How ironic that you are comparing McSweyn and Aquita ...
You do realise that Aouita came to Australia back in 2002 as the Australian Head Distance coach and tried to push PED's on the athletes.
Aouita didn't have 'super spikes' but I'd consider Mcsweyn more legitimate than him.
2010: 17 under 13 in the 5k
2014: 10 under 3:31 in the 1500
2019: 13 women sub 4
Nothing to see here.
moultonk wrote:
here is the truth wrote:
All the deniers look like FOOLS now.
7 men under 3:31 in the 1500 - just 2 in 2016
13 men sub 13 in the 5k - jut 4 in 2016
12 women under 1:58 (without intersex athletes) - just 8 in 2016
13 women sub 4 - just 9 in 2016
39 women under 15 in the 15k - just 27 in 2016
There were a ton of people that were saying only the college athletes were running faster, that the pro's weren't. Those people like DUMB now.
Below are the worldwide Top-Ten Average Men's 1500 Times from 2001 to 2020 according to WA. Still watching 2021, but up through last year, I don't see a pattern indicating a big shift with the introduction of super shoes. The year 2015, before they were introduced, was particularly fast.
03:29.8 (2001)
03:30.5
03:30.7
03:30.0
03:30.9
03:30.8
03:31.4
03:31.9
03:31.1
03:31.0
03:31.3
03:30.6
03:30.5
03:29.6
03:29.3 (2015)
03:31.3
03:31.6
03:30.9
03:30.7
03:31.3 (2020)
+1
No significant difference over the past 20 years for the men's 1500m.
here is the truth wrote:
Ho Hum wrote:
You're confident that none of the runners this year were doping? Seems premature -- e.g. Kiprop wasn't caught til late 2017.
Not confident that these current runners are dopers. But it's also disingenuous to point to the results of athletes that are currently serving drug bans and say those results prove the shoes don't work. It just proves that it takes drugs to beat runners in supershoes.
Do you see the problem, though? You're discounting the previous results because a number of them were dopers, but given a few years it's likely that some of these guys will test positive, too.
I wouldn't say it proves the shoes don't work, but it doesn't prove they're a massive advantage, either.
Another giver of +1 wrote:
moultonk wrote:
Below are the worldwide Top-Ten Average Men's 1500 Times from 2001 to 2020 according to WA. Still watching 2021, but up through last year, I don't see a pattern indicating a big shift with the introduction of super shoes. The year 2015, before they were introduced, was particularly fast.
03:29.8 (2001)
03:30.5
03:30.7
03:30.0
03:30.9
03:30.8
03:31.4
03:31.9
03:31.1
03:31.0
03:31.3
03:30.6
03:30.5
03:29.6
03:29.3 (2015)
03:31.3
03:31.6
03:30.9
03:30.7
03:31.3 (2020)
+1
No significant difference over the past 20 years for the men's 1500m.
The times are staying similar as doping decreases from peak era and spikes improve, thus leading to a relatively stable average.
Last two years would be quicker because of the super spikes, but the pandemic has hit lots of athletes racing schedules.
More likely due to improved doping techniques rather than improved spikes.
bcun g wrote:
Shocked I tell you again wrote:
The Biggest error you're making is that.... Correlation is NOT Causation.!! Just because you can point to two different years and show a correlative difference, that does not mean that the one item you can find that is different (in this case shoes) is the sole cause of that difference.
Ha ha. Sometimes correlation DOES equal causation. Just because you say it doesn’t, doesn’t mean it’s true.
Give it time. We’re only part way through the season. If the weather is cool enough during Tokyo I predict Oly records in the men’s 10,000 and 5,000. And women’s 5,000 record. Also possible in the women’s steeple. I think the shoes have less of an effect on the 1500 but it’s possible to see those go too this year. Wait and see. If the weather is good and no fast times it’s possible the shoes have little effect. But I don’t think that’s the case. And neither does 99% of the running world or why bother with the super shoes at all?
You're Wrong. But don't misunderstand me, I am not saying that the shoes make no difference. I'm saying the construct of the argument is not properly developed. It may well be the shoes are the difference. But the current claim being held together with "Look at 2016... Now look at 2021... Clearly it's the shoes!" IS laughable and very unscientific. In this construct, Correlation does NOT equal Causation. Much more evaluation needs to be conducted and provided.
Forget analysing the top tier, it is the second/third/fourth tier athletes that are going to be the biggest responders.
Cool, the debate is over. Let's stop talking about it, then.
lorde wrote:
Cool, the debate is over. Let's stop talking about it, then.
The debate is certainly over, now everyone can take their overpriced spikes and throw them in the trash. But I bet not one person here will because everyone’s pr is now dependent on a shoe lol.
dudjsnsns wrote:
Another giver of +1 wrote:
+1
No significant difference over the past 20 years for the men's 1500m.
The times are staying similar as doping decreases from peak era and spikes improve, thus leading to a relatively stable average.
Last two years would be quicker because of the super spikes, but the pandemic has hit lots of athletes racing schedules.
Wow, that is some real mental gymnastics. So there was no point before super shoes where doping control had improved?
tikitaktoe wrote:
Forget analysing the top tier, it is the second/third/fourth tier athletes that are going to be the biggest responders.
I subscribe to this: the top tier are going to be top tier irregardless. How much are the 4th tier athletes improving? That is the true test of cheater shoes.
The cheater shoe improves mechanics. The top tier already have the mechanics. It's why Shelby Houl never needed the Dragonfly.
U gotta trust me on this.
mordechai wrote:
tikitaktoe wrote:
Forget analysing the top tier, it is the second/third/fourth tier athletes that are going to be the biggest responders.
I subscribe to this: the top tier are going to be top tier irregardless. How much are the 4th tier athletes improving? That is the true test of cheater shoes.
The cheater shoe improves mechanics. The top tier already have the mechanics. It's why Shelby Houl never needed the Dragonfly.
U gotta trust me on this.
Funny. Shelby never needed the Dragonfly because she had the Burritofly. Are suggesting if she ran the 1500 in the Dragonfly she would have run 3:51?
Lets get this straight spikes definitley do make a difference this is why brands like On and brooks allow their athletes to wear the nike super shoes. Why on earth would they allow their athletes to wear shoes from a rival brand if there was not such a huge advantage. My main problem with it is not the shoes themselves but the availibiliy of these super shoes they can't allow types of shoes that only a few brands can make into the olympics its not fair on other shoe brands. There need to be a reachable standard for all companies. My problem is personified by teare vs grijalva in ncaa's its not fair that teare got the shoes and grijalva didn't this gave cooper a huge advantage so the playing field was not level.