Amby Burfoot has a nice summary where he also talks about a nice Cornell study that had identical conclusions for elite women.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2021.653173/fullYou posted the same link twice.
I don't find these kinds of studies very illuminating. Times went down from 2016 to 2019. They were stagnant from 2012 to 2016. But times improve. Why should we be surprised? I think the more interesting question is how does this drop compare with *other* three year stretches. How common was it to observe such a large fluctuation in a 3 year period over the past several decades?
I thought it was at least an hour that you get back?
Darn these kids with their new shoes running faster than I used to be able to run!
Has 1% improvement for men roughly and 2% for women. If you're doing math that's about 1:20 in a 2:05 (for the men) and 2:54 in a 2:25 marathon (for the women). One thing I would like to note is that I think the pool of elite women is expanding, so I think some of the difference might be overstated. More and more East African women are on the roads, and gender norms are changing. For the men, this result looks about right.
Reading the article, the introduction says Nike claim the Vaporfly shoes improve running times by 4%.
This is incorrect. The shoes improve running efficiency by 4%.
So the second sentence is incorrect. Good start of the article !
Not exactly a definitive statement, more like this is the change and one of the factors is shoes. Hoe to judge the impact of different factors...hard to say.
"The present study showed that top 20 and top 100 seasonal best times in 10 km, half-marathons, and marathons significantly decreased from 2017. Adoption of the advanced footwear technology has been identified as a factor contributing to these observed changes."
owl man wrote:
Not exactly a definitive statement, more like this is the change and one of the factors is shoes. Hoe to judge the impact of different factors...hard to say.
"The present study showed that top 20 and top 100 seasonal best times in 10 km, half-marathons, and marathons significantly decreased from 2017. Adoption of the advanced footwear technology has been identified as a factor contributing to these observed changes."
The effect of the shoes cannot be fully evaluated unless doping can be discounted as a factor in improved times. It can't.
Well that only took 5 years. I mean one year okay. Two huh. Three? FOUR? FIVE YEARS?
And it's almost like the thought is beyond mere mortal grasp that the shoes work differently for different forms/styles/weaknesses. Like it's not an exact number of minutes or an exact percentage but 1% for some and 6% for others. This is is beyond comprehension?
They simply increase the pace of your lactate threshold by several seconds per mile. Now what the athlete does with that new pace varies. They can push harder. Or they can just take it easier at their old pace.
Now go look at the 2016 US Olympic Marathon Trials and look at the shoes only the Nike athletes had and what the finish times/order was. Then look at what the payout was and then look at who went to the Olympics despite arguably better performances from others like Kara. The alphafly arguably did the same thing in 2020 to Des.
shoo smoo wrote:
The alphafly arguably did the same thing in 2020 to Des.
No. Just no.
Of course both doping and feather-esque shoes is a factor, but why would doping have increased since 2016? When did microdozing become popular?
Kipchoge and Bekele only improved by 1:20. Lets say 1:30 that's not 2 mins plus
They have also not factored in lack of out of comp testing in 2020/21
Down 90% in UK now imagine how much it was down in East Africa.
2:06 to 2:03 was down to EPO anyway
By the way I know with have our resident expert EPO does not work on them coach on here but I asked in person one of the top haematology consultants (Dr Eduardo Olavarria) in the UK if EPO would work on an elite East African training altitude "of course!"
JohnnyS wrote:
Of course both doping and feather-esque shoes is a factor, but why would doping have increased since 2016? When did microdozing become popular?
Doping is as much in a state of continual development as shoe technology. There is an arms race for both. But with the shoes you can see what's involved. Doping - no.
Has Seb Coe ruined the sport? Has he rendered times meaningless, particularly in a historical sense? Should records be eliminated?
Track shoes in particular did not evolve much from 1971 until the Dragonfly.
And how much time reduction does training at altitude yield? How about the latest fueling and hydration drinks? How about good pacing in pack?
“Super shoes” are now known as racing shoes.
Mahmood wrote:
Has Seb Coe ruined the sport? Has he rendered times meaningless, particularly in a historical sense? Should records be eliminated?
Track shoes in particular did not evolve much from 1971 until the Dragonfly.
No. It’s honestly odd that people’s fixation with times across eras is at this insanely high level. Winning and medals is what matters and yes times matter in the context of being the best of your era. Who cares that a 2:05 marathon isn’t what it used to be in the absolute sense?
Mahmood wrote:
Has Seb Coe ruined the sport? Has he rendered times meaningless, particularly in a historical sense? Should records be eliminated?
Track shoes in particular did not evolve much from 1971 until the Dragonfly.
Yes. Sadly I am as embarrassed about web as us should be about armstrong
And did WA conclude that the shoe technology should be further curbed or banned? No? Okay.
This is becoming highly masturbatorial, RoJoke.
I wonder what runners thought of changing in track surfaces? Running on a rubberized track is cheating!!!!
Alan