Inside "Project 99": Why the 800m Is Faster Than Ever and the Race for the First Sub-1:40

Tossing a round number like 1:40 out there and creating irrational expectations that it will soon be exceeded isn't fair to the athletes just trying to break the current record. Surely as soon as someone breaks 1:40.9 there will be questions of that person of "when will you break 1:40?" No doubt the same thing if Jakob breaks 3:43 for the mile and whether he will be the first to break 3:40. We already are on SML about breaking 50 in the hurdles.

Can't we just be awed by these performances and maybe think that record might last 20 years or 30 years? Can we not just casually move on to the next round number and forget about the greatness we just experienced?

The point that it took 31 years to take .82 off Coe's record is important. The next .82 still doesn't get under 1:40. Yes, the floor, being the recent sub-1:42 group, is closer to the ceiling than ever before, but I suspect few of us will see a sub-1:40 in our lifetime. Is it possible? Of course. Will it happen within 5-10 years? Very unlikely.

I recall 30 years ago when talk of sub-2 for the marathon started. Discussions about what that training would look like, etc. emerged and yet we still have not seen sub-2 under legal conditions. Yes, we are close to sub-2, but it still hasn't happened yet and many of the easy deductions have been accomplished including doping and super shoes.

So sad this website use to be more that just click bait

Rudolf Harbig 146 flat, in a very very suboptimal with 10.5 100m and 400 46 flat and WR 1k means the guy could run 144 in 1939 with nothing but a good field and proper race.

I actually did mean 0.91 because I was referring to 1:40, not below. But have your 1/100th of a second, if it's that vital to you. Either way, it is mere speculation it will ever be achieved. My point, which you don't address, is that it is only doping of a massive order or technology not yet invented that will enable it, because it is a bigger reduction than achieved in the last 43 years.

I am 59 years old and a runner for the last 43 years. Since 1981. As a new runner I still remember watching Coe on TV run 1:41.73. If I live to be 89 I don't think the 800m record will be sub 1:40 barring crazy technology etc. At best in the next 10 years I say 1:40.73

The 800m flat out hurts!! 😆

You try to drag people down into your doping conspiracies with you.

Arop improved 1.65 in one year. Hoppel improved 2.28 in the same period. But you have to be suspicious of the black guy, right?

Actually I did. As usual you can't read.

No, the point was if the record has only improved 0.82secs in 43 years, how is it going to improve 0.91 (to 1:40) any time soon, in the future. I have an answer. But you don't.

I have posted on the thread topic. So what have you posted other than your unending complaints about my posting?

The article and a few of the very interesting posts have answers. The fact that you don't agree with them doesn't mean they are not true.
You are not the one to decide what is true and what is not.

It escapes you that everything posted here is ultimately an opinion. But it is apparent you haven't provided one. So what is going to enable athletes to improve by a greater margin than what they've been able to achieve in 43 years?

How can you say that in good faith? Facts are not opinions. Physiology is not an opinion, training methods, shoes, track surfaces, these are not opinions.

Whatever anyone answers to your question, other than doping, is going ro get dismissed by you. Apparently you need to repeat your opinion 1000 times a month.

You didn't. You meant sub 1:40, but you are too stupid to do a single correct "calculation" - even on child level it is too hard for you.

If it will be achieved anytime soon is completely different to the question if it is possible, Dumb.

Improvements in athletics are not linear, Dumb. They never were, Dumb. Beamon has improved the record by 55cm (maybe 30 cm due to altitude) on one step 56 years ago. Since then it has just further improved by 5cm. Coe improved the old record by 1.71 seconds. Maybe someone in near future improves Rudisha's record by 1.5 seconds soon. Nobody knows. To call this impossible is pure dumbness. But normal for Dumb, so everything is OK.

Um, maybe because they won't let men race in the women's 800m anymore?

Correct. Both! What has happened? 100+ attempts and already correct. You are improving rapidly now it seems. Maybe another 5 years and you will get "Kenio" correct?

I enjoyed the article it had some great insights like running technique, NOT using bicarb, the Arop story.

But personally I think there are too many facts and figures at the beginning that overwhelm what is being said.

It's often the case with letsrun pieces

Of course some evidence is good, but not too much.

Just because something is true, and supports an argument, it doesn't mean it has to be included

Personally I'd prefer a call out box with facts and figures or something that brought all of those together as bullet points, or something similar

I value the work (hence i pay for it!) just my opinion