5000m World Record Splits: A Progression

LM wrote:

Gebremeskel ran 12:46 closing in 54, it's clear he can run low 12:40s in a more even race.

But he never ran close to this time ever again, it looks like this was a one off. If he showed this potential over 1500m, 3,000m, 2 miles, or 10,000m as well I would agree with your claim but there is no such claim.

casual obsever wrote:

dfjh wrote:

You really talk out of your ass if you think those 7 tenths are not HUGE over 800m.

+1

On the other hand, the next best white guy is still a Russian from the EPO era (2001), 7 tenth slower than Coe. Goes to show how much unlimited roids and blood doping helps over 800 m, see also the ladies' 1:53 from the dirty 80s.

Now with seriously limited roids, and somewhat limited EPO, no whitey can come close to those times anymore.

Well, we can always chalk that up to more coincidences of course. No worries, fanbois.

++1

This. You'd have to be a member of the KKK to think that a white middle-class English boy could run faster than any Kenyan ever born except for the 800 EPO king of the 90s and a stupendous athlete of today with a suspicious biological profile. The Soviet regime of the 80s were pumping Coe full of every steroid known at that time, and a few that weren't. Coe had muscles coming out of his muscles by the end of 78. It's a known fact that Ovett was about to barge past Coe in the home straight of the 1500m in Moscow but he took one look at Coe's biceps and feared he'd get a whack! Coe ran TWELVE SECONDS FASTER than Kratochvílová who was literally a walking steroid and you're telling me Coe wasn't juiced to the gills. You just to look at their physiques. Coe barely ever lifted a weight and yet his ridiculous muscularity even makes Kratochvílová look like a female waif.

Reasons why Coe ran a second faster than any other white guy and only a 2 or 3 Kenyans (leaving aside obvious cheats like Amos).

1/ A phenomenal outlier of an athlete.

2/ Timing and a bit of luck. Guys like Ivo Van Damme killing themselves weeks after winning two silvers at age 22. Juantoreno running 1:43 WR and Olympic Gold in his first 800m year then developing career ending injury problems the next. Ovett moving up to the 1500m, Wottle ending his career through injury a year after running 1:43 and winning gold in 72 at 22. Cram never really focusing on the 800m. Having said that, Coe could clearly have ran even faster. You'd have to have your head in your ass not to admit that if Coe spent the entire 81 season trying to break 1:41 he would have done it or got very close - and that was three decades ago. However, Coe (and Ovett etc) had the benefit of some awesome middle-distance runners having their careers curtailed immediately before them, and then ending their careers just when the Afro EPO experiment began and white kids got disheartened, lazy, obese etc or moved into a sport like football which pays 10,000 times more.

Seriously, if Coe, Ovett, Cram, Walker, Scott etc were all juiced up blood doped up, why weren't the British and European runners of the 90s faster, many of whom had comparable junior records such as Yates, Curtis Robb etc? Were they more ethical than the white runners that preceeded them and refused to take EPO even though the rest of the world clearly were, or is a more likely explanation that guys like Robb, Sharpe, Yates etc simply lost motivation when Africans started EPOing themselves to the gills to run 3:26 without catching breath? In fact, that's not a more likely explanation, it's exactly what happened and you could probably ask them and they'd tell you that.

As far as Borzakovskiy is concerned, I have no idea if he doped. Pretty sure a large number of white guys from the 70s and 80s could have ran low 1:42 with the higher general standard of times in the early 2000s. Your racist argument is thin and incoherent in the extreme if the case for black genetic superiority rests on Seb Coe running significantly faster in the 800m thirty years ago.

C'mon man!...are you serious? Coe's "ridiculous muscularity even makes Kratochvílová look like a female waif." Say what? ? In that photo you posted of Coe he's got skinny biceps, rounded shoulders with no deltoid development, no trap muscles, etc....a typical slender built elite mid-d runner. OTOH, that beast mode Kratochvilova (any relation to Roger Daltry?) is more muscular than half the guys at the gym I lift at! Seriously...get your eyes checked. ?

I didn't cherry pick one specific race -- all of the grand tours, and many one day events, involve the same athletes. All of the "narratives" about doping in cycling involve just the grand tours, and not by my choice. If you mean other cycling events like track cycling, where there are simply no narratives, no long controversial discussions about doping prevalence, and no amazing world records. As far as I can tell, no one really talks about these other events. Even if we focus on my phrasing of "somehow linked" we still see great differences in the narratives. In cycling "somehow linked" means caught, confessed, or client of a known doping doctor. But for running, the meaning of "somehow linked" gets weakened and stretched to encompass suspicion and allegations that have never gone anywhere and never go any further. These require very different interpretations of "somehow linked", with the running interpretation being stretched, becoming much broader and wider, in a feeble attempt to try and argue that cycling and running are the same. If we apply cycling's interpretation to running, then we lose the link to Aden, Berardelli, Salazar, Mutai, Kiprop, Keitany, of course Rupp and Farah again, naturally Radcliffe. We lose Dr. Brown and Dr. Healing Hans. Your narrative with examples of "Mourhit, Jeptoo, Sumgong, Baumann, Slaney, Shobukhova, Kisorio, for starters" do not lead us to the same kinds of narratives in cycling where 60% or more of cyclists in the top 10 were caught, confessed, or clients of known doping doctors. You still seem to have a limited ability to comprehend, always thinking every discussion is about "runners are as dirty as cyclists". Now we are talking about how the narratives between the two sports are different. Include any and all runners you want -- using the same criteria and definitions in both sports, we simply don't find the same depth of doping in the best performers, except in selected events where steroids are known to provide benefits. Another big difference in narratives, is that running had the emergence of and nearly complete domination by East Africans, while cycling did not. It's simple-minded to find some similarities to argue that everything is the same, while ignoring blatant differences.

Subway, these are my answers to your questions :

a) Yes, Cova used self transfusion till 1985, when officially the practice was considered doping. Cova never went in altitude.

Antibo, as Cova, used self transfusion till 1984. He never went in altitude till that year. Both of them, plus Panetta, had long periods of training in Finland, at sea level, while preparing WCh and Olymnpics.

When in 1985 Antibo quitted that practice, he started to go altitude, every year with more frequency, and started to improve every PB, finally training CLEAN. The best Antibo ever was in 1990, when he won ECh going alone in 59" in the first lap in 10000m, and won 5000m in spite to lose about 15" falling down at the start, and losing one shoe.

For everybody knowing his situation, it was clear altitude worked very much better than self transfusion.

b) There are "no responders" to blood doping, exactly as there are "no responders" to any type of medicine. Quit the idea that the individual behavior about EXTERNAL INTERVENTIONS (of any type) is a perfect "trend". Our behavior in case of external forces depends on a lot of factors, the most part of them till now never investigated in scientific way.

c) NO. I repeated several times : a marathon runner able running 2:10 after self transfusion can run 2:08 in clean way, if his training is in the right direction. Put in your mind that the training of doped athletes, and the training of clean athletes, are not the same. With self transfusion it's possible to have a SHORTCUT for reaching maybe 90% of the individual Aerobic Power, but nothing more for reaching 100%, and no self transfusions, nor EPO, nor other blood manipulations can have effect during the SPECIFIC PERIOD. The ability to develop the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE in the right way depends on training in altitude only, where we can observe physiological variations that EPO is not able to produce.

d) You do know that many politicians were caught for corruption ? You do know that many priests were caught for pedophilia ? You do know that many VIP are attacked for sexual harassement ? For you this mean that ALL the politicians are corrupted, ALL the priests are pedophile, and all the VIP are fundamentally pigs ?

How is it possible to think that, when we have ONE athlete in top 100 in the all time list in the marathon caught for doping, THIS is the rule, and the other 99 are OF COURSE DOPED, but were so smart, or so scientifically supported, that they are CASUALLY CLEAN in spite of the fact they MUST BE DOPED (otherwise, how is it possible they can run so fast ?).

So, the most stupid question is : IF TYSON GAY WAS DOPED, HOW IS POSSIBLE USAIN BOLT, WHO WAS FASTER THAN HIM, WAS CLEAN ?

Tell me Subway : if Bach, Wagner, Verdi, Rossini, started to produce their masterpieces when 40 or 50, how is possible Mozart was already able to compone incredible music when was 5 years old ?

Never did you hear to speak about TALENT ?

e) During a Marathon, especially in bad weather conditions (for example, during WCh or OG that are in full Summer), runners sweat a lot, losing mineral salts together with water, and changing their hydrosalin balance. If they are athletes with high viscosity (that means LESS PLASMA), losing the mosr part of liquids means their concentration of Hct becomes very high, and the blood circulation is rallented during the race, because of the increasing peripheral resistance. This means, at the end of the day, THAT THE QUANTITY OF OXYGEN TRANSPORTED TO THE MUSCLE FIBERS DECREASES, that is the opposite of what the obsessed by EPO think, and is exactly one of the reasons because, DURING THE RACE, speaking about Marathon, EPO CAN BE DAMAGEOUS FOR THE PERFORMANCE.

f) I'm not able to answers this question.

g) WADA doesn't ban a substance because is beneficial for Marathon Runners, but when thinks can be beneficial for EVERY TYPE OF EVENT. I never said self transfusion, or EPO, couldn't give advantages in races where the effort is SUPERIOR THE LEVEL OF VO2 MAX (duration UNDER 10'). But it seems that, for people in LR, everything instead is referred to LONGER distances, starting from 5000m (10000m, HM and Marathon).

The fact is exactly that, with very high viscosity, in events of SHORT DURATION the quantity of transported Oxygen in the unity of time is more important than the TOTAL QUANTITY of Oxygen transported during the duration of all the race, because the velocity of the circulation is not affected too much, looking at the power requested by the heart for pushing blood in the circle. But, because this higher effort of the heart, the same becomes TIRED very early, doing and EXTRA WORK for pushing the blood, and reduces the pulsatory level, step by step.

I can give an example, which probably can help you to understand :

You have a bike with very hard gear (for example, 55 x 12) : YOU CAN REACH HIGHER SPEED, BUT CAN MAINTAIN IT FOR SHORT TIME ONLY, BECAUSE YOUR MUSCLES BECOME VERY TIRED SINCE THE EFFORT IS MAXIMAL.

If you want to have the best possible distribution of your effort in duration, you need to have a less hard gear (53 x 13, for example), you apply LESS energy every time, and you can last longer at your MAX AVERAGE SPEED.

With increased viscosity, and increased ability to transport Oxygen (but at the same time increased viscosity), WE ASK OUR HEART A SUPPLEMENTARY EFFORT, REDUCING THE POSSIBILITY OF DURATION AT THE SAME LEVEL.

That's the reason because, longer is the race, more important is to reduce the PERIFERAL RESISTANCE in the blood circulation, and is also the reason because, LONGER IS THE RACE, LESS EPO WORKS.

Regarding the test of WADA, it's better to put a pitiful sheet on their affordability. It's enough to read again the most stupid test ever (the one giving EPO to 15 Kenyan boys with average 9'30" in 3000m, and to 15 Scottish boys with average of 11'),

for discovering that "In spite of the international coach Renato Canova wrote, that EPO doesn't work with Kenyans, this experiment shows also with them EPO works") for understanding how they look for smoke and not for roast (I have still to understand if they don't know anything, or if are not honest and want to cheat people believing in their NO SCIENTIFIC STUPIDITIES, because antidoping is a big BUSINESS for all people involved).

If Meldonium was produced in US or in UK, 100% that NEVER was considered doping (NEVER that was some research regarding that medicine).

h) Already I answered in other threads, and in the point d). You can beat a WR only with extra-category athletes, how were Gebre, Komen, Bekele, Shaheen, Dibaba, Defar, and now Ayana. We have some of extra level in the women field, not in the men field, at the moment. The fact Jenny Simpson, living in altitude, never was able to run in 3'50", is, excuse me the word, a "bullshit", because presumes that she had the same talent of who was able to run in 3'50", and this is not true, how the analysis of ALL her career clearly shows. I live in altitude 300 days per year, but this is not a reason enough because I can run, at my age, faster that the WR for the Master category over 70 years....

Thank you Mr.Canova.

I appreciate your insight and thought provoking points. The dogs here at Letsrun will tear you apart, but you made some interesting observations that should certainly be considered.

Nothing is black or white, so people need to stop making definitive judgement calls.

Fair enough I confused you a little with the two black power trolls who posted before you, one of which you stated you agreed with.

The fact that EPO works better for longer distances and that he 800m has only improved marginally would be evidence that EPO was a factor in times in the 90s.

Just take a comparison between rankings in 2004 and 2016. It's easy to say that all the top runners could have ran faster if they wanted to. It's odd that Mo Farah, a guy whose PB is indeed something like over a second a lap slower than the guys were running in 2004 has dominated the event for the last 6 years because his rivals can't outkick him in slow races, and yet they are supposedly capable of running 12:37 'if they really wanted to'. Oh well, then again Mo Farah could also run sub 12:40 'if he could be bothered'.

12 years of marginal progress in any number of areas and yet the elite are running MUCH slower. The population of Kenya and Ethiopia has almost doubled in that time so theoretically there should be maybe 10 - 20 million extra demographic for elite runners to emerge from. GDP has also increased massively in both countries, meaning better infrastructure, health care, nutrition etc. Oh yea, doping testing has improved also...a little.

This year only two Africans ran faster than David Moorcroft did 35 years ago, and neither were Kenyans. Moorcroft, great athlete, but essentially only a 5000m runner like most of that period because he couldn't compete with the very best Europeans, Americans, Austrolasians at 1500m. (and that's another red flag - why were so many great 1500/5000m runners around the EPO era if it had nothing to do with EPO??)

I Have A Kenyan Toy Boy wrote:

The Soviet regime of the 80s were pumping Coe full of every steroid known at that time, and a few that weren't. Coe had muscles coming out of his muscles by the end of 78.

Nice parody, but just in case:

Newsflash 1: it wasn't just the Soviets who doped in the 80s.

Newsflash 2: steroids weren't necessarily used to get bulging muscles. Look at convicted steroid drug cheats a la Slaney and Baumann.

Newsflash 3: the older a record, the more suspicious, as records are expected to improve along with improving training, technology and nutrition.

As for the missing world records on track cycling, start here:

Again, you are picking this one picture of part of the male TdF history, with emphasis on history. The 60%+ wouldn't work in this decade, and it won't work with other cycling events. As you might recall, the original statement compared doping in cycling in general with doping in running in general. But you chose the dirtiest cycling competition (TdF), and wanted to exclude some of the dirtier running competitions (sprints, women mid-d).

If I pick in turn the history of the male 100 m sprinters of the same decade, arguably a flagship of running, I actually get worse results.

Actually, what was the original statement? I thought, with my abilities (thank you for your insult, again), that this was about doping, and judging by your first response, so did you:

casual obsever wrote:

I Have A Kenyan Toy Boy wrote:

The Soviet regime of the 80s were pumping Coe full of every steroid known at that time, and a few that weren't. Coe had muscles coming out of his muscles by the end of 78.

Nice parody, but just in case:

Newsflash 1: it wasn't just the Soviets who doped in the 80s.

Newsflash 2: steroids weren't necessarily used to get bulging muscles. Look at convicted steroid drug cheats a la Slaney and Baumann.

Newsflash 3: the older a record, the more suspicious, as records are expected to improve along with improving training, technology and nutrition.

The fact that Soviet bloc athletes did clearly dope their athletes to the gills (and we know for certain because of East German Stasi files that were found) and yet their 800m runners did not dominate like their

1 - If everyone doped back then what exactly is your point? So everybody doped back then, but Coe was an especially good 'responder'? Meanwhile Africans are the only group who don't dope, despite their countries being far more corrupt, far more lax (or non-existant) with doping, and having far more financial incentive. Is is this the 'noble savage' myth for the 21st century? Or everybody has always doped, and clearly Africans had EPO when Europeans before 1990 didn't, and yet these naturally superior runners still run barely faster than Europeans 40 years ago? And if everybody was juiced to the gills on steroids back then, west Europeans as much as East Europeans, why didn't the likes of Kathy Cooke look like the East Germans and Czechs, and why didn't the Brits dominate female middle-distance running where obviously steroids have a greater effect?

2 - You can't pick and choose whether steroids will give you big muscles. Coe was a pioneer in weight lifting for distance runners, before him it was considered that it would you you down or add unnecessary weight. Yet he was one of the most slender white runners of all time. If his success was due to shovelling steroids down his throat, believe me, he would have put on muscle. His mileage wasn't that high.

3 - Yes, but I've already explained why Coe's time is so relatively freakish. Also I'd add that the 800m is the one event in which whites have always performed best at, even in the current era of African domination. The most likely explanation is that it's it's the least benefited from peds, either steroids or EPO/blood doping, at least with regards men's 800m. White running has declined across the board since it's peak in the 80's and I've already given a list of reasons why - declining population (esp young), less active children, less independent children, competing sports esp premiership football, decline in popularity of athletics (when Coe was starting it was second only to football in the UK and much of Europe), and the sudden emergence of hordes of cheating Africans juiced with EPO. As well as being one of the greatest athletes of all time, Coe was a bit lucky in being amongst the first generation of runners who could train and compete full time with some financial incentives, and the last generation of European runners who had the benefits of a healthy independent childhood without the distractions of video games, the internet, and other far more lucrative sports to be diverted into (as well as the message repeatedly forced down their throats by ebony fetishists that Kenyans are simply more 'naturally talented' so its a waste of time choosing running).

New study on rHuEPO & endurance exercise just published this month:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29113535

And it's not just EPO/blood doping anymore. "AICAR" has been around for few years now and is very difficult to detect as it's hard to differentiate it from the naturally produced form of the body. AICAR, an endurance enhancer, doesn't involve the hematological pathways and therefore would not affect the current module of the ABP:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25179079

And HIFs (e.g., FG4592) are becoming an emerging ESA, which apparently doesn't trigger any profound alterations in the ABP:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26808067

ukathleticscoach wrote:And one more thing.

Mo did have the perfect pacer in that race- Kiprop!

is this a joke ???

pacing means only 1 thing :

drafting

where on earth was Asbel 1 stride ahead of mo to offer drafting ???

If he was capable of the times you mentioned he could have just slotted in behind Kiprop

you really have no clue about the race

i'll keep it simple for you

pacer went out in 53.7 !!

Asbel followed it but mo certainly shoudn't & didn't & never got close to Asbel as gap got too big as mo was draftless

once more you show no idea at all of track

you really have no clue

mo was shellshocked from magnitude of race

the 1st 3'26 race for 13y !!!

is this beyond you ??

no

it's not

you have no clue about physics of drafting

drafting worth ~0.7s/lap & for 2.75 laps to bell it is ~ 2s

how rubbish are you truly at math ???

2s quicker than 3'28.9 is 3'26.9

the distance to find is :

(1500/3'28.9) * 3'26.9 from 1500 = 14.36m

which is to be from drafting upto bell which is 5.22m

learn some basic, yes very very basic math

which if drafted perfectly to bell wouda been 1.9s quicker meaning 3'27.0

this off non-ideal splits of 54.8 !/56.3/56.9/40.9, the last 300 being at 54.5 !! pace

mo that day in perfect even paced, drafted to bell race was

~ 3'26.5 / 3'26.75

uppity wrote:

wtfunny wrote:

LOL ... indeed .. 40m my a$$

Pretty much this. Ramzi obviously doped, but this was just not a strong race. 53.15, especially with Ramzi only wide on turn 1, is really not that special of a finish. Everybody else just wasn't on their game.

no

ramzi expended too much energy unnecessarily in that totally outrageous prelim when experienced observers believed meant field shoudn't have even bothered to turn up for next round

that cost him even more decisive win in final

LM wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

And one more thing.

Mo did have the perfect pacer in that race- Kiprop!

If he was capable of the times you mentioned he could have just slotted in behind Kiprop.

Missed this part. In truth, he probably should have. I suspect he didn't realize he could run anywhere near 3:28 at this point, and thus didn't because he was afraid...or perhaps the hot start spooked him off, as he did basically maintain the gap at 3-4m for a large portion of the race.

as you realise this was 2nd of his 3'28s

mo obviously terrified when saw pacer out in 53.7 !!

best then as he did to stay within his remit

however, if he'd dared to get behind Asbel by 400, the drafting offered to bell wouda definitely got him into 3'27s, albeit he wouda crumbled slowly on last lap

mo that day was in 3'26.5 / 3'26.75 shape

Asbel was however still worth somewhat lot quicker

his splits were poor with

54.1 !!/56.4/55.2 with last 300 run at 54.76 !! pace

the problem was runt of pacer immediately ahead

the runt was about 1/2 foot shorter than Asbel !!!

to offer any possibilty of perfect drafting, wabbit shoud be 1/2 foot taller

imagine if Lebron wanted to run a solo flat-out 1500 ???!!!

how much quicker woud that clocking be if paced to bell by vern troyer ???

compounding nonsense size of wabbit for Asbel was fact he was finished long before bell when job is to run it upto bell strongly

ukathleticscoach wrote:

LM wrote:

Missed this part. In truth, he probably should have. I suspect he didn't realize he could run anywhere near 3:28 at this point, and thus didn't because he was afraid...or perhaps the hot start spooked him off, as he did basically maintain the gap at 3-4m for a large portion of the race.

Your assertion that Bekele has a faster change of pace than Farah but is somehow slower over 400m does not make sense. It's possible of course but for a distance runner much more likely the other way round.

Farah big chance against Bekele would be go for a move 2-3 laps out and that is backed up by a superior 1500 time

no

learn to comprehend significance of kennster's 3 serious 1500s in '06 & or '07 when he wanted to test out possible move to it

2 of them on youtube & i of course saw all 3 including the 3rd not on youtube where he disgracefully moved out into lane 3 preventing kaouch from overtaking him on outside

kennster got hammered in pretty quick races & never broke 3'32

crushed by choge & komen-2

pacing was poor, but kennster was never ever going to break 3'30 off his 5k/10k training

mo was in 3'26.5/3'26.75 shape off his 5k/10k training

use some logic

who therefore wouda had faster basic 400 ???

he didn't run 53 in 1st lap, pacer did

in mo's 3'28.9, pacer also ran opener 53 !!

mo however hung onto 3'28, kennster only 3'32 or 3'33

kennster gets 0 advantage over mo for pacer opener

that means little

it actually compliments mo if he can finish same last lap in fastish 5 or 10k when it's known he hasn't 26'17, but certainly looked to have 26'25 - 26'30 at peak

because kennster has got crushed by chebbii & songok & bernie in last laps of fast 5ks

no

3'30-flat

7'19

12'34

26'10

he was never ever going to break 3'30 off 5k/10k training unlike mo who coud

kennster couda had slight possibilty of running 3'28 at his peak shape but only if he had switched 100% to 1500 training for at least 1 year before & more like 2 or 3

no chance 3'28 ever off his 5k/10k training

calculo wrote:

no

learn to comprehend significance of kennster's 3 serious 1500s in '06 & or '07 when he wanted to test out possible move to it

2 of them on youtube & i of course saw all 3 including the 3rd not on youtube where he disgracefully moved out into lane 3 preventing kaouch from overtaking him on outside

kennster got hammered in pretty quick races & never broke 3'32

crushed by choge & komen-2

pacing was poor, but kennster was never ever going to break 3'30 off his 5k/10k training

mo was in 3'26.5/3'26.75 shape off his 5k/10k training

use some logic

who therefore wouda had faster basic 400 ???

I don't think Bekele ever seriously considered a move to the 1500m (although if you have any proof of that, i would be interested in seeing it). His best time was in the Shanghai 1500m which correct me if i'm wrong was early in the season and I think more of a speed training race. Mo's fast times were at the end of the season at Monaco when you could argue he was in better shape than early in the season races that Bekele had.

I still don't buy Mo was in sub 3:27 shape. He was lucky enough to be in 2 fast races with Kiprop couldn't go out fast enough to stay with the lead pacers....that's on him if he didn't go with the pacers and a reflection of his ability. Also you are downplaying the aspect of still chasing people in front you whether or not he's getting an actual draft. Bekele lost his 1500ms in the last straightaway but none of his races were under 3:30 so never know how he would have done. watching Mo's races, i find it hard to believe that Bekele in his prime would have been dropped in those races