yourendisnear wrote:
I thought world records don't count at Boston. Net elevation drop?
Nobody in the previous posts before yours said it was a world record.
yourendisnear wrote:
I thought world records don't count at Boston. Net elevation drop?
Nobody in the previous posts before yours said it was a world record.
Rojo: Way to ignore that Boston Marathon course itself. If you're going to factor in the wind, you need to factor in the course too. Boston is historically slow and could easily negate the wind assistance when comparing this to races like London or Berlin, etc..
Oh yeah, and sprinters are big "sails" and catch more wind than these toothpick sized Kenyans. Maybe you can do the calculation including surface area.
Internet Scientist wrote:
26mi235 wrote:rojo, winds measured at 10 meters above the ground (at the airport), not ground level. 19 mph is about 13 at ground level in the city (Logan has 16 mph and 20 gusting to 31, further inland it was 15, 14, even as low as 9, but gusting). An additional factor is that the speed of the wind was not always a 100% tailwind, so there is at least a 10% loss in usefulness for wind assistance (although the cooling was useful; have you have ever run hard on a treadmill with no fans around?). My guess is that the average tailwind at the runners level was about running speed or slightly lower, not 19mph, which means that the power of the wind was only 40% of your cited amount (since the power is quadratic in speed).
Actually, this is not always true. In Boston especially with the road going through the city with tall buildings on either side, there is a wind tunnel effect which concentrates and amplifies the wind effect. The 19 mph at 10meters above ground can be as high as 27.8 mph at ground level
depending on the density and height of the nearby buildings.
The only place this would apply is Boyleston street. Nice try, thi
Maximus wrote:
yourendisnear wrote:I thought world records don't count at Boston. Net elevation drop?
Nobody in the previous posts before yours said it was a world record.
You are correct.
A good run in obviously very favourable conditions.Not as good as the London winner's time though I would think.I have raced Boston and the assistance of downhill running and positive wind assistance must be fantastic.
It would be interesting to see an analysis of time improvement,if any,of runners furthe down the field.Even Joe Blow should have improved on average,don't you think?
DANIEL KOMEN wrote:
That is the new Kenyan way of winning races! The Ethiopians(Tsegay Kebede 29:11 last 10k)started it and now we take the war to their backyard!!! How about that! Gebremariam, a well known sit-and-kick, could not give an answer to that!
Komen,
Just look at this list.
For Daegu or London 2012, any combination of the following would be deadly.
1. Geoffrey Mutai
2. Patrick Makau
3. Emmanuel Mutai
4. Moses Mosop
5. Martin Lel
6. Sammy Wanjiru
7. Wilson Kipsang-2:04.57 Frankfurt (Nov. 3 2010).
8. Wilson Chebet-2:05.27 Rotterdam (April 11, 2011).
9. Vincent Kipruto-2:05.33 Rotterdam 2nd.
10. Duncan Kibet/James Kwambai or whoever.
AK, incompetent as it is would have pick from this list.
Tuko sawa sawa.
9.
gonchar wrote:
Ryan Hall-Mindboggling, Spectacular. I bow down to the American king of the roads. IMHO, that performance is even with, if not greater, than Solinsky's 26:59. To blow away all those other elite Kenyans and Ethiopians like that is something never seen before.
Which Mutai is number one now? Can Kenya please send their top 10 marathoners to the next Olympics?
Gonchar,
I was trying to work out such a list.
1. Geoffrey Mutai
2. Patrick Makau
3. Emmanuel Mutai
4. Moses Mosop
5. Martin Lel
6. Sammy Wanjiru
7. Wilson Kipsang-2:04.57 Frankfurt (Nov. 3 2010).
8. Wilson Chebet-2:05.27 Rotterdam (April 11, 2011).
9. Vincent Kipruto-2:05.33 Rotterdam 2nd.
10. Duncan Kibet/James Kwambai or whoever.
If anyone can touch this (upset any combination of these guys running together-and that includes Geb), I'd have nothing but respect for him.
All this math, wind velocity, 3 minute aid talk, physics, etc....they should just rerun it in a few days, on a day with no wind, and then we will know for sure what their times would have been. And since they might be tired from running a marathon just a few days prior, we can subtract 5 minutes from each of their times. Then we would know.
This talk of how it must be seen as 3-4 minutes fast is pure bs. There is no way of determining overall the windspeed of the course because there are too many unquantifiable variables. When Ryan was in front being followed....the tailwind would be significanly blocked..as well as the lulls in the wind itself ,surface area of the runner,etc.Wind was not measured at all points in the course either.
Was it a fast day ...yes!
But that is not why the times won't count...all times on the /boston course are not allowed for iaaf records, due to the course tecnical layout.
Will it be discounted as the greatest time ever in the most historic, greatest race in the U.S.?.... No! this counts ...it is the new boston record!
I sense some envy by the pb police... but this was done on a historically slow course on a fast day. Don'tworry people... you'll get your lucky day soon too!
Two Mutais win two marathons! wow, and in speedy speedy time
gonchar wrote:
Which Mutai is number one now? Can Kenya please send their top 10 marathoners to the next Olympics?
NativeSon wrote:
If anyone can touch this (upset any combination of these guys running together-and that includes Geb), I'd have nothing but respect for him.
Do you know when the selections are made? They can't leave it too late, or else, athletes will blow themselves up trying to qualify. Boston / London next year is probably the last race to qualify - unless they introduce trials, which I don't think they should. Maybe make London 2012 the official Kenyan Olympic trials? That would be a race to remember...
Wanjiru is only No 6 on that list now, but being the defending champion must be worth something. He's also arguably the greatest racer (except perhaps for Martin Lel, whom I suspect will move up the list in fall). If Wanjiru gets fit and stays out of jail, I think there are only two places left.
In any case, it's a crazy choice to make.
I think that if you look at it holistically - physics, history, individual performances, the wind had an enormous effect.
My first impact is 2:05-something.
The analysis on this site is good:
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2011/04/20302-3-to-4-min-what-effect-did-wind.html
I think it's accurate - 2 to 3%, 3 minutes, thereabouts.
When I was 2nd mate on a freighter docked in Rosario, Argentina, many years ago, I broke the 1500mts world freestyle record swimming in the Parana River, diving in from the deck of my good ship.
Luckily I was fished out of the river further on at about 2 miles at a slight bend by some of the girls at the cigarette factory on that bend, otherwise, I might have gone on all the way down to Buenos Aires.
I found out later, the river at that point, had a 5 to 6 knot current - so I couldn’t claim a new world record.
Thought I’d mention that.
At about that time also, there wasn’t such a thing as a ‘world record’ at the marathon distance - just world ‘best’ times.
It was always deemed, quite sensibly, that it was impossible to have such a definitive world record when all the various marathon courses were (obviously) not standard in both road conditions and measurement.
It can only be commercial pressure that’s brought about the era of world records for the distance - suppose there’d been a 20 - 30 mile an hour wind behind them in London - would the times that produced been acceptable as a world record?
London would count with 21mph winds because you would spend as much time battling the winds as being pushed by it. It is like track, a 400 meter race counts with wind because you go with AND against. 3 min. seems about right for the predicted time without high winds.
His analysis is rubbish, and includes this gem: "...in 1994, America's Bob Kempainen produced a "Beamonesque" performance by running 2:08:47, which was an American record at the time, and would remain so until Ryan Hall broke it. "
Guy never heard of Khalid Kannouchi? Rubbish!
Bobby1 wrote:
I hate to burst your bubble but since wind resistance is exponential you can't use sprint speeds to calculate the difference for marathon speeds.
Rojo wasn't using sprint speeds in those calculations.
GW wrote:
London would count with 21mph winds because you would spend as much time battling the winds as being pushed by it. It is like track, a 400 meter race counts with wind because you go with AND against. 3 min. seems about right for the predicted time without high winds.
London was a bad example, I was thinking of a credited course that was mainly one way, if there is one.
Are Berlin or Rotterdam or any other, such courses?
Alf Shrubb wrote:
London was a bad example, I was thinking of a credited course that was mainly one way, if there is one.
Are Berlin or Rotterdam or any other, such courses?
No, of course not. That's the whole point about a course being record-eligible, it has to be a loop course, and thus cannot be predominantly in one direction. (unless you run a 42 km loop around either of the earth's poles, but there the meaning of "easterly" or "westerly" winds approaches zero, for obvious reasons).
Alf Shrubb wrote:
London was a bad example, I was thinking of a credited course that was mainly one way, if there is one.
Are Berlin or Rotterdam or any other, such courses?
You aren't serious with that question are you?
GW wrote:
London would count with 21mph winds because you would spend as much time battling the winds as being pushed by it. It is like track, a 400 meter race counts with wind because you go with AND against. 3 min. seems about right for the predicted time without high winds.
and going against the wind is slightly more of a detriment than going with the wind is an advantage
thats why windy courses are usually a bit slow for most runners
cc1438 wrote:
OK, so the men run the two fastest times in history and the women are nearly 7 minutes behind Radcliff's world best. How is the supposed benefit even remotely comparable?
Radcliff's marathon record = East German swimming records from the 80's. Apples to oranges.