None of the “records” are impressive because they are merely the result of training/racing in super shoes. Here are what the times equate to in normal spikes:
Jakob: 8:02
Kipyegon: 14:17
Girma: 7:59
The times run by Komen, Dibaba and Shaheen were more impressive.
None of the “records” are impressive because they are merely the result of training/racing in super shoes. Here are what the times equate to in normal spikes:
Jakob: 8:02
Kipyegon: 14:17
Girma: 7:59
The times run by Komen, Dibaba and Shaheen were more impressive.
Could you please stop posting your nonsense everytime you have the opportunity? Do you believe Komen would run 7:12 and El Gerrouj 3:22 today? Or even better, Maatelong running 7:48, Silas Kiplagat 3:23, Evan Jagger 7:52, Mark Carrol 7:22 etc etc etc. Does not make sens
The sad thing is that Jakob and Girma seemed to duck each other at the Paris meet--a bit like Coe vs. Ovett during the 80s. A head to head match between the 2 may help settle the issue better.
How can Jakob duck Girma!? Jakob hasn´t run the 3000m st for many years. I think last time was at the Norwegian Championships in 2017?
Yes, absolutely. Is there anything unclear about my position? 1 second per lap is the combined benefit of training and racing in super shoes.
Do you really think Cheptegei is a better runner than prime Bekele?
Is Woody Kincaid better than prime Bob Kennedy?
Kipyegon’s 1500 PR was 3:54 prior to super spikes. Now she’s run 3:49. Could the evidence be any more compelling?
-Cheptegei > Bekele? no. The shoes and wavelight do provide a little help. Like 1s/km and there are many other factors like pacing, training, doping, tracks etc. If I remember correctly Bekele was poorly rabitted in his WRs. It's how history works. It has always been the case. WRs go faster with time.
-You have to give credit to nowadays US distance runners who are fighting with the best africans of our time, sometimes beating them like in Florence. At least as good as Kennedy who was not a gold medal level athlete.
-I can give you dozens of counter examples :
Barega pre superspikes/after : 12: 43/12:49
Cheruyiot : 3:28/3:28
Kejelcha : 3:32/3:32, 12:46/12:52
etc
Some runners improves, some stagnates, some regresses. Nothing new...
And if you think some random elite of the 90's/2000's would beat today's best of the best, then you are hopeless.
None of the “records” are impressive because they are merely the result of training/racing in super shoes. Here are what the times equate to in normal spikes:
Jakob: 8:02
Kipyegon: 14:17
Girma: 7:59
The times run by Komen, Dibaba and Shaheen were more impressive.
forget the super shoes, what is Jakob on??? he finished that monster race not even gassed ??? Girma was destroyed after his effort, and Kipyegon, was so hysterical you really couldn't tell ......
None of the “records” are impressive because they are merely the result of training/racing in super shoes. Here are what the times equate to in normal spikes:
Jakob: 8:02
Kipyegon: 14:17
Girma: 7:59
The times run by Komen, Dibaba and Shaheen were more impressive.
You are merely assuming that the athletes today aren't doping. They are. The shoes have far less effect than drugs.
Maybe time-wise, men's records are more impressive, but that's about it. The female body and history of oppression are a lot more complex.
I think most people are trying to rank the records in terms of relative athletic performance, not based on Democrat identity politics. And if anything, wouldn't the history of oppression make the women's world record less impressive because fewer women have had a chance to attempt it?
Maybe time-wise, men's records are more impressive, but that's about it. The female body and history of oppression are a lot more complex.
I think most people are trying to rank the records in terms of relative athletic performance, not based on Democrat identity politics. And if anything, wouldn't the history of oppression make the women's world record less impressive because fewer women have had a chance to attempt it?
1. Ingebrigtsen
2. Girma
3. Kipyegon
I was directly replying to a poster who said “men’s records are always more impressive than women’s records.”
I’d argue Jakob’s record is probably the “coolest” to the average person. The 4 minute barrier is the most well-known barrier in the sport, even someone who’s never run can appreciate the ridiculousness of running back-to-back sub 4 miles.
By contrast, the average person has no clue what a 14min 5k or 7:52 SC means.
2 miles - a novelty event that is rarely raced. Never contested in the Olympics or World Championships.
SC- a niche event for people who cannot win 1500 or 5000.
5000 - the most frequently contested distance event on track.
So it should be Kipyegon > Girma > Ingebrigsten.
So, if someone ran 1490 meters in 3:15 it would not be impressive because "it's a novelty event"? This mentality is just silly and makes absolutely zero sense. Regardless of whether or not the 2 mile is run frequently, it was an insane performance and the outright highlight of the meet.
The n is lower. Fewer people running the event and fewer races and fewer WR attempts equals fewer opportunities for an outlier WR to be set. It also means IAAF conversion charts are less reliable, because the data isn’t there. People aren’t training for 3000s or peaking for 3000s like they are for 1500s and 5000s.
