arsi wrote:
Surely an endurance animal could go through the half 2mins slower than half mar PB and continue for the full marathon. 58.00 is certainly possible. Someone like Tadesse could take the marathon to a new level.
2hr thoning requires the ability to do 56 something for the half.
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz wrote:
What if the top ten men marathon runners hook up with the top 10 female marathon runners and each couple has 10 children. Then all of them move out into the country with various rolling hills and they aren't allowed to wear shoes. Then several coaches are employed to train the children as well as several people trained in brainwashing to make them believe they can break 2 hours or that they have already accomplished the feat. Those who grow and are not able to get anywhere close to the barrier or shot and then the process is repeated.
Aside from the 2 hour brainwashing, that's basically what has been happening for generations in certain parts of ethiopia and kenya. Although the parents might not have been runners, they certainly have had the genetics for it.
Now if you took the best of the best men and women kenyans and ethiopians and 'bred' them together for a few generations, well then I think that 2:02 might even be possible. Not 2 flat. Never.
Wonder if some legal supplement could be found in nature (Amazon rain forest?) that could increase glycogen stores beyond current levels. My understanding is right now there is only enough glycogen in the body for 90 minutes of running. Or a supplement to help burn fatty acids.
Also if a method of massage, meditation, brainwave training, or something could be developed to enable runners to train longer and harder and recover better.
I remember reading Renato's comment that he thought Geb would be a better marathoner if he ran more of his mileage easier. Is Geb doing that now?
Finally, I know Kelly Holmes was not a marathoner, but she had success with cross-training. Curious if elite marathoners other than Kempanian and Ingid K. (cross country ski cross-trainers) could benefit from a low-impact aerobic alternative.
Put it all together with the right genetics, attitude, coaching, and some luck and maybe 1:59.90 can happen.
Peter wrote:
Wonder if some legal supplement could be found in nature (Amazon rain forest?) that could increase glycogen stores beyond current levels. My understanding is right now there is only enough glycogen in the body for 90 minutes of running. Or a supplement to help burn fatty acids.
Also if a method of massage, meditation, brainwave training, or something could be developed to enable runners to train longer and harder and recover better.
I remember reading Renato's comment that he thought Geb would be a better marathoner if he ran more of his mileage easier. Is Geb doing that now?
Finally, I know Kelly Holmes was not a marathoner, but she had success with cross-training. Curious if elite marathoners other than Kempanian and Ingid K. (cross country ski cross-trainers) could benefit from a low-impact aerobic alternative.
Put it all together with the right genetics, attitude, coaching, and some luck and maybe 1:59.90 can happen.
No. No chance. Perhaps if they discover magic, then yes. Genetic engineering? Maybe. From natural means? no f'ng way.
We talk as if 2:04 is a routine performance. In fact, of the 8 performances of 2:05 or better, only Geb's 2:05 has come in the last three years. If anything, we're getting slower these days.
Running a very fast time isn't an easy thing to do. Running a great race is easier.
According to my calculation, the equivalent half marathon (of a 1:59.8 marathon) is 57.16, but that is strictly comparing the two in terms of equal energy use, and the marathon always involves the heat and dehydration factor, in addition to being able to supply the necessary energy for that duration of time. In terms of 10k equivalent I calculate 26:03, but that would have to be an accurate 10k on the same surface conditions on which the marathon would be run. I was asked some 40 years ago when we would see the first sub-2hr marathon and my answer was that we have to first break 1hr for the half. Now that has been done, but we still have a ways to go. Interestingly, using the same formula, I calculate that the women's marathon record is the best women's distance performance that currently exists -- track or road. So, that seems to suggest that the shorter distances should be better or that women lack some characteristic that affects the shorter, faster events more than it does the longer events (or you could say men lack some characteristic that prevents their longer events from equaling their shorter ones). By the way, that Lance prediction (someone came up with) was based on his lab (cycling) VO2max and that is not at all valid to use in predicting a running performance (nor is a lab running VO2max test valid for that prediction)
jtupper wrote:
According to my calculation, the equivalent half marathon (of a 1:59.8 marathon) is 57.16, but that is strictly comparing the two in terms of equal energy use, and the marathon always involves the heat and dehydration factor, in addition to being able to supply the necessary energy for that duration of time. In terms of 10k equivalent I calculate 26:03, but that would have to be an accurate 10k on the same surface conditions on which the marathon would be run. I was asked some 40 years ago when we would see the first sub-2hr marathon and my answer was that we have to first break 1hr for the half. Now that has been done, but we still have a ways to go. Interestingly, using the same formula, I calculate that the women's marathon record is the best women's distance performance that currently exists -- track or road. So, that seems to suggest that the shorter distances should be better or that women lack some characteristic that affects the shorter, faster events more than it does the longer events (or you could say men lack some characteristic that prevents their longer events from equaling their shorter ones). By the way, that Lance prediction (someone came up with) was based on his lab (cycling) VO2max and that is not at all valid to use in predicting a running performance (nor is a lab running VO2max test valid for that prediction)
One of the reasons I came to letsrun is because I heard you post here, Sir!
When will we know that we are near limits of human potential over the spectrum of distances? WRs rarely seem to get very old these days.
Johnson and Levis both ran 20 meters at the speed of 0.83 secs / 10 meters, finishing the 100 meter race in less than 10 seconds. This gives a speed of over 40 kilometers per hour, enough to break the 1 HOUR Marathon !! The only problem is to sustain this speed for longer distances - and for this we probably need some genetic engineering to devise the "perfect respiratory tract", or maybe just some special environment in which the athelte to spend most of their time. I believe the limit is somewhere around 56-57 minutes (I don't believe the sprinting cadence can be imporved much more).
NEver ever dudes
mr. answers wrote:
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz wrote:
What if the top ten men marathon runners hook up with the top 10 female marathon runners and each couple has 10 children. Then all of them move out into the country with various rolling hills and they aren't allowed to wear shoes. Then several coaches are employed to train the children as well as several people trained in brainwashing to make them believe they can break 2 hours or that they have already accomplished the feat. Those who grow and are not able to get anywhere close to the barrier or shot and then the process is repeated.
Aside from the 2 hour brainwashing, that's basically what has been happening for generations in certain parts of ethiopia and kenya. Although the parents might not have been runners, they certainly have had the genetics for it.
Now if you took the best of the best men and women kenyans and ethiopians and 'bred' them together for a few generations, well then I think that 2:02 might even be possible. Not 2 flat. Never.
No human is limited.
MarathonMind wrote:
Sub 2:04 will be a huge, if not impossible barrier itself.
I do think we may see a 2:03 something, but we will all be old and gray by then.
Ron Hill thought 2:03 was the ultimate, if you want another knowledgable perspective.
Geb 2 years later: "Hold my beer"