Genzebe Dibaba just ran 3:54.11 for 1500 in Spain!

PC-8801 wrote:

Anyone who thinks this woman is clean is completely insane.

This result is not surprising at all when you look at her performances in the 5K, 3:55 1500m indoors and 3:57 outdoors 2 years ago, the question is what took her so long. In the next year or 2, I would not be surprised to see her run a second or 2 faster in the 1500m. There have been very few women's 1500m run for time because the record is so out of touch that 3:57 has become the gold standard. Women have been underperforming in the 1500 and the 800 for that matter.

I say Genzebe can be beaten in a championship style 1500m because she does not have experience running in a crowd and her foot speed in a dash to the finish line is probably only average for a world class 1500m runner. Although, she can probably win from the front since she is 2 seconds faster than everybody else, which she might not want to if she is doubling back with the 5K.

Heads in the sand wrote:

Hell, based on the WADA survey from 2011 (the one that WADA suppressed), it's hard not to wonder about lots of people. That survey had between 1/3 and 1/2 of athletes saying that they had doped in the previous year.

Do you have a link to that survey? I'd like to read it.

Almaz and Genzebe will likely cause Tirunesh, Meseret and Cheruiyot to fully commit to the marathon and perhaps we will now see some serious 2:15 marathon attempts.

That's not a former training partner of Dibaba. Just because some try hard girl says so doesn't make it true

reader of the forums wrote:

dfdfdffgdgdgfdgfdg wrote:

Can we get more evidence than just "she runs really fast"?

Her former training partner

https://twitter.com/Swift__Girl/status/616704129881124865

Swift Girl is unfortunately not much of an authority on serious matters like doping in sports. She is just some random girl with no real insight and only superficial knowledge who has been to a couple of meets where she's blagged press accreditation despite not being a member of the media and hangs around the athlete hotels like a 14-y-o Justin Bieber fan

reader of the forums wrote:

Do you have a link to that survey? I'd like to read it.

Good luck with that. When I said WADA suppressed the survey, I meant that literally. As far as I've been able to find out, they have never released the survey.

.

We only know about the survey and its suppression because they guys who were commissioned to do it blabbed when WADA sat on the results. Here's what the NYTimes had to say:

Doping experts have long known that drug tests catch only a tiny fraction of the athletes who use banned substances because athletes are constantly finding new drugs and techniques to evade detection. So in 2011, the World Anti-Doping Agency convened a team of researchers to try to determine more accurately how many athletes use performance-enhancing drugs.

More than 2,000 track and field athletes participated in the study, and according to the findings, which were reviewed by The New York Times, an estimated 29 percent of the athletes at the 2011 world championships and 45 percent of the athletes at the 2011 Pan-Arab Games said in anonymous surveys that they had doped in the past year.

By contrast, less than 2 percent of drug tests examined by WADA laboratories in 2010 were positive....

If your blood pressure is well-controlled, you can read the whole sad story here:

Here's a short story about the French TV show debunking the biological passport:

That's German Fernandez fast.

TrackCoach wrote:

There have been very few women's 1500m run for time because the record is so out of touch that 3:57 has become the gold standard. Women have been underperforming in the 1500 and the 800 for that matter.

I'm not sure I follow your logic. You seem to say that women could have been running faster, but didn't because they confused. They thought 3:57 was the fast they could run, so that is what they aimed for. But today we found out they were wrong -- it is possible to run under 3:57.

In other words, their false belief -- we can only run 3:57 -- turned out to be self-confirming. Women who thought they couldn't run faster than 3:57 didn't train hard enough to run faster than 3:57, which just proved that they were right when to believe they couldn't run under 3:57. .

That's a cool story, but for it to make sense, you have to explain to us why women thought 3:57 was the fastest they could run. You suggest it was that they were confused about how fast they really could run.

You also have to explain whazt changed, so at least one woman thought she could run under 3:57.

There is, of course, another story. In some ways, it's simpler and cleaner than your story. In this story, women stopped running under 3:57 because of better drug tests. The women who ran under 3:57 were dopers. With the development of effective drug tests, it got a lot more expensive to dope. One result was a drastic reduction in times. After the development of drug tests, running below 3:57 just wasn't possible.

But now with micro-dosing and other doping improvements, it's again possible to run under 3:57 without failing a drug test.

Obviously, only one of those stories can be true.

Nowhere in his post did he say they thought the fastest they could run was 3:57. How old are you?

Bill Huntington wrote:If you eliminate the highly suspicious Chinese times, the last time anyone ran that fast was Paula Ivan in 1988, 3:53.96

as clean as pristine snow ???

One of the reasons there's been so much activity chasing and setting 5000 records is that it wasn't a popular distance for women back in the days of the Chinese worm fungus eaters or the Eastern bloc steroid chompers. They did 3000s.

reader of the forums wrote:Her former training partner

https://twitter.com/Swift__Girl/status/616704129881124865

shame on you

you are a top poster

that gal is a kid & has about as much clue about running as my goldfish who deceased about 4 decades ago

this chumpess wears T-shirts with drivel such as

"Fuuck of Gatlin"

as her crie-de-couer

if she was her training partner, i doubt the association extended to more than cleaning her shoes after Genze's runs

rojo wrote:

3:54 doesn't shock me. My buddies and I have always said, "Ever 14:15 guy in the world can run 4:10 for the mile. Why don't the very top women run faster?"

On JK's conversion chart, a 14:19 is equal to a 4:08 mile which would be a sub-3:50 1500.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1739614

Big Guy

Keep an open mind.

JK's conversions aren't very good.

You have to think case-specific.

Genze could obviously have run ~ 14'10 if the pace had been perfect & Paris was not blisteringly hot at 90+F, but more like 70F.

Then you have to understnd that 5k is not her "Hitting Zone".

Her Sweet-Spot is 1500 & she will currently not have better 5k performances than her current 1500 ability, even if she runs 14'05 - 14'10WR !!!

Best approach is to consider her current 400 ability which is likely 54 or 55 & a 5k abilty which if it was her Sweet-Spot - I think you better look at 14'05

so, 14'05 with

55 ->

1'56.92

3'50.98

5'15.14

8'07.89

54 ->

1'55.46

3'49.19

5'13.33

8'06.37

She has to be considered capable of ~ 3'50-flat in a "perfect" paced race to the bell in temperate weather.

I doubt weather in Barcelona was "temperate" !!!

ventolin^3 wrote:

reader of the forums wrote:Her former training partnerhttps://twitter.com/Swift__Girl/status/616704129881124865

shame on you

you are a top poster

that gal is a kid & has about as much clue about running as my goldfish who deceased about 4 decades ago

this chumpess wears T-shirts with drivel such as

"Fuuck of Gatlin"

as her crie-de-couer

if she was her training partner, i doubt the association extended to more than cleaning her shoes after Genze's runs

Wasn't implying anything one way or another, just found it interesting that (who I thought was) a former training partner had said that, but someone wrote that person wasn't actually a former training partner anyways.

Bill Huntington wrote:

If you eliminate the highly suspicious Chinese times, the last time anyone ran that fast was Paula Ivan in 1988, 3:53.96.

And Paula Ivan was obviously a clean female runner:

Fastest time for 18 years!

Finally, someone who doesn't care that it couldn't be done.

Dibaba is clean and 3:54.11 is the clean WR

J.R. wrote:Fastest time for 18 years!

Finally, someone who doesn't care that it couldn't be done

eh ???

i said she was capable of 3'50 outdoors when running 3'55i last year

i have no idea what pacing she got today or how even the laps were, let alone alone likely far too damn hot weather

3'54.1 is not a very good time for her if smoothly paced to bell at even-pace at 70F

however, running probably equivalent of 5k WR just 4 days ago, wouda probably cost her coupla seconds in her legs from fatigue for this 1500

it is humanly impossible to run effectively 5k WR & within coupla seconds of your best possible 1500 less than 4 days later

ventolin^3 wrote:

Best approach is to consider her current 400 ability which is likely 54 or 55

"likely" based on what? Seems that the best approach would be to start with times that she actually ran (like statsgangsta) and see what 400 time that gives