Not possible for fueling change to cause such extravagant obscenity to the extent of 2:09.
I know of a ton of semi fast elite age groupers who hardly improved by tens of seconds in the marathon after using maurten hydrogel, and improved more using the combination of maurten and super shoes.
Verdict: it’s not bicarbonate or hydrogel
Not sure why the running world refuses to believe that ketone esters don’t work. I mentioned this to Gault over a year ago and it was dismissed. There is no doubt the top marathoners are using it. Heck, Murphy and Mantz have talked about how they use it. if a legal fueling aid can spare glycogen, it has a huge effect on how long you can hold a pace deep into a marathon. We are in an age of super fueling and most don’t realize it. Reminds me of 2017 when everyone thought the OG vaporfly was nike bs marketing, etc.
Fueling is important no doubt it's just the percentage of contribution we are talking about. Between shoes and fueling, it's the shoes that dwarfs the fueling hands down. And not to forget you have RF experts on this forum already explaining that even the shoes and fueling gets hacked by man-made electromagnetic emissions flying around the whole city.
This post was edited 14 minutes after it was posted.
I liked the article and thought he had one interesting intellectual point near the end.
For those of you who say, "It's obvious she must be doping." Ok, I get it but are you saying she just started doping for this race? SO she was clean before this race and then just did it for this race? What explains the huge jump for this race?
Yes that could be true but why would she risk it if she was already making hundreds of thousands a year and was already one of the very best runners on planet earth without doping.
This article/thread does come across as an attempt to appease the Kenyans.
It's been pointed out quite a few times that she likely hadn't been tested for months before Chicago, including in the two threads about the reaction to your question that show up in news results for Ruth Chepngetich (though I'm unsurprised you missed those posts, as your mods have allowed Rekrunner to completely rekrunner both those threads).
This is a very serious mistake by AIU not anticipating a possible doping spree by Ruth. That's why the sport has too many loopholes dear Coevett!
I suppose I agree with people who say we don't truly know what the limits of human running performance are. To an extent, anyway (I don't think we'll ever see, for example, a marathon run in under an hour). But I also feel that when an individual runner has been around for a while. and they are a physically mature adult (let's say, 30 years old), you get a fairly clear picture of what their ability range is, and what their absolute top level might be. Granted, being around for a while already, they've probably already had some "perfect days" when the lead-in was perfect, the weather was great, etc., but things could always get slightly better, right?
So let's look at Ruth Chepngetich's marathon yearly bests since 2017. Try to temporarily forget what you know, and read only up until the end of 2023: what would you estimate her absolute perfect result might be?
2017 2:22:36 Istanbul (TUR) 12 NOV 2017 2018 2:18:35 Istanbul (TUR) 11 NOV 2018 2019 2:17:08 Dubai (UAE) 25 JAN 2019 2020 2:22:05 London (GBR) 04 OCT 2020 2021 2:22:31 Chicago, IL (USA) 10 OCT 2021 2022 2:14:18 Chicago, IL (USA) 09 OCT 2022 2023 2:15:37 Chicago, IL (USA) 08 OCT 2023 2024 2:09:56 Chicago, IL (USA) 13 OCT 2024
If you asked me for my unadulterated view, and I give very premium views as a result of my Optic Physics background, she was already doping from 2022 onwards. Her last chance at 2:14/2:15 would have come on the back of 2019 after her 2:17:09 in Dubai. But there was COVID so we pardon her and give her a chance in 2021 and 2022 to run 2:18 again at least but she didn't and ran a string of 2:22s in super shoes I suppose which were better than the shoes from 2018/2019 right? Then a sudden 9minute drop from 2021 to 2022 while still wearing same supershoes? Fishy!
Her best time clean is 2:17:08. No faster. This is how I do space-time critical assessment.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
I suppose I agree with people who say we don't truly know what the limits of human running performance are. To an extent, anyway (I don't think we'll ever see, for example, a marathon run in under an hour). But I also feel that when an individual runner has been around for a while. and they are a physically mature adult (let's say, 30 years old), you get a fairly clear picture of what their ability range is, and what their absolute top level might be. Granted, being around for a while already, they've probably already had some "perfect days" when the lead-in was perfect, the weather was great, etc., but things could always get slightly better, right?
So let's look at Ruth Chepngetich's marathon yearly bests since 2017. Try to temporarily forget what you know, and read only up until the end of 2023: what would you estimate her absolute perfect result might be?
2017 2:22:36 Istanbul (TUR) 12 NOV 2017 2018 2:18:35 Istanbul (TUR) 11 NOV 2018 2019 2:17:08 Dubai (UAE) 25 JAN 2019 2020 2:22:05 London (GBR) 04 OCT 2020 2021 2:22:31 Chicago, IL (USA) 10 OCT 2021 2022 2:14:18 Chicago, IL (USA) 09 OCT 2022 2023 2:15:37 Chicago, IL (USA) 08 OCT 2023 2024 2:09:56 Chicago, IL (USA) 13 OCT 2024
Maybe 2:13xx but remember that if you look at her results for other distance races you would say 2:14xx was “perfect.”
Wrong, yours is a wrong assessment of space-time of Ruth's. Read my comment above to see how I do it like a Physics King.
When I read the 4 scenarios that are laid out in the article, the conclusion is that if an African runs really fast and because they are so tainted by doping their performance will never be accepted whether they are guilty of doping or not. And East Africans dominate the sport of distance running. You will need to find another sport to find interest in and report on.
Jonathan: Great article, particularly the 4 crystal clear options at the end. I suspect and fear we'll end up at options 1 or 2. Unless the recent Faith Chepkoech history repeats itself. The various proposed explanations--Maurten, new shoes, training--seem unlikely. We didn't see her slow down while chugging gels at any point. Sure, it's possible that new shoes and extreme "responder" status could make a difference, but seems a big stretch as she was already wearing Nike super shoes previously. Better training? Not a chance. If we are to believe what we have been told about Kiptum, then everyone should be doing 180 miles per week, just like all track runners should be doing "double thresholds." Why is she training by herself in N'gong without a coach? That's strange.
So how come you don't understand Running Economy? Please don't try to tell me that you do, berecause clearly you don't.
All of this endless dope talk is just the worst type of attention seeking, where all you do is promote the very thing that you claim to despise.
And all the time, never having even the most basic understanding of what you are talking about. You don't even understand what metabolism is and you have no desire to learn.
Don't you understand that you have a duty of care to young athletes? And that includes not filling their heads with dangerous misinformation?
Well said.
The problem is when the most positive thing that some people have in their lives is to spew and spread their disgusting abusive racist bigoted misogynistic hatred filled attitudes toward hard working runners, especially those in other ethnic groups and cultures and females in particular.
For me the most obvious red flag is how the time stacks up against the men in that race.
Is everyone forgetting biology? So Hb, testosterone, lung capacity, height, heart size etc of professional well trained males can be beaten by a clean female? I don't buy it.
So how come you don't understand Running Economy? Please don't try to tell me that you do, berecause clearly you don't.
All of this endless dope talk is just the worst type of attention seeking, where all you do is promote the very thing that you claim to despise.
And all the time, never having even the most basic understanding of what you are talking about. You don't even understand what metabolism is and you have no desire to learn.
Don't you understand that you have a duty of care to young athletes? And that includes not filling their heads with dangerous misinformation?
Well said.
The problem is when the most positive thing that some people have in their lives is to spew and spread their disgusting abusive racist bigoted misogynistic hatred filled attitudes toward hard working runners, especially those in other ethnic groups and cultures and females in particular.
Ruth is either doping or she is not. It is not racist or sexist to assume she is doping. It is true however that there are racists and sexists who assume she is doping. But the assumption itself is not dispositive regarding whether one is racist or sexist.
For me the most obvious red flag is how the time stacks up against the men in that race.
Is everyone forgetting biology? So Hb, testosterone, lung capacity, height, heart size etc of professional well trained males can be beaten by a clean female? I don't buy it.
Biology eh? So you don't understand running economy either?
Ruth’s time would put her 93rd on the Kenyan men’s list. The 93rd man on USA is 2:21:xx. Maybe she has some 2:10:xx Kenyan men training with her. Just a thought.
2020 2:22:05 London (GBR) 04 OCT 2020 2021 2:22:31 Chicago, IL (USA) 10 OCT 2021 2022 2:14:18 Chicago, IL (USA) 09 OCT 2022 2023 2:15:37 Chicago, IL (USA) 08 OCT 2023 2024 2:09:56 Chicago, IL (USA) 13 OCT 2024
in 2022 , at age 26-7
that is when the new protocol was used. and amped up of late.
The article does reveal she recently switched from the Vaporfly to Alphafly - could that explain the big jump?
Jonathan's "four paths" are not mutually exclusive. For example both scenarios 2 and 3 can co-exist, that the run is legitimate, and that others will approach and even break it.
The main problem with the doping scenarios is the lack of any established significant correlation between doping and faster marathon performances.
For me the most obvious red flag is how the time stacks up against the men in that race.
Is everyone forgetting biology? So Hb, testosterone, lung capacity, height, heart size etc of professional well trained males can be beaten by a clean female? I don't buy it.
Biology eh? So you don't understand running economy either?