"I don't understand the sport anymore. At the bell in the mile WR race, there were like 7 guys right there?"
Are you asking or telling me? This is Gen Z upspeak? Literally Gen Z upspeak?
You don't understand what he is saying - which was quite simple. A world record distance race isn't expected to have a near blanket finish with nearly the whole field over the last 200m. It isn't a sprint.
Also, the super shoes (especially the road ones) have an enormous impact on training. I see this piece left out of the discussion on this topic. Anyone that has done a long run or hard workout in vaporflys vs their regular trainers understands this. You run faster and are less fatigued after. The cumulative effect of that over years isn’t negligible by any means.
The big break throughs in sport come from the lifting of mental bindings.
Most here grew up ranking yourself below the best.
The younger athletes today aren't limiting themselves like you all did and do.
No, they aren't. They are taking whatever they can.
This is simply dead wrong. I have spent decades working with top athletes, many of whom have broken records and have won medals at major championships and they have all cared about doing it the right way and not going outside the rules set forth by World Athletics, the Iaaf before it, and anti doping authorities.
"I don't understand the sport anymore. At the bell in the mile WR race, there were like 7 guys right there?"
Are you asking or telling me? This is Gen Z upspeak? Literally Gen Z upspeak?
You don't understand what he is saying - which was quite simple. A world record distance race isn't expected to have a near blanket finish with nearly the whole field over the last 200m. It isn't a sprint.
No, they aren't. They are taking whatever they can.
This is simply dead wrong. I have spent decades working with top athletes, many of whom have broken records and have won medals at major championships and they have all cared about doing it the right way and not going outside the rules set forth by World Athletics, the Iaaf before it, and anti doping authorities.
You don't know the athletes who are doping. They wouldn't tell you if they were. If clean athletes are winning and setting the records by beating those who dope then doping doesn't work. Really?
You don't understand what he is saying - which was quite simple. A world record distance race isn't expected to have a near blanket finish with nearly the whole field over the last 200m. It isn't a sprint.
I literally don't understand what he is saying?
You have just shown you do - and that you think you're really clever.
This is simply dead wrong. I have spent decades working with top athletes, many of whom have broken records and have won medals at major championships and they have all cared about doing it the right way and not going outside the rules set forth by World Athletics, the Iaaf before it, and anti doping authorities.
You don't know the athletes who are doping. They wouldn't tell you if they were. If clean athletes are winning and setting the records by beating those who dope then doping doesn't work. Really?
Your logic is faulty.
A clean athlete with 3:27 potential can beat a doped athlete who before doping could run 3:35 and doped 3:30 See? It's simple. But you have think you know better than those involved in the sport at the highest level.
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.
Most people on here are far leftists one track ponies who are only able to think 1 dimensional. Throw them a curveball explanation and they become gassed. RF is the last thing they will never understand so while I appreciate your speaking out the truth Rojo has already taken the lead and admit defeat. There is nothing you can do about it. We will live in this and die together in this. We have been baited and hooked and there is no turning back. We are just that asinine species unfortunately.
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.
Why not? When millrose laid a new track surface world records tumbled like a heap of dominos. Or when suoershoes came out, a new surface for the feet, area and world records also did the same. There maybe other reasons why it could take 5 years before the mile world record fell again. Which year was that? 1969? The year commercial and military radar was introduced in every country and aviation? Just look above at all the sundry posts and you may find your clue that explains the 5 year limbo wait. Actually, for someone so elder like you, you have failed miserably to convince me that you actually really know what or why this sport is. You have good knowledge and I can see that but not good enough. Mainly you miss out on cross discipline knowledge.
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.
It’s like picking and choosing your poison. Everything is a poison, everything bites and hurts. The food you eat, the water you drink the clothes you wear, the friends you have they all have their ‘bite’ (harmful and negative) points. Any sane and logical person cannot half expect to think that wireless technology that provides your internet experience and connectivity could never bite if everything must bite by default. I’m of the view that the way young people use to internet today is not sustainable as there is zero know-how protection of their health. These kids don’t know a thing. They are just pawns for their masters and they will fall off one after another and be forgotten.
This is simply dead wrong. I have spent decades working with top athletes, many of whom have broken records and have won medals at major championships and they have all cared about doing it the right way and not going outside the rules set forth by World Athletics, the Iaaf before it, and anti doping authorities.
You don't know the athletes who are doping. They wouldn't tell you if they were. If clean athletes are winning and setting the records by beating those who dope then doping doesn't work. Really?
This is simplistic logic. Doing drugs doesn't guarantee you will beat any drug free athlete. I'm certain there are thousands of marathon runners on drugs that would be smoked by a drug free Kipchoge and Bekele.
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.
Why not? When millrose laid a new track surface world records tumbled like a heap of dominos. Or when suoershoes came out, a new surface for the feet, area and world records also did the same. There maybe other reasons why it could take 5 years before the mile world record fell again. Which year was that? 1969? The year commercial and military radar was introduced in every country and aviation? Just look above at all the sundry posts and you may find your clue that explains the 5 year limbo wait. Actually, for someone so elder like you, you have failed miserably to convince me that you actually really know what or why this sport is. You have good knowledge and I can see that but not good enough. Mainly you miss out on cross discipline knowledge.
this thread now has 2 roads, 1 headed in the right direction and the other group of people headed in the wrong. The group talking endlessly about drugs is headed to a cul-de-sac, pardon me. While the first group offers a glimmer of life and could very well form the majority of govt come 2030 or 2040.
malmo is another dogmatic bloke and thinks his elite running experience covers all the reality gaps in our sport. He doesn’t know his knowledge is necessarily unnecessary to explain sporting dilemmas. Without his input the reality gaps can still be fixed using other knowledge.
You don't know the athletes who are doping. They wouldn't tell you if they were. If clean athletes are winning and setting the records by beating those who dope then doping doesn't work. Really?
This is simplistic logic. Doing drugs doesn't guarantee you will beat any drug free athlete. I'm certain there are thousands of marathon runners on drugs that would be smoked by a drug free Kipchoge and Bekele.
I have a goldfish at home. That’s the level of significance of your contribution in this post of yours, the things that don’t matter just like gold fishes. Like do we care that bekele will smoke your grandpa running a marathon on drugs? It’s stating the obvious that anyone with a bird brain would know. What’s not so obvious and that requires the brain of a nobel prize laureate in science is how emfs is insidiously messing up this sport and creating mysterious gaps in human achievement that isn’t so mysterious after all upon applying it diligently.