclude that everybody at the top is doping.
I wouldn't say everybody is, but the likelihood is high the those getting the best results will be. The margins at that level are small. Doping can make all the difference.
Has Jakob had any Whereabouts Failures last five years?
Jakob seems to be very accessible all year around, splitting much of his time between Sandnes and Flagstaff. His performance has been on a gradual and even trajectory with no big leaps or setbacks since age 10.
I say Jakob has run the fastest clean mile ever.
It's silly to suggest that Jakob is more likely to be clean than Crammy. Cram, like Jakob, improved from being a young prodigy to a world beater on a gradual and even trajectory.
Though I'll grant you that Jakob is likely the clean 1500m WR holder.
There are other runners who have run 3.28 or better. Why would you say they are doped but Jakob isn't? I take the view that the prevalence of doping is such that you cannot get to the top now without it. Ramzi, clean, was not the best of his era; doped, he was. The best clean athletes couldn't beat him.
I am sure Elliott, Snell and co were capable of much better than the times they recorded, with the advantage of modern tracks and shoes. But they were also highly trained - Elliott in fact retired young because he said training and competing took such a toll. I look on subsequent changes in training methods as not so much revolutionising running but refining it to provide incremental gains. Probably altitude-training offered the single biggest improvement.
However the degree of improvement I have seen in top athletes in recent decades suggests other factors may be at play. We know that doping has become more pervasive in sports, and it remains ahead of efforts to stamp it out or even curb it. We may like to attribute the improvements in sports solely to the factors you describe, but we cannot count out the possible effect that doping has also had - and continues to have. I cannot do that. Nor can you.
I see two problems here:
- You downplay the impact on improvements in training over the last 60 years, to make more room for your ideas about what you don't really know about doping and performance. It's not enough to be "highly trained", but you need the right training for your event, the right order of training, to build on what you have gained without losing something else, as well as sufficient recovery, or you will retire young like Elliot.
- For these events in question, there hasn't been the significant degree of improvement in top athletes in recent decades that you say you've seen. Most of the gains (about 2.7% in 1500m) were made by the mid-1980s, ending with the British era of Coe, Cram, and Ovett.
Really!? The WR improved by 2.7secs in the 1500m from 1974 to 1985. In the next 13 years it improved by 3.46 secs! The rate of improvement % wise actually speeded up during the last 25 years of the 20th century, mostly in the last decade. Hmm can't think why?
It has since stood still in the 24 years since the current WR was set, with only a confirmed doper and a solitary run by Kiplagat (on the Monaco track) getting within 2 secs.
- You downplay the impact on improvements in training over the last 60 years, to make more room for your ideas about what you don't really know about doping and performance. It's not enough to be "highly trained", but you need the right training for your event, the right order of training, to build on what you have gained without losing something else, as well as sufficient recovery, or you will retire young like Elliot.
- For these events in question, there hasn't been the significant degree of improvement in top athletes in recent decades that you say you've seen. Most of the gains (about 2.7% in 1500m) were made by the mid-1980s, ending with the British era of Coe, Cram, and Ovett.
Really!? The WR improved by 2.7secs in the 1500m from 1974 to 1985. In the next 13 years it improved by 3.46 secs! The rate of improvement % wise actually speeded up during the last 25 years of the 20th century, mostly in the last decade. Hmm can't think why?
It has since stood still in the 24 years since the current WR was set, with only a confirmed doper and a solitary run by Kiplagat (on the Monaco track) getting within 2 secs.
You forgot US-based Lagat.
Really!!
Recall I'm responding to posts comparing Jakob relative to the greats of the '60s like Snell, and Elliot, asking why Jakob can run 8 seconds faster than these legends from 60 years ago, as if that 8 seconds only "suggests other factors", while downplaying well known factors in the last 60 years.
From Elliot (1960) to Cram (1985) the record dropped by ~6 seconds, from 3:35.6 to 3:29.67. Jakob has run 1.39s faster than Cram's time from 1985, and El G has run 3.67 seconds faster. 6 seconds is bigger than both 3.67s and 1.39s, therefore I say "most of the gains".
Also recall I'm responding to a post about observations from "top athletes in recent decades suggests other factors", presumably not just 1985-1998, which is not the most recent decade, but also the 2+ decades after.
If we use your "within 2 seconds" metric, we can find very few athletes before and after 1998. During 1985-1998, we only have one athlete, Morcelli, compared to post-1998 with the two you implicated, and then the one you forgot.
If we expand that to "within 3 seconds", we can only add just 1 more (Cacho) during your 13 years (3 runners total), while we can add 9 more in the 24 years since (12 runners total), with 7 of those (9 in total) after the implementation of the ABP in 2009.
Similarly, if we sort post-1986 runners faster than Coe (3:29.77), we find the same pattern of increasing number of athletes:
- 5 runners, including El G, in those 12 years, up to El G's current WR in 1998
- 8 runners in the next 12 years to 2009, until the ABP was implemented
- 19 runners in the next 12 years from 2010-2021, with 6 of those added in 2020-2021
This shows a pattern of continuous, but small, improvements, with very few exceptions, from 1985 to the present, mostly and initially from North and East Africans, but recently from non-Africans like Jakob, Wightman, Kerr, and McSeweyn.
Really!? The WR improved by 2.7secs in the 1500m from 1974 to 1985. In the next 13 years it improved by 3.46 secs! The rate of improvement % wise actually speeded up during the last 25 years of the 20th century, mostly in the last decade. Hmm can't think why?
It has since stood still in the 24 years since the current WR was set, with only a confirmed doper and a solitary run by Kiplagat (on the Monaco track) getting within 2 secs.
You forgot US-based Lagat.
Really!!
Recall I'm responding to posts comparing Jakob relative to the greats of the '60s like Snell, and Elliot, asking why Jakob can run 8 seconds faster than these legends from 60 years ago, as if that 8 seconds only "suggests other factors", while downplaying well known factors in the last 60 years.
From Elliot (1960) to Cram (1985) the record dropped by ~6 seconds, from 3:35.6 to 3:29.67. Jakob has run 1.39s faster than Cram's time from 1985, and El G has run 3.67 seconds faster. 6 seconds is bigger than both 3.67s and 1.39s, therefore I say "most of the gains".
Also recall I'm responding to a post about observations from "top athletes in recent decades suggests other factors", presumably not just 1985-1998, which is not the most recent decade, but also the 2+ decades after.
If we use your "within 2 seconds" metric, we can find very few athletes before and after 1998. During 1985-1998, we only have one athlete, Morcelli, compared to post-1998 with the two you implicated, and then the one you forgot.
If we expand that to "within 3 seconds", we can only add just 1 more (Cacho) during your 13 years (3 runners total), while we can add 9 more in the 24 years since (12 runners total), with 7 of those (9 in total) after the implementation of the ABP in 2009.
Similarly, if we sort post-1986 runners faster than Coe (3:29.77), we find the same pattern of increasing number of athletes:
- 5 runners, including El G, in those 12 years, up to El G's current WR in 1998
- 8 runners in the next 12 years to 2009, until the ABP was implemented
- 19 runners in the next 12 years from 2010-2021, with 6 of those added in 2020-2021
This shows a pattern of continuous, but small, improvements, with very few exceptions, from 1985 to the present, mostly and initially from North and East Africans, but recently from non-Africans like Jakob, Wightman, Kerr, and McSeweyn.
Are you including convicted dopers in that list?
From Elliott to Cram, the sport changed from an amateur one with no big European circuit and regular paced races, and where the best typically retired by 25 (21/22 in the case of Elliott), to one where the athletes were full-time pros and went on to their 30's, and had a lucrative European circuit with regular WR attempts. It also encompassed the switch from cinders and even grass, to synthetic tracks.
So the 1500m WR went from 3:35.8 in 1960, to 3:29.4 in 1985, with all those major changes in athletics. It went from 3:29.4 to 3:26.0 in 13 years and hasn't been improved in the 24 years since. The thing is, there was no major change between 1985 and 1997 other than EPO. Yes, El G and the rest enjoyed much better pacing than Coe and Cram, but that itself was almost certainly down to EPO.
Same with your 'steady increase' in numbers of runners faster than Coe. The reason why the number has risen recently is obviously due to super shoes and kangeroo tracks, as well as a genuine resurgence in performances from non-African runners (itself largely due to motivation factors with EPO testing introduced in Kenya and North Africa, as well as no doubt other things such as GPS and sharing of online coaching (and videos of Coe and Cram to inspire)).
Since the ABP in 2009, if you took out Tokyo and Monaco, the only guys to have ran faster than Seb Coe are convicted doper Kiprop, potato Tim, Augustine Choge, and Silas Kiplagat. If you took out Kiprop and Tokyo and Monaco, the fastest 1500m since the ABP is Choge with 3:29.47, slower than Aouita's WR in 1985.
Really!? The WR improved by 2.7secs in the 1500m from 1974 to 1985. In the next 13 years it improved by 3.46 secs! The rate of improvement % wise actually speeded up during the last 25 years of the 20th century, mostly in the last decade. Hmm can't think why?
It has since stood still in the 24 years since the current WR was set, with only a confirmed doper and a solitary run by Kiplagat (on the Monaco track) getting within 2 secs.
You forgot US-based Lagat.
Really!!
Recall I'm responding to posts comparing Jakob relative to the greats of the '60s like Snell, and Elliot, asking why Jakob can run 8 seconds faster than these legends from 60 years ago, as if that 8 seconds only "suggests other factors", while downplaying well known factors in the last 60 years.
From Elliot (1960) to Cram (1985) the record dropped by ~6 seconds, from 3:35.6 to 3:29.67. Jakob has run 1.39s faster than Cram's time from 1985, and El G has run 3.67 seconds faster. 6 seconds is bigger than both 3.67s and 1.39s, therefore I say "most of the gains".
Also recall I'm responding to a post about observations from "top athletes in recent decades suggests other factors", presumably not just 1985-1998, which is not the most recent decade, but also the 2+ decades after.
If we use your "within 2 seconds" metric, we can find very few athletes before and after 1998. During 1985-1998, we only have one athlete, Morcelli, compared to post-1998 with the two you implicated, and then the one you forgot.
If we expand that to "within 3 seconds", we can only add just 1 more (Cacho) during your 13 years (3 runners total), while we can add 9 more in the 24 years since (12 runners total), with 7 of those (9 in total) after the implementation of the ABP in 2009.
Similarly, if we sort post-1986 runners faster than Coe (3:29.77), we find the same pattern of increasing number of athletes:
- 5 runners, including El G, in those 12 years, up to El G's current WR in 1998
- 8 runners in the next 12 years to 2009, until the ABP was implemented
- 19 runners in the next 12 years from 2010-2021, with 6 of those added in 2020-2021
This shows a pattern of continuous, but small, improvements, with very few exceptions, from 1985 to the present, mostly and initially from North and East Africans, but recently from non-Africans like Jakob, Wightman, Kerr, and McSeweyn.
You cannot eliminate the effect doping may have had on performance in the last few decades. Given that we know it has been widespread in the sport since the 80's if not before, it could well have been decisive - more so than improvements in technique, training, nutrition and equipment. The progression need not have been consistent, as doping practices have changed in response to attempts to eradicate it. But the practice has not been eradicated, which means the effects of doping must still be there in sporting performance, as it has been in the past, even if we do not know precisely how much it has boosted performances. Nonetheless, doping may be the single biggest factor in improved sports performances in recent decades. Your analysis of improvements is meaningless without that data. The improvements that changes in training may give, in better tracks and new shoe technology, cannot be accurately measured if there is another factor that aids performance but which is not amenable to exact assessment because it is clandestine - we don't know for sure who is using it - but is nonetheless known to have an effect.
- You downplay the impact on improvements in training over the last 60 years, to make more room for your ideas about what you don't really know about doping and performance. It's not enough to be "highly trained", but you need the right training for your event, the right order of training, to build on what you have gained without losing something else, as well as sufficient recovery, or you will retire young like Elliot.
- For these events in question, there hasn't been the significant degree of improvement in top athletes in recent decades that you say you've seen. Most of the gains (about 2.7% in 1500m) were made by the mid-1980s, ending with the British era of Coe, Cram, and Ovett.
Really!? The WR improved by 2.7secs in the 1500m from 1974 to 1985. In the next 13 years it improved by 3.46 secs! The rate of improvement % wise actually speeded up during the last 25 years of the 20th century, mostly in the last decade. Hmm can't think why?
It has since stood still in the 24 years since the current WR was set, with only a confirmed doper and a solitary run by Kiplagat (on the Monaco track) getting within 2 secs.
From 1962 to 1979 the 800m WR improved by less than 1 sec - and this mainly because of shoes and tracks.
From 1979 to 1981 god himself trims 1.71 secs of the record. In 84/85 five others (Cruz, Koskei, Gray, Cram, Mack) have run faster than the previous record of 1:43.44 (10 more under 1:44 in 83/84/85).
new shoe technologie? no
new track technologie? no
some new "diamond league"? partly, Grand Prix in 85 - benefit?
Really!? The WR improved by 2.7secs in the 1500m from 1974 to 1985. In the next 13 years it improved by 3.46 secs! The rate of improvement % wise actually speeded up during the last 25 years of the 20th century, mostly in the last decade. Hmm can't think why?
It has since stood still in the 24 years since the current WR was set, with only a confirmed doper and a solitary run by Kiplagat (on the Monaco track) getting within 2 secs.
From 1962 to 1979 the 800m WR improved by less than 1 sec - and this mainly because of shoes and tracks.
From 1979 to 1981 god himself trims 1.71 secs of the record. In 84/85 five others (Cruz, Koskei, Gray, Cram, Mack) have run faster than the previous record of 1:43.44 (10 more under 1:44 in 83/84/85).
new shoe technologie? no
new track technologie? no
some new "diamond league"? partly, Grand Prix in 85 - benefit?
more money? partly - benefit?
what else? doping!
* Ivo Van Damme killed in car crash just after Olympic silver and destroying Ovett.
* Juan Toreno only took up the 800m in 76 and was injured already in 77. The fact that he ran 1:43 so regularly (and easily) suggests he could have ran at least 1:42.5.
* Snell had already ran the equivalent of low 1:42 nearly 20 years before on grass.
* Cruz also ran 1:41 in 84, and 1:43 became quite commonplace. Was there a new ped available like EPO in the 90's? Only HGH, which came out in 1983, so after Coe set his world records.
*Rudisha and Kipketer ran nearly a second fater without super shoes. Even with super shoes, nobody is getting near El G's 1500/mile times.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.