Or maybe everyone should be required to run in leather spikes with leather shoes on cinder tracks?
I see your point but this is a potentially interesting idea. Look at a sport like tennis where the players have tournaments on cement, clay, grass, or asphalt surfaces on courts that are basically the same dimensions. Maybe reintroducing the older track surfaces such as cinders or grass alongside the current surfaces could give the sport a wider appeal? You could have a whole bunch of other world records to be targeted and shoe companies could be developing shoes/spikes to be best adapted to each of the surfaces. Employment opportunities for track surface maintenance would also increase.
These threads are a vain and even desperate effort to avoid uncomfortable truths about the sport. It's got to be anything but not doping! Why wouldn't American athletes not dope? They want to succeed - and the rest of the sport is doping.
I agree with you. Doping is the main protagonist as athletes should not perform well when they are radiated by microwaves rads from telecommunications systems. A quick check on ‘antenna search’ website in downtown Manhattan where millrose indoor arena is shows at least 50 different bands within 300 feet. This should slow down athletes drastically and if it doesn’t then they must be doing drugs.
Or maybe everyone should be required to run in leather spikes with leather shoes on cinder tracks?
I see your point but this is a potentially interesting idea. Look at a sport like tennis where the players have tournaments on cement, clay, grass, or asphalt surfaces on courts that are basically the same dimensions. Maybe reintroducing the older track surfaces such as cinders or grass alongside the current surfaces could give the sport a wider appeal? You could have a whole bunch of other world records to be targeted and shoe companies could be developing shoes/spikes to be best adapted to each of the surfaces. Employment opportunities for track surface maintenance would also increase.
Not a single top American ran at us xc nationals each year and in a world where xc is traditionally a foundation base for the track season it’s very surprising Fisher at least is successful at the outdoor 5 and 10k. Even Reyes Esteves used to be crazy about xc as a 1500m runner. He was regularly participating in world xc 12km races every single year of his professional career. I suspect these athletes avoiding other surfaces is due much to trying to maximise gains from using drugs on the track.
If there's "more depth" now then that must mean more athletes are involved in the sport than the past. How does that figure with running declining in relation to major sports as well as the proliferation of niche sports? Most people outside running have no idea who the athletes are that are routinely discussed on these threads. Running is now a "niche" sport. That doesn't create "depth".
Populations keep increasing, so even with a stagnant percentage of participation it means more people doing it. The bigger factor though is more people going 'all in' on running. It's known in all sports that more high schoolers are single sport athletes now than 'back in the day'. More people are doing top level training for a much longer chunk of their life. Starting at 14 years of age doing big time training, plus increased usage of red-shirt seasons in NCAA. Plus covid year. Plus the increase of post-collegiate training groups. Even in other countries life has gotten easier such that people can train more and focus less on getting a job. More people going all in means more people near the best in the world.
It is also well known that diversifying different sports is what made you really good in the end as it build all round strength and resilience. What you are saying about specialising at a young age is complete BS. You are making it up. The research shows you can’t be very good if you do this and you will burn out an athlete.
Then when has life ever gotten easier? With wars, inflation and climate change you are living in delusion. Again trying to find an excuse as ‘not doping’ when it clearly is.
Yes, Hobbs Kessler is nearly 2 seconds better at the mile than El Guerrouj! Strand is a better miler as well!
Why does this bother you so much? I look forward to seeing how fast everyone runs outdoors, arent you? I've had the privilege of watching the sport improve for over six decades.
"Track is good!" shouted Mike Goodman, an enthusiastic young runner from Easter Michigan in the mid '70s.
What are your credentials? If you are not bothered with how doped this sport is, you have betrayed it and you know it.
If there's "more depth" now then that must mean more athletes are involved in the sport than the past. How does that figure with running declining in relation to major sports as well as the proliferation of niche sports? Most people outside running have no idea who the athletes are that are routinely discussed on these threads. Running is now a "niche" sport. That doesn't create "depth".
Populations keep increasing, so even with a stagnant percentage of participation it means more people doing it. The bigger factor though is more people going 'all in' on running. It's known in all sports that more high schoolers are single sport athletes now than 'back in the day'. More people are doing top level training for a much longer chunk of their life. Starting at 14 years of age doing big time training, plus increased usage of red-shirt seasons in NCAA. Plus covid year. Plus the increase of post-collegiate training groups. Even in other countries life has gotten easier such that people can train more and focus less on getting a job. More people going all in means more people near the best in the world.
Jakob’s success is the rarity than the norm. Started running since 9 and didn’t do other sports. Had emotional and mental torture from a dictator dad and yet still succeeded. He is 1 in 100 million who can withstand specialisation at a young age but the rest of the kids all loss steam and dropped out in their adulthood.
Why does this bother you so much? I look forward to seeing how fast everyone runs outdoors, arent you? I've had the privilege of watching the sport improve for over six decades.
"Track is good!" shouted Mike Goodman, an enthusiastic young runner from Easter Michigan in the mid '70s.
What are your credentials? If you are not bothered with how doped this sport is, you have betrayed it and you know it.
A lot has been said about it being easier to succeed in whatever in the last few years after the massive 5g roll out communication and internet services but hey with every action there is always an equal and opposite counter effect. this would be the physical and psychological toll of being both connected always online and being directly xposed to its harmful radiation. Easier to succeed? Seems like it’s stuck at equilibrium like always. There is no difference between 1998 and 2025. Athletes took whatever advantages and disadvantages from the same pot. They just switched one thing out for another from same pot. Nothing to see here.
Better coaching, training, sharing of training information, AND being able to watch other elites/collegiates training/racing 24/7 online.
Every event, the knowledge is here online 24/7.
Are future 21XXers(and beyond) going to be digging through the crates and studying how we lived way back when?
Crazy how all of that just started happening for all athletes and coaches independently around the world at all levels in the same year and had immediate impacts on results. Nothing to do with the footwear that was released at that exact time.
Everything is a double edged sword. Nothing comes with only full benefits or full harms. If you say high schoolers are so savvy about double threshold because they have online connectivity they are counter produced with the full array of the harmful effects of staying connected and xposed to colossal dosimetry of radiation from all devices. The net utility of any pursuit still boils down to zero. Humans can’t outdo themselves in real measurable value as they are imaginary entities with imaginary goals and values. Love is immeasurable and that’s the only avenue they can.
There's more depth than ever before. The difference from 1st to 10th is very small. Same with 1500m outdoors, 5,000m, 10,000m... The time spread from fastest in the world to 20th in the world for 5,000m is like 15 seconds. Back in the 90's/early 2000's we had a couple guys running 12:39 and 20th in the world was way back at like 13:10. Because there is so much depth now it's like there are pacers for most of the field that never drop out. Everyone can pack run the whole thing at very fast paces. The fastest people aren't really getting a ton faster, there are just way more people near the front. And that is helping push the records down. If hocker weren't in the 3k Grant probably only runs 7:23, maybe 7:24. If Kessler weren't in the mile giving Nuguse a push in the final laps then Nuguse probably only runs 3:47. The increased depth is making the best faster. Shoes are not an explanation for so many people being close to the best. If shoes simply made you faster then we'd have the same old spread times from 1st to 20th and they'd all just be a little faster.
Or maybe the shoes don’t really work the way you think it does with the same spread from 1st to 20th. All this is just imaginary conjecture. It could also just shorten the spread at the tail end while the front end remains unchanged and make you fall for it thinking the shoes did nothing. You have no data to back up what you say whereas there is already hard data that radiation is also harmful to healthy people such as athletes and not just people with illnesses. People who were ill were first healthy previously so there is a clear causation seen between increased dosimetry of radiation and increased falling ill after being healthy previously.
It’s crazy because they’re in 3:30 shape in February. Are you thinking? Like are you thinking at all? Remember 5+ years ago when guys would work all year to peak to be in 3:30 shape in July/August? Now it’s just random indoor meets in January and February.
Yeah, generally people are faster or less afraid to try and run fast.
but it's actually not random indoor meets. It's a time of year where everyone is aiming to run fast in a 1-2 week period, then refocus on the outdoor season.
Lagat and El G could have adjusted their training calendars to a few February indoor meets and run 3:46 miles for sure if it felt important, but it was different back then. El G has the world records in 1500m and mile and he ran under 3:30 32 times.
I think the talent pool is deeper these days so guys are racing and shoes, training, and tracks are a little different too to understate it.
It’s a starkly different approach to the indoor season than decades ago. Until a few years ago, it was virtually unheard of to use indoor competitions as attempts to knock out the qualifying standard for the outdoor major championships of the season. That is now entirely common.
Footwear has had a massive effect, and also to be noted is that there’s more variation in the returns on indoor surfaces compared to outdoor venues. A quick look at the all-time lists in the men’s 5000m shows how the one facility in Boston has completely rewritten the history books, even if Bekele’s record still stands at present.
What is crazy about 3:27-3:30 guys running 3:46-3:48? The indoor records have been soft for a long time.
Okay, sure. But it can't just be "soft" records. As if people in the EPO era weren't trying to run fast or pick up bonuses?
It has to be the bi-carb + super shoes + the sprung up tracks.
I know the shoes are real. I run in Vaporflys and they "work" to make me faster. That is not up for debate. I have never tried the bi-carb but might do it for a 5000m race, why not, right? I would love to run on one of those boosted tracks myself and see if you can really feel it. Has anyone here had the chance to do that?
The Armory and BU have been around for years and years. Anyone who ran collegiately in the Northeast in the past decade likely ran on BU, and plenty have run the Armory too. I certainly did. I still ran faster on outdoor tracks consistently, but they're nice tracks. BU is the only one I've run on that actually *feels* faster, because the wood makes it noticeably bouncy. I ran some really fast times on the Armory too though.
Or maybe everyone should be required to run in leather spikes with leather shoes on cinder tracks?
I see your point but this is a potentially interesting idea. Look at a sport like tennis where the players have tournaments on cement, clay, grass, or asphalt surfaces on courts that are basically the same dimensions. Maybe reintroducing the older track surfaces such as cinders or grass alongside the current surfaces could give the sport a wider appeal? You could have a whole bunch of other world records to be targeted and shoe companies could be developing shoes/spikes to be best adapted to each of the surfaces. Employment opportunities for track surface maintenance would also increase.
Actually, there is zero point. When synthetic tracks finally came out, guess how many distance WRs were broken the first year? ZERO. It took another 5 years…FIVE, for the mile WR to finally be broken by .1 second. Not 1 second…point one. Despite racing on both cinder and synthetic, Ryun and Clarke never ran faster than they did on cinder. As for leather to synthetic upper transition. Do we really think anyone is running faster because of a synthetic upper? If they are, it’s only because of weight. Other than EPO, no other tech has made such a significant difference in distance runners than current cheat shoe technology. None.
I see your point but this is a potentially interesting idea. Look at a sport like tennis where the players have tournaments on cement, clay, grass, or asphalt surfaces on courts that are basically the same dimensions. Maybe reintroducing the older track surfaces such as cinders or grass alongside the current surfaces could give the sport a wider appeal? You could have a whole bunch of other world records to be targeted and shoe companies could be developing shoes/spikes to be best adapted to each of the surfaces. Employment opportunities for track surface maintenance would also increase.
Actually, there is zero point. When synthetic tracks finally came out, guess how many distance WRs were broken the first year? ZERO. It took another 5 years…FIVE, for the mile WR to finally be broken by .1 second. Not 1 second…point one.
When synthetic tracks first came out would you really expect WRs to be broken the first year? No you wouldnt. Besides "synthetic" tracks weren't anythng you know. It was mostly rubberized asphalt. An asphalt base, ground rubber tires mixed with gooey tar poured and pressed on top. Its utility was for it's durability not performance. The sh!t melted in the heat and stuck to your feet. While it was more durable than cinders or clay the inside lane wore down to the asphalt base making a distinct clacking sound as you ran.
Its not as though there was a massive flip from cinders to tartan and other iterations all at once. It occurred over years and years.
Even with indoor tracks synthetic tracks were generally at only a few universities. Most of your big invitational events were on 160 yard board tracks that were assembled just for a single event. When I was on a recruiting trip to Brown U. I saw a board track that was about 120 yards. Crazy. The NCAAs were held at Cobo Arena in Detroit annually. Literally, 2x6 or 2x8 boards with NO plywood surface and not even a painted surface, just like running through a lumber yard.
It would help your understanding of track history if you peruse images of vintage track races. A lot of typical LRC misinformation here like what you've posted.
the younger athletes hate this life enough to want to not limit themselves. they let down their guard and give in to all whims and fancies. They don’t know they are risking their lives.