ooh good article, I wonder if they saw that from the study I posted on drafting
that shoe upgrade is absolutely ridiculous and I don't understand why people don't accept that someone who learned how to properly use alphafly could run much faster than vaporfly even if they refused to look at the shoe studies
(and again, the alphafly should never have been allowed in racing regardless of what people think of plates or not)
Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
While there are no studies that have directly compared Nike’s Vaporfly 2 to the Alphagly 3 (or whicever prototype Chepngetich may have been wearing), we cannot undermine the impact shoe technology has on performance these days, especially at the elite level where every percent advantage matters.
there are studies that compare the vaporfly v2 to the alphafly v2
Purpose: Determine the effects of advanced footwear technology (AFT) in track spikes and road-racing shoes on running economy (RE). Methods: Four racing shoes (3 AFT and 1 control) and 3 track spikes (2 AFT and 1 control) wer...
Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
”what’s objective data but a collection of single minded biases founded on multiple assumptions? Isn’t day dreaming or wild imagination just as lucky as objective thinking?”
Usually it's morons like you who casually bandy that term around. It shows you're too lazy to actually think. You prefer slogans.
Coevett has a history of racist posts that goes back almost a decade. That you defend him shows you are a vile racist too. You are disgusting.
Letter from RF King to you:
“Coevett has done handsome work on LRC in the past decade by bringing to light far superior subjective insights and thoughts into doping in much the same way armstrongliv has achieved. Coevett is a fine English gentlemen with humble English origins and would never hate on another race. He may dislike Hicham El Guerrouj, but that can be persuaded out of him.”
Biology eh? So you don't understand running economy either?
So funny that the Kenyan doping apologists here say that any white guy like Jakob who runs as fast as Africans must be doped, but they've spent the last week claiming we're racist for being suspicious of a woman from a country with 400 doping busts running as fast as men.
Your racism exists independently of allegations regarding Ruth. Your racism is something you carry with you. But you have been proven correct about a huge doping problem in Kenya. This doesn’t have anything to do with your racism.
BS. The accusations about racism are based solely on his identifying the African doping problem.
“That’s correct Armstrong!!!!!!! An African doping problem is not an African color problem!!!!!!!!!!”
I feel it is absolutely possible that the sub 2:10 is clean. The shoes and the pacing for sure were an insane advantage. Basically the women's record almost got the conditions of Kipchoge's 1:59:40 (drafting, shoes etc) plus I guess finally the women have roughly the same conditions and motivation to train in Kenya as the men.
What I still struggle to understand is that she went out at 93.3 percent of the 5k world record and at 95.5 % of the 10k world record, what would be like 13:28 and 27:25 for a man plus the half marathon split would be like a man going out in 58:something and still came home within 3 minutes of the half maratjon WR. You'd expect her to run at least 62ish, 28:30ish, 13:45ish. I do not talk the exact 3k and 1500 times that are needed for this (although we all know it... it is in the WR range).
If the 2:09:56 is legit we should see a relatively harsh drop in the 3k - HM times soon because even as pure strength based runner she at least has to be able to run sub 14 and I believe there are faster 5k runners.
“Excuse me Pikachu sir!!!!! Make up your mind pls. Don’t tell us you think it’s clean and then says the reasons why it shouldn’t be!!!!”
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.
this is blatant.
“Both the King of Physics and you are correct to identify 2022 as the year she started doping. She basically decided to follow in the footsteps of Eliud Kipchoge, Faith Kipyegon etc”
I wouldn't call this a data-driven analysis. It just says drafting helps, shoes help, and she's at the right age for peak marathon performance.
One thing nobody seems to be discussing when they suggest that this is plausible is the weather. It was not ideal. It was around 58-60 and humid, with direct sunlight for a lot of the race. You can just see from the photos that the athletes were sweating profusely. Now, 60 isn't terrible, and Chepngetich is tiny, but the conditions were way better in 2023.
Agreed. The shoe bonus wasn't estimated, and the weather ignored, and the drafting bonus exaggerated:
"By drafting optimally, such a runner could save between 3 minutes 42 seconds and 5 minutes 29 seconds over the course of a marathon."
Then she had 2 pacers now (far from "drafting optimally", see Kipchoge), and 1 pacer last time who didn't last as long (much better than nothing). So the data driven analysis goes with "only considering taking three minutes off", to bring the 2:14:18 down to 2:11:00 (actually that's 3:18, not just three minutes, but who is counting).
A proper analysis would also include whether or not the 2:14:18 was "believable".
I think it's really shameful that Burfoot and other journalists made those doping allegations with zero evidence, but this is the world we are living in now, I guess. It's one thing for people to spout off online in a message board or comments section with their suspicions, but when a member of the press does this it gives me pause.
I think it's really shameful that Burfoot and other journalists made those doping allegations with zero evidence, but this is the world we are living in now, I guess. It's one thing for people to spout off online in a message board or comments section with their suspicions, but when a member of the press does this it gives me pause.
Why is it shameful? You say there is zero evidence but there is plenty of evidence. The evidence may not persuade you but it is there nonetheless. Are you expecting a confession? Are you expecting Ruth to grow a beard? What evidence are you thinking might materialize?
I think it's really shameful that Burfoot and other journalists made those doping allegations with zero evidence, but this is the world we are living in now, I guess. It's one thing for people to spout off online in a message board or comments section with their suspicions, but when a member of the press does this it gives me pause.
Why is it shameful? You say there is zero evidence but there is plenty of evidence. The evidence may not persuade you but it is there nonetheless. Are you expecting a confession? Are you expecting Ruth to grow a beard? What evidence are you thinking might materialize?
Amby Burfoot wrote "I have no evidence that Chepngetich cheated".
Why is it shameful? You say there is zero evidence but there is plenty of evidence. The evidence may not persuade you but it is there nonetheless. Are you expecting a confession? Are you expecting Ruth to grow a beard? What evidence are you thinking might materialize?
Amby Burfoot wrote "I have no evidence that Chepngetich cheated".
Yes I know that Amby wrote that. I am not Amby. When I see a car speeding egregiously, I generally cannot see their speedometer. It is like Potter Stewart said about obscenity: “I know it when I see it.” Is it guaranteed proof? No but it is not nothing either. Do you have evidence that most people cannot reason well? It is clear they cannot but providing the proof might take some labor. But there is some evidence for it.
Amby Burfoot wrote "I have no evidence that Chepngetich cheated".
Yes I know that Amby wrote that. I am not Amby. When I see a car speeding egregiously, I generally cannot see their speedometer. It is like Potter Stewart said about obscenity: “I know it when I see it.” Is it guaranteed proof? No but it is not nothing either. Do you have evidence that most people cannot reason well? It is clear they cannot but providing the proof might take some labor. But there is some evidence for it.
You wanted to know why it is shameful.
He wrote what he wrote while in his mind he had no evidence. It's one thing if "Tcid" writes it in a forum, but someone of his visibility and stature and name recognition gives it an extra weight not supported by the evidence, even in his own mind.
