How would Mu push the sport forward? If any another runner were to see Mu run 1:51, and think she could do the same thing, is headed for a major disappointment.
This is literally not how psychology works. There are thousands of examples in this sport of one person breaking a barrier (in this case, Kratochvilova's record) that stood for years if not decades, and immediately others following and even improving on the time. The longer the barrier has stood, the more powerful the effect.
The only thing that will equal a record is a runner of comparable talent. Sure, statistically the more time that has passed, the more likely a record will be broken.
How would Mu push the sport forward? If any another runner were to see Mu run 1:51, and think she could do the same thing, is headed for a major disappointment.
This is literally not how psychology works. There are thousands of examples in this sport of one person breaking a barrier (in this case, Kratochvilova's record) that stood for years if not decades, and immediately others following and even improving on the time. The longer the barrier has stood, the more powerful the effect.
"Thousands of examples"? Give me a break. A few dozen at most.
1) This is a laughable idea. Unless we get a new generation super shoes, no woman is breaking 4 anytime soon, particularly Kipyegon. I will shut this website permanently down if
Is anyone asking, "Can Jakob Ingebrigtsen break 3:20?" Of course not but he's closer to 3:19 (6.73 seconds) than Kipyegon is to sub 4:00 (7.65).
2) I HATE the idea that smart people like Shayala Kipp promote in this article that "bias" may be what's preventing Kipeygon from doing it.
A sub-four mile by a woman could be “another nail in the coffin” against bias, Dr. Kipp said, and further affirmation that “women are very capable and we don’t need to worry about these kind of things.”
Neither bias or a mental block is stopping Kipyegon or any other woman from breaking 4:00. It;s physiology. Prior to Kipyegon, were people writing, "Is bias or a mental block preventing women from breaking 3:50 for 1500?" No they weren't. But she was the first to do it.
The idea that 4:00 is a mental block is laughable.
So by the same kind of reasoning Ingebrigtsen should be capable of beating 3:20 for the 1500 or running 3:36 for the mile. (He also isn't 31.) What an informed article. Still - we never know what is possible with Kenyan doping now.
You are always thinking of Jakob. So cute ❤
I'm always thinking of likely dopers. Is that cute?
1) This is a laughable idea. Unless we get a new generation super shoes, no woman is breaking 4 anytime soon, particularly Kipyegon. I will shut this website permanently down if
Is anyone asking, "Can Jakob Ingebrigtsen break 3:20?" Of course not but he's closer to 3:19 (6.73 seconds) than Kipyegon is to sub 4:00 (7.65).
2) I HATE the idea that smart people like Shayala Kipp promote in this article that "bias" may be what's preventing Kipeygon from doing it.
A sub-four mile by a woman could be “another nail in the coffin” against bias, Dr. Kipp said, and further affirmation that “women are very capable and we don’t need to worry about these kind of things.”
Neither bias or a mental block is stopping Kipyegon or any other woman from breaking 4:00. It;s physiology. Prior to Kipyegon, were people writing, "Is bias or a mental block preventing women from breaking 3:50 for 1500?" No they weren't. But she was the first to do it.
The idea that 4:00 is a mental block is laughable.
'Is anyone asking, "Can Jakob Ingebrigtsen break 3:20?" Of course not but he's closer to 3:19 (6.73 seconds) than Kipyegon is to sub 4:00 (7.65).'
Neither bias or a mental block is stopping Kipyegon or any other woman from breaking 4:00. It;s physiology. Prior to Kipyegon, were people writing, "Is bias or a mental block preventing women from breaking 3:50 for 1500?" No they weren't. But she was the first to do it.
The idea that 4:00 is a mental block is laughable.
The idea that we can objectively quantify how much of a mental block some athletic challenge is versus a physiological one is laughable.
10
7
scientists should look at the evidence before speaking
Drafting doesn't have near that much effect. Drag forces increase exponentially over speed. 100m runners go 10 m/s and wouldn't gain .5 from the mightiest tailwind.
Kipyegon goes 6 m/s, not 10. Less drag by far. Pacers don't create an equivalent tailwind, to that, more like 2-3 m/s tailwind at best. Not worth even 1 second per lap let alone 2.
Wavelights have pretty much proven that drafting was a mental thing, as far as distance track racing. Far more common for a front runner to methodically drop everyone
Finding that many seconds is frankly insane. Kipchoge found 90 in an event 26 times longer and where pacing to the finish and blocking the wind is a bigger issue (Faithd records were set in big stadiums). I think Kipyegon could find maybe 2-3 seconds in a mixed race. Sub-4 only if it’s downhill or they make some crazy new shoe/track (BU/Dragonfly 2 doesn’t qualify)
ultra BS the 3:59.37 prediction is wrong
i have 3:59.212333444556677332.
as you can see my accuracy is to 14 decimal points.
If you read the article, which everyone here clearly did not, you will find that the study claims that Kipyegon would need pacers to accompany her the entire way, in an exhibition-style event, which would not be eligible for record purposes. So, a wavelight + tight phalanx of pacers (probably male) running exactly 59.6 per 400m for 1550m, who alternate out at 800m, on a dead-calm evening in an enclosed stadium in perfect conditions. She might be able to do it...but would she even want to?
There is legitimately 0% chance that adding another pacer (Or multiple) for an extra 800m is dropping 7 seconds off your mile time. Have people lost their mind
I think we need to be a little more scientific here. When she's gone 3:49, how long has she had a pacer? What if she had male pacers 3 across running the perfect splits?
But I still don't think that is worth 7 seconds. But organizing this run could be done tomorrow. It's not hard to pull off at all. If Nike thought it was feasible I'm not sure the first place we would be reading about it would be some scientific journal. And if they think she ran run 4:02 the article doesn't get as much interest right?
From the NY Times article by Jere:
A lot of people said it was physiologically impossible for Bannister or anybody to break four minutes, and I’m sure lots of bros are going to say, ‘No way a woman is ever going to run four minutes; it’s seven seconds away,’” said Rodger Kram, a biomechanist and emeritus professor at the University of Colorado and one of the authors of the study. “But people have said women can’t do a lot of things, and then they have.”"
This has nothing to do with sexism at all. I don't think Jakob can get anywhere near 3:20.
And I haven't read the study:
"The study posits that the best chance for Kipyegon to break four minutes would be via drafting, or the use of pacesetters to help reduce wind resistance, with one pacesetter in front of her and another in back for the first half of the race. Those pacers would be substituted with two different escorts for the final two laps."
but it helps to have someone draft behind you?
Why do we need to have 2 new men jump in and 2 more jump out? There are a ton of male runners who could pace 4 flat with wavelight nearly perfectly. But if we don't want the human element what about some robot with a plexiglass shield setting the pace perfectly. Do something like that and you'll get better results right? But then again let's just make it downhill and get away from this:)
Don’t listen to anything like this coming out of academia. In my PhD I’ve been shocked by how much leeway you have in a journal article to get the results you want. Especially when it comes to fluid mechanics, which is so random, unpredictable, and easy to claim the extreme cases as normal. This is another example of that.
The current women's world record in the following events are:
1000m: 2:28.98 (worth 1252 points)
1500m: 3:49.04 (worth 1296 points)
Mile: 4:07.64 (worth 1287 points)
If Faith were to run a 3:59.37 mile, her splits would average out to:
1000m: 2:28.74 (worth 1255 points)
1500m: 3:43.11 (worth 1346 points)
Mile: 3:59.37 (worth 1352 points)
Make your own conclusions...As great as Faith is, I don't think she can pull off three new world records in one race.
In 1952, the men's world record in the 1000m was 2:21.2, and in the 1500m 3:43.0, so that showed that the four minute barrier (mile WR at the time 4:01.4) was indeed achievable at the time, albeit difficult.
If it's even possible, I think we're at least a generation away from a women's sub four. First, we need to see improvements to the 1000m and 1500m records (possibly even the long standing 800m record of 1:53.28), along with the mile record itself. 4:07.64 is a long, long way from 3:59.xx.
This is true. Maybe with a male pacer going all the way, she could get closer than many of us would expect is feasible, but the fact is no woman can even think of pacing a 4min attempt through more than 1000m, so this arodynamic pacing argument is a bit irrelevant.
To add some more perspective to this, Ruth's crazy new marathon record (which many think is suspicious) is still only equivalent to a 4:04 mile. As rediculous as her sub 2:10 is, it still isn't close to as good as a 4min mile, and that is the strongest womens record on the books.
Yeah well Faith is already moving past her prime as a middle distance runner. She is 31 years old and she has no chance to ever run sub 4 for the mile.
This is what I thought instantly. She is getting old. The odds of her even PRing again are slim.