2:04:26 WILL be broken. 2:03 will not. ever.

Use this link:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1105/1472206753_2a261e0328_o.jpg

Actually the record progression (drop in record) INCREASED after the early 90s. During the 50s the record was broken 5 times by a total of 10+ minutes by two people (4 times by Jim Peters). During the 60s the record was broken 8 times by a total of ~7 minutes by 6 people. During the 70s....NOTHING. During the 80s the record was broken 4 times by a total of ~1:40. During the 90s the record was broken twice by a total of ~1:00 by two people. Since the 90s the record has dropped almost 2 minutes...and we still have 2+ years to go in this decade.

Alan

Ernst Van Aaken stated many years ago that he believed the fastest a human being could run a marathon is 2:04. I myself am going believe that is the limit until someone proves him wrong. He understood the limits of human aerobic capacity better than any one else I can think of.

MarathonMind wrote:

2:00 will never happen. NEVER....

Looks like nobody ever told Clayton or Geb about your logarithmic curve. Didn't they know they weren't able to run that fast?

Let it go already. It will happen or it will not, regardless of your predictions

I don't think the OP's contention that 2:03 won'tbe broken is as farfetched as some might think. Ok sure, it will likely be broken SOMEDAY....BUT...not for a very long time. Why?

Because what many of you are failing to recognize is that the far, far majority of sub 2:07 times ever run have been by runners of African descent done in the last 20 years, since the influx of African athletes EN MASSE (there was always a smattering) on the international athletics scene. These are the most naturally gifted distance athletes ever, they've made their stand, and we've seen from them as good as we will likely see for a very long time: Geb, Tergat, and Bekele. They've run mind-blowing 10k times ( in the case of Bekele, almost a minute faster than practically any runner of euro descent has), and now that two of the group have attacked the marathon, we've seen marathons run in the mid to high 2:04's. Now granted, neither was likely in their true peak when they ran these marathons (they waited until they were older), but I would say that if all 3 of these guys focused on marathons and ran them in their peaks, and battled each other, we would have seen no better than 2:03:30. And these are the best of the best, 100% peaked, 100% perfect conditions. I just really don't see runners much better than these guys coming along any time soon.

And.... a lot of you are talking about how all records are routinely smashed, and the progression of performances marches on and on and on, but wait! How many people have beaten Coe's 1:41 in over a QUARTER CENTURY, the 25 years that were the most drug fueled of all time maybe ? ONE ?! 800m times have gotten slower. How many people have beaten Beamon's LJ record in nearly 40 years?? A couple? How many jr's (LEGIT jr's ) have beaten Ryun's 3:51 mile and 1:44 800m times ? A few? All records are not just routinely being crushed. Many of them are remaining stagnant.

And in fact, if you look at NON-AFRICAN performances, many records are indeed fairly stagnant. Over 20 years ago, Steve Jones went out insanely fast and died a little to run 2:07:13, and a 38 y.o. Lopes ran 2:07:12. You don't think that if Jones paced himself a tad better, and if Lopes had focused on the marathon when he was a tad younger, we might have seen some 2:06:30's out of those two? It's very likely, and that was over 20 years ago. How many runners of non-African descent have run under 2:06:30 ? ONE ( a JPN runner). So how much have non-Africans been improving in the marathon?

So......summing up:

* European and non-African performances have been fairly stagnant in many distance events the last 25 years, despite the wide-spread use of PED's.

* The records in some events like the 800 or LJ have been fairly stagnant period

*In the marathon, the big improvement in times have been from the African runners mainly. And now they've had 20+ years of serious en masse international participation, and I think we've seen close to the best they have to offer.

Therefore, we may not see a 2:03 for a very, very long time, if at all.

I've been around for a while, but I don't ever recall Bob Beamon running a marathon :)

A lot of your argument has no relevance whatsoever to the subject at hand, or is based on speculation.

The fact is that we are only about 1 second per mile away from a sub-2:04 marathon and I happen to believe that we will see such a performance in the very near future: if not from Geb, then from Wanjiru or some other up-and-coming runner.

As for sub-2:03; I will speculate that this might take a few years, but will probably happen sooner than most people on this thread think. We already have athletes running sub-59 minutes for a half marathon, which indicates that a sub 2:04 is imminent, on the right day, with the right course and conditions. Once we get a few guys down to 58:30 for the half, then we can look forward a sub 2:03 marathon.

Dave

Are you the Dave Hill from Canada that was a top runner in the late 70's?

Getting Annoyed wrote: I'm certain that 2 hours will be broken before the world ends

I suspect you're right about human potential to, one way or another, keep nudging the record down even to two hours flat. OTOH perhaps you underrate the chances of "the world ending" before this occurs. I mean, we don't even require all of humanity to be wiped off the planet - merely a big enough change such that folks aren't running marathons any more, or maybe even just not paying princely sums as incentives to the very best.

WHAT? Where did I say anything about Beamon and the marathon. I said "loooong juuuuump". It's even in track and field, look it up. ( I know you were trying to make a joke, but it failed in acheiving its desired effect)

And you are way off, because my points were factual and very relevant to the discussion at hand. It sounds like you failed to understand my point. I guess I will have to repeat it for you. It went like this:

Many on this board were discussing how track and field records have progressed, and they mentioned how the mile barrier that no one thought could be surpassed is long gone, and other such supposed barriers(see, *other* NON-marathon t&f events? With me so far?)

Then *I* pointed out that in some events (see the 800, the LJ, and the jr records of Ryun), there has NOT been a lot of progression in the last 20-40 years (depending on the event). So this idea that all t&f records have continued to progress & progress at a fairly rapid rate is false. People made that point, and I refuted it.

I also pointed out that if we removed Africans from the equation, record progression in many distance events has not been particuarly rapid at all, but actually quite static. So Europeans for example have leveled off in many events. In the last 20+ years, how many non-Africans have beaten Coe and Cram's 1500m times? I think one. Oh yeah, toooons of progression there. No, Europeans times have been pretty static the last 25 years in many events. They are leveling off for sure.

So...... most of the progression in the marathon in other distance events that people cite has come mainly from the Africans, who did start participating en masse until the late '80's. This is when from where the bulk of the record progression has come.

And I feel that now that the Africans have been involved heavily for many years distance running, THEY TOO will start leveling off. That is my only conjecture really, but it makes sense. Now explain to me how all of those points have "no relevance whatsoever to the subject at hand" ? They are all extremely relevant, sorry you failed to comprehend them.

And I disagree. And what is the "relevant" information you are using to back your point? Oh, it's "i think it will happen" and " people will just keep getting faster and faster and faster, because....... they always do." That's not much to go on, sorry.

We will see a sub 2 hour marathon about the same time we see the WR for 5k drop down 30 seconds and the 10k drop down 60 seconds.

That is the type of track speed that will be required. Maybe KB will move up to the marathon some day. Who else has the track speed to even have a go at the record now?

The only other way will be through better drugs.

You saying that no one will ever run under 2:00, and providing a link, suggests that your progression line is absolute.Yet, Clayton and Gebrselassie both ran faster than they should be able to.2 men in 60 years ran faster that they were supposed to.By your own absolute chart it looks like 2 men in the next 60 years will run faster than they are supposed to, one of those 2 men will dip under 2:00.

MarathonMind wrote:

Use this link:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1105/1472206753_2a261e0328_o.jpg

.

SMJO wrote:

Are you the Dave Hill from Canada that was a top runner in the late 70's?

No I am a Brit, currently living in Tucson, AZ

Sir Lance-alot,

I believe what Dave Hill was saying is that you are using other events that have leveled off and applied them to the marathon. He wasn't saying you said Bob Beamon ran a marathon, he was basically saying what does the long jump record progression slowing down have to do with the marathon record progression. And his point was well made. You are trying to compare a WR that is still moving down fairly rapidly to some of the WR's that have stalled and saying it is the same thing. The thing is, its not. You can't use this comparison precisely because the 800/LJ records haven't changed much, which means its a completely different situation that the marathon. Hence he was correct in saying your argument has no relation to the subject, because it doesn't, you are talking about completely different events at completely different points in their record progression.

Secondly, he said you based a lot on speculation. and that you did. you say that so and so athlete ran this time but woulda run faster if he ran a more even race, so very few non-africans since him have broken this time that you pretend he ran could have ran. Fact is you can't say what a runner may have been able to run if something was different. You can only use the facts to argue your points, which you did not.

also a point i will bring up is you very nicely cut out the most dominant group of distance runners on the planet, the africans, from your equation. saying non-africans have stopped improving does not matter one little bit because the africans have taken over so non africans aren't the ones setting the records anyways. and you cannot just assume, in order to make your point, that the africans are about to level off like the non africans have done. so yes speculation and things that have nothing to do with the topic at hand make up your argument. and thus it really isn't at argument at all.

Sir Lance-alot, I agree with your argument regarding the recent progression of records being due to the emergence of Africans, and I would add that the progression of records in the 70's and 80's was likely at least partially due to the introduction of professionalism. (And your argument was well put forth.)

As for those of European descent not improving, I think that is at least partially due to not having another competitive running boom like the US had in the early 80's, when the pool of competitive male marathoners was much larger than it is today.

Also, as you said the best Africans have waited until past their prime to run. That, coupled with the psychological advantage of having a record to shoot at within reach and the fact that their will continue to be genetic running freaks born will lead to incremental improvements that will eventually get the record below 2:00, but it will be a long while, I certainly don't expect to be around to see it.

I would bet you on it, but I would have to collect in my next life.

so as far as 2:03 being broken i don't think it will take super long. right now you've got haile who just ran under 2:04:30 in a race that i would say shows that he finally has the marathon down. now that he's got it figured out and is good at the marathon I would not be surprised if he broke it once or twice more, he might not, but its definitely a possibility. his age is the only thing that will stop him. so he very well could get it under 2:04. whether he does or not, we also currently have two other athletes who look to have a good shot at knocking the record down further than haile can. wanjiru is young so he has plenty of years and he's run a half marathon some 20 seconds faster than haile. good chance he'll run faster than haile. and bekele has beaten haile's track records and if he moves up to the marathon he could also be faster than haile. one of those 3 athletes might break 2:03 and i think will probably at least beat 2:04.if they don't break it then just wait till the next record setter comes along. if haile, wanjiru, bekele don't break 2:03 in the next 10 years i think by the time bekele is done there might be some youngin' starting up who will break records and will probably break 2:03.

Sir Lance-alot wrote: I feel that now that the Africans have been involved heavily for many years distance running, THEY TOO will start leveling off. That is my only conjecture really, but it makes sense.

Counterpoint: until now, the marathon has not been a race for the very best runners at their primes. It's been - outside of Japan anyway - something of a last resort for those lacking the speed or the youth to win shorter races.

Tergat and Geb both lowered it by decent chunks. The two best distance runners of their generation, they didn't jump into marathons at the heights of their powers. And suddenly top Americans like Hall and Ritz are running marathons at a much younger age. Hall in particular responded with the fastest American debut ever. Let's see what these and other young lions do with a race or two under their belts.

And if marathoning is or becomes more lucrative to a Kenny B than track, surely we'll see more of the absolute top East and North Africans racing 42k in their primes, not waiting until they get a senior discount on the entry fee.

Ryan Hall? lol.

Sir Lance-alot

Yes, my reference to Bob Beamon was a little joke, but with a purpose, which was to point out that you were off-subject. The thread is about marathon progression. The fact that only two men have surpassed Beamon's record in almost 40 years, has no relevance to the matter in hand, nor does Seb Coe's 800 performance or Jim Ryun's outstanding junior performance.

Most of the remainder of your post was just speculation - and that's fine, I don't have a problem with that. I clearly stated that my post was also speculation, so it's just your speculation against my speculation - there's no need to be rude about it.

Dave

For a start, I believe that the marathon will eventually be run under 2:03 and eventually under 2:00, no idea when though.

First, I have to say you're partially correct in your argument, I have to say that even though the Africans emergence in the sport has significantly lowered te WR in the marathon, what points to this trend slowing? If the Africans can still lower the current WR by 30 seconds or more, why is it at THEIR limit. If it is them and only them that can break the WR, then their progression certainly cannot be done, can it? Does this mean sub-2:03 in the NEAR future, who knows, but it certainly doesn't mean that sub-2:03 is hard to comprehend.

Secondly, just an argument to bring a bit more discussion: if the world record reaches 2:03:00, why can't somebody run 2:02:59. And if somebody runs 2:02:59, why can't somebody then run 2:02:58? How far can this go? I mean, if somebody runs a certain time, why can somebody not run a second faster with just a bit better conditions, just a bit better technology or one more gust of wind? I completely and fully understand the idea of limits and all that theory, but just for discussion, who are we to create our own limits? If scientists haven't discovered this limit yet by pure physics, how can we say that we are even remotely close?