And as several have said in this thread, its really only 8 secsonds not 12 seconds (multiple women have ran 4:08 equivalents). No question Kipyegon can run a 4:07 - 4:08 right now in the right conditions.
So much meaningless speculation. The human body is not a neat mathematical table. If beating 4.12 was so easy it would have been done long ago. The record is also held by a 3.51 1500 runner. And they are all doping at that level, so they can't get much faster.
I like Lets’run -There’s a lot of trolls here, haters, fan boys, insightful peoples, joy and laughs..
Well, I don’t know what you are, but “So much meaningless speculation” from a poster who types “doping” in almost every post is hilarious…
Speculation isn’t meaningless when connected to reason, experience or arguments. And speculate is what we do in this forum. - I know you have tried to give some reasoning for your doping allegations, but boiling everything down to “they are simply too good to be true (clean)” contradicts experience, nuances and logic…
I think doping has been and is a huge problem in athletics, and that there still is some stellar athletes to be “popped”. But I also think there’s a majority of clean athletes on the upper shelf, and that w-recs still can be broken clean. And I think it doesn’t matter what I think -we can never be sure (And this is my strongest criticism against you -you are too sure. -You don’t dive into, or discuss all the circumstances that suggests doping not being as easy / prevalent). So all we can do is rooting for a better testing regime, investigation and so forth, and the argument for that is good enough without all your generalised accusations…
You have derived me from the topic, and that’s another bad consequence (of consistently typing “doping”). I would love to discuss suspicions / doping / test in a suitable thread, but for now I had to delete a lot of the off-topic things I wrote in this current post.. Topic: I do believe a woman in the future will go sub 4 in the mile, but not this year, or next. And I agree that breaking 4.12 isn’t easy (no w-recs are easy), but I think Kipyegon maybe can do 4.05 (in a max paced race) this year, based on her 3.50 last year… Saying that I don’t mean at all that “the human body is.. a neat mathematical table “ (see my other posts)..
Kipyegon, Hassan and Tsegay are all in my view strength based runners, with pbs in the 800ms a couple of seconds on the slow side. I don’t know how strong you can be to compensate for lack in speed (see Jakob Ingebrigtsen), or if you have to be like a Cheruiyot / Wightman (1,43 800m) to run 1500 / mile w-rec…
Kratochvilova puzzles me (47,99 / 1,53,26) -if I had a pb like that in the 400m I would have done 1,44 800m.. Ok; I’m a strength gay and a gay, and she was more of a sprinter, but what about a woman with 50 flat pb, 1,53 and 3,59 (mile)..? Could a Francine Niyonsaba (53,4 / 1,55) type (apart from the dsd-problematic) be the contender -better 400 and 800m speed than Kipyegon / Hassan / Tsegay along with 5000m strength…? Time will show.
So much meaningless speculation. The human body is not a neat mathematical table. If beating 4.12 was so easy it would have been done long ago. The record is also held by a 3.51 1500 runner. And they are all doping at that level, so they can't get much faster.
I like Lets’run -There’s a lot of trolls here, haters, fan boys, insightful peoples, joy and laughs..
Well, I don’t know what you are, but “So much meaningless speculation” from a poster who types “doping” in almost every post is hilarious…
Speculation isn’t meaningless when connected to reason, experience or arguments. And speculate is what we do in this forum. - I know you have tried to give some reasoning for your doping allegations, but boiling everything down to “they are simply too good to be true (clean)” contradicts experience, nuances and logic…
I think doping has been and is a huge problem in athletics, and that there still is some stellar athletes to be “popped”. But I also think there’s a majority of clean athletes on the upper shelf, and that w-recs still can be broken clean. And I think it doesn’t matter what I think -we can never be sure (And this is my strongest criticism against you -you are too sure. -You don’t dive into, or discuss all the circumstances that suggests doping not being as easy / prevalent). So all we can do is rooting for a better testing regime, investigation and so forth, and the argument for that is good enough without all your generalised accusations…
You have derived me from the topic, and that’s another bad consequence (of consistently typing “doping”). I would love to discuss suspicions / doping / test in a suitable thread, but for now I had to delete a lot of the off-topic things I wrote in this current post.. Topic: I do believe a woman in the future will go sub 4 in the mile, but not this year, or next. And I agree that breaking 4.12 isn’t easy (no w-recs are easy), but I think Kipyegon maybe can do 4.05 (in a max paced race) this year, based on her 3.50 last year… Saying that I don’t mean at all that “the human body is.. a neat mathematical table “ (see my other posts)..
Kipyegon, Hassan and Tsegay are all in my view strength based runners, with pbs in the 800ms a couple of seconds on the slow side. I don’t know how strong you can be to compensate for lack in speed (see Jakob Ingebrigtsen), or if you have to be like a Cheruiyot / Wightman (1,43 800m) to run 1500 / mile w-rec…
Kratochvilova puzzles me (47,99 / 1,53,26) -if I had a pb like that in the 400m I would have done 1,44 800m.. Ok; I’m a strength gay and a gay, and she was more of a sprinter, but what about a woman with 50 flat pb, 1,53 and 3,59 (mile)..? Could a Francine Niyonsaba (53,4 / 1,55) type (apart from the dsd-problematic) be the contender -better 400 and 800m speed than Kipyegon / Hassan / Tsegay along with 5000m strength…? Time will show.
I have followed and observed sports since the '60's. I have seen how doping has increased in every sport over the last decades. I have seen the corresponding leaps in performance levels.
I also have known professional athletes, coaches and antidoping officials. We know for a fact that doping is hard to detect and many more dope than are caught. But there will always be fans like you who think the sport should be given the benefit of the doubt. That horse has long bolted.
Finally there is no way a woman will run 4 minutes for the mile when their best performances have been produced through doping for decades. (Remember the Chinese in the '90's?) 4.12 is doped - and so is 3.50 or anything near it. But unlike some posters here, I am not interested in writing essays to "prove" that point. I accept all the evidence of what the reality is for elite and professional sport today. Sport is about success. So is doping. They now go hand in hand.
BTW, there is no way Kipyegon or any woman who has run near 3.50 can run a 4.05 mile. That is like saying El G could run a 3.40-41 based on his 3.26 for the 1500. Women will slow further as the distance increases. (Indeed, in the Lovelock era, when the record was 3.47, there was over 20 secs difference between the 1500 and mile records - and the latter was run more often). Kipyegon's 3.50 may be worth about 4.10 at best, which is why the current record (by a 3.51 runner is 4.12 and nowhere near 4.05 - and never will be).
BTW, there is no way Kipyegon or any woman who has run near 3.50 can run a 4.05 mile. That is like saying El G could run a 3.40-41 based on his 3.26 for the 1500. Women will slow further as the distance increases. (Indeed, in the Lovelock era, when the record was 3.47, there was over 20 secs difference between the 1500 and mile records - and the latter was run more often). Kipyegon's 3.50 may be worth about 4.10 at best, which is why the current record (by a 3.51 runner is 4.12 and nowhere near 4.05 - and never will be).
I agree that 4:05 at this moment is out of reach. That said when you say the tables are wrong about 4:08.7 being equivalent to a 3:50, that means you are saying there is no way El G could run a 3:43 (which is exactly what the tables say is equivalent to his 3:26). Is your point that the tables are right for the men but wrong for the women.
Over the past 10 years or so the top 1500 runners have run the mile 9 times and the 1500m 119 times. Your point being that you think the record should be the same for an event that was contested 9 times as one that was contested 119 times. I disagree, and think an event that is contested more will have a stronger record. But you think the number of times an event was run is irrelevant for the strength of that record. In which case there is no point in use arguing any further.
From 2017 - 2023
Kipyegon ran the mile 0 times, and the 1500m 30 times
Hassan ran the mile 4 times, and the 1500m 26 times
Tsegay ran the mile 2 times, and the 1500m 35 times
From 2012 - 2019
Genzebe Dibaba ran the mile 3 times, and the 1500 28 times
I'm not assuming marks are clean. I'm assuming that there has always been doping in all of the events.
I like Lets’run -There’s a lot of trolls here, haters, fan boys, insightful peoples, joy and laughs..
Well, I don’t know what you are, but “So much meaningless speculation” from a poster who types “doping” in almost every post is hilarious…
Speculation isn’t meaningless when connected to reason, experience or arguments. And speculate is what we do in this forum. - I know you have tried to give some reasoning for your doping allegations, but boiling everything down to “they are simply too good to be true (clean)” contradicts experience, nuances and logic…
I think doping has been and is a huge problem in athletics, and that there still is some stellar athletes to be “popped”. But I also think there’s a majority of clean athletes on the upper shelf, and that w-recs still can be broken clean. And I think it doesn’t matter what I think -we can never be sure (And this is my strongest criticism against you -you are too sure. -You don’t dive into, or discuss all the circumstances that suggests doping not being as easy / prevalent). So all we can do is rooting for a better testing regime, investigation and so forth, and the argument for that is good enough without all your generalised accusations…
You have derived me from the topic, and that’s another bad consequence (of consistently typing “doping”). I would love to discuss suspicions / doping / test in a suitable thread, but for now I had to delete a lot of the off-topic things I wrote in this current post.. Topic: I do believe a woman in the future will go sub 4 in the mile, but not this year, or next. And I agree that breaking 4.12 isn’t easy (no w-recs are easy), but I think Kipyegon maybe can do 4.05 (in a max paced race) this year, based on her 3.50 last year… Saying that I don’t mean at all that “the human body is.. a neat mathematical table “ (see my other posts)..
Kipyegon, Hassan and Tsegay are all in my view strength based runners, with pbs in the 800ms a couple of seconds on the slow side. I don’t know how strong you can be to compensate for lack in speed (see Jakob Ingebrigtsen), or if you have to be like a Cheruiyot / Wightman (1,43 800m) to run 1500 / mile w-rec…
Kratochvilova puzzles me (47,99 / 1,53,26) -if I had a pb like that in the 400m I would have done 1,44 800m.. Ok; I’m a strength gay and a gay, and she was more of a sprinter, but what about a woman with 50 flat pb, 1,53 and 3,59 (mile)..? Could a Francine Niyonsaba (53,4 / 1,55) type (apart from the dsd-problematic) be the contender -better 400 and 800m speed than Kipyegon / Hassan / Tsegay along with 5000m strength…? Time will show.
I have followed and observed sports since the '60's. I have seen how doping has increased in every sport over the last decades. I have seen the corresponding leaps in performance levels.
I also have known professional athletes, coaches and antidoping officials. We know for a fact that doping is hard to detect and many more dope than are caught. But there will always be fans like you who think the sport should be given the benefit of the doubt. That horse has long bolted.
Finally there is no way a woman will run 4 minutes for the mile when their best performances have been produced through doping for decades. (Remember the Chinese in the '90's?) 4.12 is doped - and so is 3.50 or anything near it. But unlike some posters here, I am not interested in writing essays to "prove" that point. I accept all the evidence of what the reality is for elite and professional sport today. Sport is about success. So is doping. They now go hand in hand.
I agree then you write: “We know for a fact that doping is hard to detect and many more dope than are caught.” But no, I don’t think we shall give the sport the benefit of doubt -I think we shall both increase testing and punishment.
What I disagree in is that you know who dopes -only based on achievements / times / medals or country of birth. That’s illogical…
Regarding womens mile: I don’t predict Kipyegon doing 4,05 this year (or any). I just said that she maybe could (if everything smooth). Likewise I don’t predict a sub 4 -what do I know ;maybe the w-rec in 50 years still stands 4,12. But maybe sub 4 “all of a sudden” is a reality say 2025. You have to consult similar huge unexpected leaps forward in the near historie of athletics to understand what I mean…
I like Lets’run -There’s a lot of trolls here, haters, fan boys, insightful peoples, joy and laughs..
Well, I don’t know what you are, but “So much meaningless speculation” from a poster who types “doping” in almost every post is hilarious…
Speculation isn’t meaningless when connected to reason, experience or arguments. And speculate is what we do in this forum. - I know you have tried to give some reasoning for your doping allegations, but boiling everything down to “they are simply too good to be true (clean)” contradicts experience, nuances and logic…
I think doping has been and is a huge problem in athletics, and that there still is some stellar athletes to be “popped”. But I also think there’s a majority of clean athletes on the upper shelf, and that w-recs still can be broken clean. And I think it doesn’t matter what I think -we can never be sure (And this is my strongest criticism against you -you are too sure. -You don’t dive into, or discuss all the circumstances that suggests doping not being as easy / prevalent). So all we can do is rooting for a better testing regime, investigation and so forth, and the argument for that is good enough without all your generalised accusations…
You have derived me from the topic, and that’s another bad consequence (of consistently typing “doping”). I would love to discuss suspicions / doping / test in a suitable thread, but for now I had to delete a lot of the off-topic things I wrote in this current post.. Topic: I do believe a woman in the future will go sub 4 in the mile, but not this year, or next. And I agree that breaking 4.12 isn’t easy (no w-recs are easy), but I think Kipyegon maybe can do 4.05 (in a max paced race) this year, based on her 3.50 last year… Saying that I don’t mean at all that “the human body is.. a neat mathematical table “ (see my other posts)..
Kipyegon, Hassan and Tsegay are all in my view strength based runners, with pbs in the 800ms a couple of seconds on the slow side. I don’t know how strong you can be to compensate for lack in speed (see Jakob Ingebrigtsen), or if you have to be like a Cheruiyot / Wightman (1,43 800m) to run 1500 / mile w-rec…
Kratochvilova puzzles me (47,99 / 1,53,26) -if I had a pb like that in the 400m I would have done 1,44 800m.. Ok; I’m a strength gay and a gay, and she was more of a sprinter, but what about a woman with 50 flat pb, 1,53 and 3,59 (mile)..? Could a Francine Niyonsaba (53,4 / 1,55) type (apart from the dsd-problematic) be the contender -better 400 and 800m speed than Kipyegon / Hassan / Tsegay along with 5000m strength…? Time will show.
I have followed and observed sports since the '60's. I have seen how doping has increased in every sport over the last decades. I have seen the corresponding leaps in performance levels.
I also have known professional athletes, coaches and antidoping officials. We know for a fact that doping is hard to detect and many more dope than are caught. But there will always be fans like you who think the sport should be given the benefit of the doubt. That horse has long bolted.
Finally there is no way a woman will run 4 minutes for the mile when their best performances have been produced through doping for decades. (Remember the Chinese in the '90's?) 4.12 is doped - and so is 3.50 or anything near it. But unlike some posters here, I am not interested in writing essays to "prove" that point. I accept all the evidence of what the reality is for elite and professional sport today. Sport is about success. So is doping. They now go hand in hand.
My apologies -I don’t want to offend you. But you are a little harsh yourself calling achievements doped, without analysing pros and cons regarding the named athletes…
Saying that I will add that I can of course be wrong in my “think the majority of athletes must be considered clean” (I may have misjudged the pros and cons -hard to tell with so little hard facts / evidence). And you can be right -I don’t think I have any agenda here. I just see a lot of pros for regarding quite a few athletes clean… But we really don’t know…
I don’t think you lie about your broad experience regarding prevalence of doping, but I don’t think you can extrapolate that to every elite athlete… (But I miss a broader, detailed discussion about doping -with contributions from athletes, science, research, medicine ..)
The topic: I see 4,12 / 3,50 as sort of weak records -can of course have been doped, but don’t need to have been. My arguments: First the weakest -The Norwegian marathoner Grete Waitz still holds the national record in the 1500m 10 sec shy of the w-rec. She did her NR fifty years ago, without any talent for such a short distance, in a time period with very little doping, working full job as a teacher, in snowy / icy Norway pre treadmills, pre altitude camps, pre better shoes and tracks, pre so much more. -The 10 sec gap to the world record isn’t strange at all (should easily been 12-14 sec)…
My strongest argument: Comparing mens 1500ms development with womens. 8.13.1980 mens w-rec was 3,32,09 (Ovett, july same year). At this date in august Kazankina ran 3,52,47. So what then: Mens record bettered 6+ seconds, womens only 2,4 sec. as of today. Conclusion: Womens w-rec should nowadays been 3,46… And there’s more: Kazankina had far less competition than Ovett, so 3,52 may have been weak even in 1980.
Mile: We can debate how much to add from 1500m -let me say 16 sec (just to provoke); that gives 4,02.
My apologies -I don’t want to offend you. But you are a little harsh yourself calling achievements doped, without analysing pros and cons regarding the named athletes…
Saying that I will add that I can of course be wrong in my “think the majority of athletes must be considered clean” (I may have misjudged the pros and cons -hard to tell with so little hard facts / evidence). And you can be right -I don’t think I have any agenda here. I just see a lot of pros for regarding quite a few athletes clean… But we really don’t know…
I don’t think you lie about your broad experience regarding prevalence of doping, but I don’t think you can extrapolate that to every elite athlete… (But I miss a broader, detailed discussion about doping -with contributions from athletes, science, research, medicine ..)
The topic: I see 4,12 / 3,50 as sort of weak records -can of course have been doped, but don’t need to have been. My arguments: First the weakest -The Norwegian marathoner Grete Waitz still holds the national record in the 1500m 10 sec shy of the w-rec. She did her NR fifty years ago, without any talent for such a short distance, in a time period with very little doping, working full job as a teacher, in snowy / icy Norway pre treadmills, pre altitude camps, pre better shoes and tracks, pre so much more. -The 10 sec gap to the world record isn’t strange at all (should easily been 12-14 sec)…
My strongest argument: Comparing mens 1500ms development with womens. 8.13.1980 mens w-rec was 3,32,09 (Ovett, july same year). At this date in august Kazankina ran 3,52,47. So what then: Mens record bettered 6+ seconds, womens only 2,4 sec. as of today. Conclusion: Womens w-rec should nowadays been 3,46… And there’s more: Kazankina had far less competition than Ovett, so 3,52 may have been weak even in 1980.
Mile: We can debate how much to add from 1500m -let me say 16 sec (just to provoke); that gives 4,02.
Interesting post. The fact that so many women are close to the 1500m record does suggest that it is perhaps not as strong as we once thought (back when only the doped chinese were running those times), and interesting story about Grete.
Add 16sec for the extra 109.34 m is certainly provocative ... considering it is 3:39 pace! haha.
My apologies -I don’t want to offend you. But you are a little harsh yourself calling achievements doped, without analysing pros and cons regarding the named athletes…
Saying that I will add that I can of course be wrong in my “think the majority of athletes must be considered clean” (I may have misjudged the pros and cons -hard to tell with so little hard facts / evidence). And you can be right -I don’t think I have any agenda here. I just see a lot of pros for regarding quite a few athletes clean… But we really don’t know…
I don’t think you lie about your broad experience regarding prevalence of doping, but I don’t think you can extrapolate that to every elite athlete… (But I miss a broader, detailed discussion about doping -with contributions from athletes, science, research, medicine ..)
The topic: I see 4,12 / 3,50 as sort of weak records -can of course have been doped, but don’t need to have been. My arguments: First the weakest -The Norwegian marathoner Grete Waitz still holds the national record in the 1500m 10 sec shy of the w-rec. She did her NR fifty years ago, without any talent for such a short distance, in a time period with very little doping, working full job as a teacher, in snowy / icy Norway pre treadmills, pre altitude camps, pre better shoes and tracks, pre so much more. -The 10 sec gap to the world record isn’t strange at all (should easily been 12-14 sec)…
My strongest argument: Comparing mens 1500ms development with womens. 8.13.1980 mens w-rec was 3,32,09 (Ovett, july same year). At this date in august Kazankina ran 3,52,47. So what then: Mens record bettered 6+ seconds, womens only 2,4 sec. as of today. Conclusion: Womens w-rec should nowadays been 3,46… And there’s more: Kazankina had far less competition than Ovett, so 3,52 may have been weak even in 1980.
Mile: We can debate how much to add from 1500m -let me say 16 sec (just to provoke); that gives 4,02.
Interesting post. The fact that so many women are close to the 1500m record does suggest that it is perhaps not as strong as we once thought (back when only the doped chinese were running those times), and interesting story about Grete.
Add 16sec for the extra 109.34 m is certainly provocative ... considering it is 3:39 pace! haha.
Thank you for nice words! And you are of course right -16 sec is laughable! But since you were patient enough to read my long post I will “reward “ you with another -self experienced- anecdote about Grete Waitz (and Ingrid Kristiansen). And even a second involving Seb Coe, his father and the Norwegian double threshold guru Marius Bakken…
It’s tempting to start the anecdotes with something from Gretes friendship with her fierce competitor Joan Benoit Samuelson, but in the Norwegian podcast “I det lange løp» (“In the long run”) one can (via vpn) hear a long interview about this -with Joan- in English of course… But in the same pod Marius Bakken gives an anecdote about him self and the Coes -in Norwegian. Here is an English extract: Marius went to England some years after Sebs retirement as an athlete, to be coached by Peter Coe. Marius was installed in Sebs old boys room, and being curious he got permission to read Sebs training diary… Well, Coes training was not suitable for Bakkens somewhat limited middle distance talent, so they gave up, and Marius thought of early retirement. But by coincidence he was transferred to the 5000m, and even sent to Kenya for altitude camp, and he used his eyes, and he used his brains, and his knowlegde as a medical doctor student (measuring lactate, hart rate, ++) and he then came up with “double threshold” (the basis for all the Ingebrigtsens training), and he himself ran 13,06 in the 5000m (I remember him as the best white behind the africans in that time period).
Anecdote 2: In the 1970s, as a teenager, I attended an athletics race in Oslo, Norway, where men and juniors and women were to run together (women 4 laps, men 5). -The stadium/ track was the main horse competition stadium in Norway; each lap ca 1000m, and the surface sand / gravel. Ok -I ran, and I wasn’t any good, not even national elite, but this race was my only together with Grete Waitz and Ingrid Kristiansen. -The former was well known in Norway, but hadn’t had her debut in the marathon, nor peaked at the track, and the latter was well known as a cross country skier, but only recently broken 9 min (3000m) as a runner. So I didn’t know I raced two stars in shaping -Grete: The first world champ in marathon/ multiple wins in worlds xc, 9 times winner of New York marathon, silver in the olympics. And Ingrid: World xc winner, 10000m world champ + the only woman to hold w-rec in 5000m, 10000m and marathon at the same time…
After 4 laps I turned my head and saw Grete and Ingrid ten meters behind me, fighting for the win. I didn’t see / remember who won. And I don’t remember my own placing. I only remember these two giants…
This post was edited 7 minutes after it was posted.
Kipyegon's best mile is 4:16, which she did 8 years ago. still a long long ways off, but as others have mentioned, breaking the 4 minute mile doesn't seem to be a priority in women's racing.
I'd just like to update this thread. The previous 1500m world record was equivalent to a 4:08.7 mile. Kipyegon's current record is now equivalent to a 4:07.9 mile.
BTW, there is no way Kipyegon or any woman who has run near 3.50 can run a 4.05 mile. That is like saying El G could run a 3.40-41 based on his 3.26 for the 1500. Women will slow further as the distance increases. (Indeed, in the Lovelock era, when the record was 3.47, there was over 20 secs difference between the 1500 and mile records - and the latter was run more often). Kipyegon's 3.50 may be worth about 4.10 at best, which is why the current record (by a 3.51 runner is 4.12 and nowhere near 4.05 - and never will be).
She just ran 4:07.64, further evidence the tables were indeed correct.
Or are you sticking to your guns and you believe she just ran the equivalent of 3:46 1500m?
BTW, there is no way Kipyegon or any woman who has run near 3.50 can run a 4.05 mile. That is like saying El G could run a 3.40-41 based on his 3.26 for the 1500. Women will slow further as the distance increases. (Indeed, in the Lovelock era, when the record was 3.47, there was over 20 secs difference between the 1500 and mile records - and the latter was run more often). Kipyegon's 3.50 may be worth about 4.10 at best, which is why the current record (by a 3.51 runner is 4.12 and nowhere near 4.05 - and never will be).
She just ran 4:07.64, further evidence the tables were indeed correct.
Or are you sticking to your guns and you believe she just ran the equivalent of 3:46 1500m?
I believe her mile record is as doped as her 1500 record. She has improved her mile best by 9 seconds. It is all beyond ridiculous.
This post was edited 28 seconds after it was posted.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.