joedirt wrote:
Stat of the day: Mary Keitany's 2nd half marathon split was 66:58. Jared Ward's split, the top American male, was 66:59.
Ward 65:25
Keitany 75:50
joedirt wrote:
Stat of the day: Mary Keitany's 2nd half marathon split was 66:58. Jared Ward's split, the top American male, was 66:59.
Ward 65:25
Keitany 75:50
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Americans train in miles, so the mental barrier in training is 5:00/mile or 2:11 pace.
Every other country trains in kilometers, and the barrier is 3:00/km or 2:06 pace.
There’s also a greater margin of error for running a 5:00 mile rep wrong vs running a 3:00 km rep wrong.
I.e. you could run a 5:00 mile rep with 1/4 splits of 70, 73, 76, 81.
Did you run 5:00? Yes!
Did you do it in a way that will make it comfortable to run during a race? No.
I hate the imperial system so much. We are retarded for not switching. Just freaking do it!!!
I'm running for president and that is my platform. Nothing else. One issue - metric. That's it.
Wild thought: Maybe there's no genetic difference or doping involved. Maybe, just maybe, they produce better athletes because they have a large population that focuses heavily on running for 24 hours a day. Maybe because they sleep consistently, don't stay up late playing video games with their friends, and grow up having to run multiple miles a day instead of sitting in a desk for 8 hours then sitting on a couch until they go to bed, maybe just maybe this makes them better athletes. Also, maybe its possible that because East African kids dream of growing up to become distance runners the same way many American kids dream of growing up to become basketball players, that maybe this is why East Africans are as good at running as we are at basketball.
But most of the other comments that posit that they have extra tendons, are all doping, or that Putin is secretly breeding them in labs as part of his plan to rig the US elections and keep Trump in power forever are probably right.
IwishIwasDaveWottle wrote:
Wild thought: Maybe there's no genetic difference or doping involved. Maybe, just maybe, they produce better athletes because they have a large population that focuses heavily on running for 24 hours a day. Maybe because they sleep consistently, don't stay up late playing video games with their friends, and grow up having to run multiple miles a day instead of sitting in a desk for 8 hours then sitting on a couch until they go to bed, maybe just maybe this makes them better athletes. Also, maybe its possible that because East African kids dream of growing up to become distance runners the same way many American kids dream of growing up to become basketball players, that maybe this is why East Africans are as good at running as we are at basketball.
But most of the other comments that posit that they have extra tendons, are all doping, or that Putin is secretly breeding them in labs as part of his plan to rig the US elections and keep Trump in power forever are probably right.
I actually think that it's a combination of all the things you listed (genetics, doping, culture) and probably some other factors too, but that the debate would come down to which of those make the biggest impact.
i just don't know enough about the status of doping in modern athletics. I am fully open to the possibility that it is a significant problem, including among Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes. Certainly the incentives are there for them to engage in PED use.
But one thing that struck me about the top runners in the pack yesterday is that they have 13 minute 5k speed (Kamworor has actually broken thirteen and has crazy finishing speed when on), while Jared Ward, a fine American runner, has run 13:34. These guys running 2:04-2:06 just have that much more speed, which frankly gives them a greater margin for error in terms of taking risk and pushing the pace in a marathon. Ward runs at slightly above 5 minutes a mile pace because he has to - kudos to him for running smart races. But I don't think we will see 2:04-2:06 races from Americans unless they can run at around 27 minutes for 10k, which also explains Rupp's 2:06, because, well, he is fast at the shorter distances. . True enough, the marathon is a quirky event in which success on the track is at times indeterminate, in terms of predicting marathon success, but speed has to matter in terms of running the times we are seeing from the East Africans. A corollary to this principle is that if an American runs, let's say 27:20 for 10k, that is the time to give a try at a marathon - which of course sounds logical but may not be - dedicating one's self to a marathon is far different than being competitive in track (both are difficult, however).
Americans are (mostly) fat and lazy. The ones who are not lazy are (relatively) fat. You can't take someone who weighs 160 pounds and expect him to complete on even ground with a 130 pound guy. Also, Americans eat crap, and they like their electronic toys too much to take running seriously. They just want to spend hundreds of dollars on Oakleys, alter-G crap, hyperbaric crap, Garmins, etc. All that stuff works for triathloners - not for distance running.
From the IAAF:
US men marathoners
1970s
13 below 2:12
1980s
29 at or below 2:12
1990s
8 below 2:12
2000s
11 below 2:12
2010s
17 so far below 2:12
John Utah wrote:
I hate the imperial system so much. We are retarded for not switching. Just freaking do it!!!
I'm running for president and that is my platform. Nothing else. One issue - metric. That's it.
You have been outed as a commie traitor. A patriotic American would never use metric. I think you should be deported to wherever your ancestor came from.
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Americans train in miles, so the mental barrier in training is 5:00/mile or 2:11 pace.
Every other country trains in kilometers, and the barrier is 3:00/km or 2:06 pace.
There’s also a greater margin of error for running a 5:00 mile rep wrong vs running a 3:00 km rep wrong.
I.e. you could run a 5:00 mile rep with 1/4 splits of 70, 73, 76, 81.
Did you run 5:00? Yes!
Did you do it in a way that will make it comfortable to run during a race? No.
I suspect most of us can convert on the fly. I always did 'mile reps' for 5000m training - ok they were actually 1600s cos no-one in their right mind literally runs mile reps on a metric track. And I happen to know that if you run 15.28 for 5000m that's just 4.59 per mile. So even though 1528 doesn't sound like a round number, it is.
Coevett wrote:
If Kenyans are inherently so above the rest of the world (apart from Ethiopia, which just so happens to be another country where EPO is available over the counter in every high street pharmacy), then surely they would do a bit better in other sports. Nearly all sports award an advantage to aerobic ability. There are guys in a sport as brutal and yet technical as MMA/the UFC who get to the top a large part due to their ability to simply keep the pressure when their opponents simply run out of gas (examples the Diaz borthers, Bisping). Yet Kenyans can't seem to even compete in any other sport other than distance running.
You've made a lot of idiotic statements on here (really, a LOT), but this one might take the cake-
"Nearly all sports award an advantage to aerobic ability. " Only a Trump fan (and I am about 100% sure you are one, though I don't think I remember a single post of yours related to politics) could say something so obviously false and not blink or smile. I could name TONS of sports that don't "reward an advantage to aerobic ability." TONS. Are you that dense, or that in a hurry to make a PED point against E. Africans that you'd say something so clearly false??? Yes, of course you are (yes to both possibilities). And if you think the MAIN reason some guys like Diaz are exceptional MMA fighters is their aerobic ability, you are also clearly dim. His aerobic ability is the "icing on the cake" for him. Without his great submission skills, his great boxing, and his AMAZING chin, his aerobic ability wouldn't mean crap. But put it on top of his other skills, and yes, it helps him. But it's not the key to his ability (and FYI, compared to a kenyan, his aerobic ability is mediocre. It's just tops or near tops for UFC guys).
And your point is even stupider when you consider: if their awesome performance in an aerobic event like running is mainly due to PED's, and if "nearly all other sports" are also very reliant on aerobic ability, then....they would just keep using PED's and dominate those sports too. Why couldn't they? (What exactly was your point anyway?) But....they don't care about those sports, and.....in tons of sports, aerobic ability is not the key parameter. What a weird thing for you to say to prove Kenyans are on PED's (" they don't dominate baseball, weightlifting, archery, tennis, or MMA, so......clearly they are cheating!" Brilliant!
Coevett wrote:It also ironic, to say the least, that the most famous and richest athlete in Kenyan sporting history, is a pasty faced Scottish born kid who dominated the other (and far more lucrative) aerobic sport of cycling.
Well I'll tell you what is NOT ironic, and that is: the ONE kenyan endurance athlete that you probably think is not on PED's is the.......WHITE ONE (who is just as likely or more likely to have doped as all the black Kenyan runners you accuse of doping).
NewtotheSouthSide wrote:
Is this question really too hard to break down? NYC is a difficult course. The top guys are all in 2:03-05 shape and ran 2:06. The top Americans would top out at 2:09-11 ran 2:12. It makes enough sense to me.
/thread
Ggggggvv wrote:
What can Americans do to get faster?
TRAIN HARDER DUH, Rupp shows it can be done with Hard Work
-Have skinny calves and a petite frame
-Live at altitude your whole life
-Run 10 miles a day to get to school
-Run fast or live in poverty
-Have good PEDS
well,, wrote:
1955 wrote:
Two things:
- not play soccer (takes away lots of potentially good runners)
- not have college available as a means of preparing for a career (takes away motivation to do well financially via running).
Soccer is by far the biggest and most popular sport in Kenya.
I'm sure that's true, as it is in most countries. But it wasn't true in the US in the 1960's/70's/80's, and a lot of those skinny kids who could run forever were running track and cross country. Our talent tool was deeper.
How to be an East African wrote:
-Have skinny calves and a petite frame
-Live at altitude your whole life
-Run 10 miles a day to get to school
-Run fast or live in poverty
-Have good PEDS
Coevett, you go home devastated.
Ggggggvv wrote:
What can Americans do to get faster?
Eat less junk food.
FFF wrote:
From the IAAF:
US men marathoners
1970s
13 below 2:12
1980s
29 at or below 2:12
1990s
8 below 2:12
2000s
11 below 2:12
2010s
17 so far below 2:12
This sums it up nicely. The only problem is that today's 2:06 was 2:12 in the 80ies.
Forest Gump again wrote:
FFF wrote:
From the IAAF:
US men marathoners
1970s
13 below 2:12
1980s
29 at or below 2:12
1990s
8 below 2:12
2000s
11 below 2:12
2010s
17 so far below 2:12
This sums it up nicely. The only problem is that today's 2:06 was 2:12 in the 80ies.
Not really. Just that people weren't so infatuated with time trial type "races" in the 80s.
If all the top dogs in the 80s focused on as-fast-as-possible time trials with 20 pacers on super flat courses, there would have likely been more of a 2:08 avg.
Ggggggvv wrote:
What can Americans do to get faster?
Americans are more focused on the races that more people care about and that have more prestige, the 1500-5000 meters.
They do much better there.
more prestige wrote:
Ggggggvv wrote:
What can Americans do to get faster?
Americans are more focused on the races that more people care about and that have more prestige, the 1500-5000 meters.
They do much better there.
Lol what masses of people care about elite 1500 and 5k? The money and fame is in the major marathons. Actually it’s distance running on the track that no one cares about. Oh and check the world rankings on those distances. Outside of one guy named centrowitz the US is a joke too