Problem with your hypothesis is comparing her performance against men who may have doped too.
There is an issue that is similar and that is qualifying standards against supplemented world- class performances. The men’s world championships standard is 2:06:30, the former Olympic record by Sammy Wanjiru was 2:06:32 (I think, not looking it up atm).
This is the side effect of doping, not just theft, but a domino effect for everyone trying to get there without doping
Super insightful post, thanks for taking the time for this.
The question I wonder is: is she doping on another level than everyone else or will the other women soon catch up to this?
What was the % for Paula’s WR at the time she ran it? I believe she took off about 3 minutes from Catherine Ndereba’s 2:18?
I've never doped and I've also never been a good runner.
But do you really think that taking an infinite amount of PEDs will make you infinitely better? I don't.
There has to be a point where the athlete is maxed out. So just because she smashed the WR doesn't necessarily imply she is taking way more PEDs than everyone else (if she's taking anything at all that is?).
That isn't an argument that she isn't using peds. It isn't really relevant whether she is taking more or better drugs than other runners, the crucial factor is whether she is doping. I would say there is no possibility she could run what she has without doping. Her record is another "Ben Johnson moment" from Seoul '88 (and, yes, other runners were doping, too).
2018 WRs (Super shoes already prevalent on roads for world class athletes)
M 2:01:39
W 2:17:01, 2019 2:14:04
Percentage improvement:
M 4899 seconds / 4835 = 1.3%
W 5821 seconds / 5396 = 7.78%
Or pre Berlin 2023 5644 / 5396 = 4.6%
The women's record is not a natural progression.
First, I don't think you should compare the women-only WR (2:17:01) to the mixed race WR.
Second, as I already mentioned in my OP, Kiptum was due to run a 1:59 or even 1:58 before his premature death. Let's say 1:59:30, that would put him at 98.3%.
Third, not sure where you get your "seconds" from, but 1 hour has 60 mins, not 40. So it should be 7796/8044=96.9%.
With the above in mind, the progression on the women's side is not nearly outlandish as you've suggested. And the difference could be explained by factors other than doping - maybe less women are interested in attacking the WR, so when they do, we see a more rapid improvement, or maybe, as someone suggested, women's sports are simply weaker in the first place (not that I agree with that statement). I'm sure there're a lot of more explanations out there other than doping that make sense.
marathon distances and up minimize the crucial male athletic advantage of muscle mass and general aggressiveness.
A long distance runner is inherently a small twiglike creature. Body mass is proportional to volume, which increases on an order of 3 compared to surface area, which increases on an order of 2. For example, a cube 1 meter to a side has volume of 1 cubic meter, and surface area of 6 square meters. But a cube 2 meters to a side has volume of 8 cubic meters, and surface area of only 24 square meters. The ratio of volume to surface area has doubled.
A distance runner isn't making a maximum effort. The game is mainly to go as fast as possible without overheating, so the runner with lowest volume to surface area has a huge advantage. That is generally the smallest runner.
the 209 high beats shorter and rogers most of the time, beats bekila by 3 minutes. viren by 4 minutes.
so we either have the greatest distance runner ever, that struggled to break 220 in prime time,
or is on the list of what? 200 kenyans busted recently.
when you see decent track americans stuck around 208 to 210, with supershoes, you know they have no secret sauce.
Bikila wore crappy shoes, had no pacers and competition, and there's wasn't even gels back then. And after his famous 2:15 barefoot run, he stated he could've gone on for another 15k, as it felt very comfortable. He could've run much, much faster than 2:12 in today's environment.
marathon distances and up minimize the crucial male athletic advantage of muscle mass and general aggressiveness.
A long distance runner is inherently a small twiglike creature. Body mass is proportional to volume, which increases on an order of 3 compared to surface area, which increases on an order of 2. For example, a cube 1 meter to a side has volume of 1 cubic meter, and surface area of 6 square meters. But a cube 2 meters to a side has volume of 8 cubic meters, and surface area of only 24 square meters. The ratio of volume to surface area has doubled.
A distance runner isn't making a maximum effort. The game is mainly to go as fast as possible without overheating, so the runner with lowest volume to surface area has a huge advantage. That is generally the smallest runner.
that's actually a good point. A lot of guys would be struggle to break 3 with a 37/38 mins 10k, but it's not unusual for a woman to run 2:59 without even breaking 40.
Bikila wore crappy shoes, had no pacers and competition, and there's wasn't even gels back then. And after his famous 2:15 barefoot run, he stated he could've gone on for another 15k, as it felt very comfortable. He could've run much, much faster than 2:12 in today's environment.
Almost as fast as a woman perhaps.
nah, the shoes alone would've got him well below 2:10, and with better fueling and competition, he could've run 2:07-08 minimum.
I think this result is highly suspect. But where would the men settle out if they had 2 or 3 perfect pacers blocking the wind for them the entire way and if they were truly going all out. I bet CJ or Zack could have run 2:05’s in those conditions yesterday and Korir could have gone 2:00:xx or better. It was really windy and Korir took his foot off the gas the last 2 miles. at 13mph speed wind drag becomes real even when the air is still. now once you factor in cross wind, headwind etc that becomes fairly material.
also any evidence or chance the woman are better responders to the super shoes? does weight impact the relative energy return?
Second, as I already mentioned in my OP, Kiptum was due to run a 1:59 or even 1:58 before his premature death. Let's say 1:59:30, that would put him at 98.3%.
Third, not sure where you get your "seconds" from, but 1 hour has 60 mins, not 40. So it should be 7796/8044=96.9%.
With the above in mind, the progression on the women's side is not nearly outlandish as you've suggested. And the difference could be explained by factors other than doping - maybe less women are interested in attacking the WR, so when they do, we see a more rapid improvement, or maybe, as someone suggested, women's sports are simply weaker in the first place (not that I agree with that statement). I'm sure there're a lot of more explanations out there other than doping that make sense.
You're also assuming Kiptum was actually clean too.
"Gervais Hakizimana stated that Kiptum logged 250 to 280 km (155–173 mi) per week in the lead-up to that year's London Marathon in April. His routine regularly featured daily morning runs spanning 25–28 km, track or fartlek workouts on Tuesdays and Saturdays, and intense long runs of 30–40 km at close to marathon pace on Thursdays and Sundays."
That training block doesn't seem feasible. It's either a mis-translation or evidence of something going on that allowed him to train at 18-25 miles at near marathon pace twice per week. Also being Kenyan, it's hard to not question it.
The problem with her race yesterday is that nothing adds up. Her 10k and 1/2 PR's don't indicate much faster than a 212-213. And you're going to tell me that an experienced marathoner running their 13th marathon suddenly drops 5 minutes off their PR on what was reported as a less than ideal weather day?
Second, as I already mentioned in my OP, Kiptum was due to run a 1:59 or even 1:58 before his premature death. Let's say 1:59:30, that would put him at 98.3%.
Third, not sure where you get your "seconds" from, but 1 hour has 60 mins, not 40. So it should be 7796/8044=96.9%.
With the above in mind, the progression on the women's side is not nearly outlandish as you've suggested. And the difference could be explained by factors other than doping - maybe less women are interested in attacking the WR, so when they do, we see a more rapid improvement, or maybe, as someone suggested, women's sports are simply weaker in the first place (not that I agree with that statement). I'm sure there're a lot of more explanations out there other than doping that make sense.
You're also assuming Kiptum was actually clean too.
"Gervais Hakizimana stated that Kiptum logged 250 to 280 km (155–173 mi) per week in the lead-up to that year's London Marathon in April. His routine regularly featured daily morning runs spanning 25–28 km, track or fartlek workouts on Tuesdays and Saturdays, and intense long runs of 30–40 km at close to marathon pace on Thursdays and Sundays."
That training block doesn't seem feasible. It's either a mis-translation or evidence of something going on that allowed him to train at 18-25 miles at near marathon pace twice per week. Also being Kenyan, it's hard to not question it.
The problem with her race yesterday is that nothing adds up. Her 10k and 1/2 PR's don't indicate much faster than a 212-213. And you're going to tell me that an experienced marathoner running their 13th marathon suddenly drops 5 minutes off their PR on what was reported as a less than ideal weather day?
I agree with you and I actually said sth like that awhile back.
Smelly_Cat wrote: "I never said she's clean/dirty in my posts. Well, guess what. I actually believe "no doper is limited". I just don't think she's anymore dirty than her competitors."
Ruth is also not dirtier than the American poster's girls like Sisson, D'Amato. She's just more talented and hard-working. Elaboration on the hard-working part: almost all American top women use SNS regularly, which is a huge distraction as well as stressor in life. You rarely see a EA runners do that.
As for the PRs. Maybe she just hasn't run the 10k and 1/2 PRs enough? So she's not come remotely close to her potential in those distances.
the 209 high beats shorter and rogers most of the time, beats bekila by 3 minutes. viren by 4 minutes.
so we either have the greatest distance runner ever, that struggled to break 220 in prime time,
or is on the list of what? 200 kenyans busted recently.
when you see decent track americans stuck around 208 to 210, with supershoes, you know they have no secret sauce.
Bikila wore crappy shoes, had no pacers and competition, and there's wasn't even gels back then. And after his famous 2:15 barefoot run, he stated he could've gone on for another 15k, as it felt very comfortable. He could've run much, much faster than 2:12 in today's environment.
Its a massive outlier when compared to her own performances. That's what makes it seem especially unbelievable
She ran 1:04 flat for the half marathon 3 years ago and 2:14 for the marathon 2 years ago. You’ve never seen a top male marathon runner make a similar improvement over several years?
It’s a massive outlier when compared to her own performances. That's what makes it seem especially unbelievable
She was 45:30 at 15k- 2:07 pace. Her best half marathon race is 64:08. She was 64:15 in Chicago at halfway. This was a tipping point. Something needs to be done.
are you guys not watching the sport you claim to like ?
in 2022 chicago she passed in 65:44 and dropped her pacers before halfway, in 2023 in 65:42, in both cases she ran massive positive splits. in 2022 Chepngetich’s 30k split of 1:34:01 put her on pace for 2:12:14. In 2023 with Hassan she was on pace for 2:11:30 until 25k
now she had more helps from her pacers (actually perfect help she was tucked in behing 2 for 95% of the race) and ran a still positive split albeit much smaller than previous attempts
this is not a massive outlier. this is a massive performance
2:14 wasn’t a shock. Scientists already predicted that women were more suited for long distance running than men decades before that. It was shocking that women only started running sub 2:17 after the super shoes.
Men's World Record Sept 28, 2003 - Paul Tergat - Berlin - 2:04:55 Oct 8, 2023 - Kelvin Kiptum - Chicago - 2:00:35 (dropped 4:20 in 20 years) Oct 12, 2019 - Eliud Kipchoge - Ineos 1:59 Challenge - 1:59:40 (dropped 5:15 in 16 years) ** Unofficial**
Women's World Record April 13, 2003 - Paula Radcliffe - London - 2:15:25 Oct 13, 2024 - Ruth Chepngetich - Chicago - 2:09:56 (dropped 5:29 in 21 years)
Don’t know how valid the comparison is. The 2003 baseline for women (Paula’s 2h15) is a huge outlier in WR progression.
In fact, this shows Ruth’s performance is as much of a massive outlier as Paula’s performance in 2003.
Men's World Record Sept 28, 2003 - Paul Tergat - Berlin - 2:04:55 Oct 8, 2023 - Kelvin Kiptum - Chicago - 2:00:35 (dropped 4:20 in 20 years) Oct 12, 2019 - Eliud Kipchoge - Ineos 1:59 Challenge - 1:59:40 (dropped 5:15 in 16 years) ** Unofficial**
Women's World Record April 13, 2003 - Paula Radcliffe - London - 2:15:25 Oct 13, 2024 - Ruth Chepngetich - Chicago - 2:09:56 (dropped 5:29 in 21 years)