Performance is important but I feel like there is something to be said for what your body can actually do, as opposed to how clever you can be with bending the rules to get an edge. I wish there was some way to quantify integrity.
Performance is important but I feel like there is something to be said for what your body can actually do, as opposed to how clever you can be with bending the rules to get an edge. I wish there was some way to quantify integrity.
There is an on going mental adjustment to what any recent times mean and how new times fit in with older times.
We now have current vs pre "2016" or so times.
Obviously when looking at all-time lists the informed running community will understand that a guy that ran 2:09 back in the 1980's would be running 2:04 today. Although Americans are putting down some amazing times (with better shoes) I am not seeing any change in the gap to close in on the African runners.
I ran on cinder tracks in HS and I am fine knowing that I would have run much faster with todays equipment.
Racetraining1 wrote:
There is an on going mental adjustment to what any recent times mean and how new times fit in with older times.
We now have current vs pre "2016" or so times.
Obviously when looking at all-time lists the informed running community will understand that a guy that ran 2:09 back in the 1980's would be running 2:04 today. Although Americans are putting down some amazing times (with better shoes) I am not seeing any change in the gap to close in on the African runners.
I ran on cinder tracks in HS and I am fine knowing that I would have run much faster with todays equipment.
You wouldn’t have. Ron Clarke ran 27:39 and 13:16 in ‘65 and ‘66 on cinders. Despite running several races on a synthetic track, he never ran faster than his times on a cinder track. Do we really think Clarke was, what, a 13:05 guy if he’d run on synthetic back in ‘66? Hardly.
Synthetic was introduced not long after but it wasn’t until ‘72 (years after synthetic was introduced) that we finally saw his 10,000 WR broken by, get this, 1 second. Synthetic was such a revolutionary new material that it took several years after its introduction to break Clarke’s WR by one second.
The same holds true for Ryun’s 3:51.1 which was run on cinders. Despite racing many times on synthetic, Ryun never ran faster than 3:51. Years later, after synthetic had been around for some time, Bayi finally broke Ryun’s record by .1 second on a synthetic track. Wow! What an advantage Bayi had running on synthetic. Or is it possible that Bayi was just .1 second better that Ryun? I’ll bet the latter.
Even when mondotrack was introduced in the 80s we hardly saw any progression. From 1978 to 1989 we only saw the WR in the men’s 10,000 broken twice despite new and improved track surfaces that had been around for many years by that point. In 11 years the record had only been improved 14 seconds. It wasn’t until, ahem, the mid 90s that things really took off. By that point fast tracks had been out for many many years and the spikes weren’t that much different from what the were wearing in the 70s and 80s (eva foam, nylon, and a plastic spike plate).
Fast forward to today. Super spikes were introduced in Aug of 2020. Since then we have seen WRs in both the men’s and women’s 5 and 10,000 (twice in the women’s). The men’s NCAA indoor mile record (two different athletes and a third that just missed the record) and, of course, the HS 1500 record which is 4 seconds better than Webb (arguably the most talented American miler ever). Americans are now running low 27s regularly and we’re not even done with the year. Records that used to take years or decades are now being broke night to night. Of course peds likely play a big part (as they always have) but I think the biggest change has come from shoe technology.
Yes, super spikes are the biggest technological advantage since steroids. There’s no denying the effect it is having on current times.
You ok over there bro?
I have no issue with the shoes. I hate the lacing lights, though, and think they account for a huge time savings.
I want to see races, not time trials - even if going for a record.
Can I tell people that I ran 4:15 instead of 4:20 since it was in 2006?
Agreeance wrote:
USADAWADA wrote:
The first sentence is wrong improvements are nowhere near PEDs and may be comparable to past technological jumps. The improvement on the track in my opinion greatly exaggerated, people thought they would have as big of an affect as the road shoes. The second per lap advantage is obviously wrong and the advantage probably isn't even half a second per lap.
The shoes do however provide an obvious advantage and should be restricted.
Name a drug that you can instantly improve up to 60sec in a 10k and up to 5sec in mile as soon as you take it (like slipping on supershoes).
By that you're saying blood doping is ok since it take longer than an instant to improve your times.
We've spent a year where there was very little out of competition testing because of COVID and in that time everyone comes out with super shoes. The shoes create a great cover, a legal explanation for the performances other than the absence of testing, i.e., the shoes are part of the explanation and the part you're supposed to notice.
Lol exactly! What a dumb thread! All sports evolve..why not track and field. Some of these "track fans" are stuck in the 50s 60s smh
doper12 wrote:
Can I tell people that I ran 4:15 instead of 4:20 since it was in 2006?
Yes you can. I would.
distancerunningwizard wrote:
Lol exactly! What a dumb thread! All sports evolve..why not track and field. Some of these "track fans" are stuck in the 50s 60s smh
Well, the sport was a lot more popular then than now.
Free_the_thigh wrote:
[quote]
Spikes provide grip and protection against slippage, so they comply with the purpose of footwear.
Hardly, a pair of brook ghosts provide protection and grip, spikes are a super shoes that are technology doping.
By any chance if you remove the spikes how many seconds slower are you over 400/800/1500/5000 etc compared with.
Then compare to a “carbon” shoe how much slower than spikes are you?
Agreeance wrote:
The current supershoe times are making a mockery of the sport. The improvements are far greater than even PEDs and unparallel to any previous training and technological progressions.
The onus should be on World Athletics (particularly technical commitee) for being so ill informed before formulating the current shoe rules (or succumbing to shoe manufacturer pressure?).
The purpose of footwear should be soley to "protect the foot" and "prevent the athlete from slipping", not to provide a unfair mechanical advantage.
shoes and tracks have always evolved.
Also even though innovation is good and arguement is that these shoes are very exspensive some unsponsered runners may not be able to afford them which removes the level playing field
Samuel Mahele Akili wrote:
Also even though innovation is good and arguement is that these shoes are very exspensive some unsponsered runners may not be able to afford them which removes the level playing field
Again this??? come on... $250 is not "I wont pay mortgage for 3 months" money... if you are at a sub-elite level, running 10+ hours a week and taking this seriously, for sure you will be willing to set aside 20-25 bucks a week, and buy a pair each 2 - 3 months
If it's all about the shoes and not the person running in them then why don't you go out right now and break the 10K world record? Oh wait, this is LetsRun.com, keyboard warriors, real life losers.
Nope, wrong. Stats are not the basis of sport, competition is.
Agreeance wrote:
The current supershoe times are making a mockery of the sport. The improvements are far greater than even PEDs and unparallel to any previous training and technological progressions.
The onus should be on World Athletics (particularly technical commitee) for being so ill informed before formulating the current shoe rules (or succumbing to shoe manufacturer pressure?).
The purpose of footwear should be soley to "protect the foot" and "prevent the athlete from slipping", not to provide a unfair mechanical advantage.
Shoes ARE a mechanical advantage. they always have been. And as they improve, they continue to provide a greater advantage. Track surfaces are an advantage. There are limits even to these advantages though. and once the world records are adjusted to the new technology, it'll all even out again.
shocked I tell you again wrote:
Agreeance wrote:
The current supershoe times are making a mockery of the sport. The improvements are far greater than even PEDs and unparallel to any previous training and technological progressions.
The onus should be on World Athletics (particularly technical commitee) for being so ill informed before formulating the current shoe rules (or succumbing to shoe manufacturer pressure?).
The purpose of footwear should be soley to "protect the foot" and "prevent the athlete from slipping", not to provide a unfair mechanical advantage.
Shoes ARE a mechanical advantage. they always have been. And as they improve, they continue to provide a greater advantage. Track surfaces are an advantage. There are limits even to these advantages though. and once the world records are adjusted to the new technology, it'll all even out again.
They have never been a technological advantage until just recently. There is practically no difference between spikes from the 70s and spikes from the 2000s.
British Guy wrote:
If it's all about the shoes and not the person running in them then why don't you go out right now and break the 10K world record? Oh wait, this is LetsRun.com, keyboard warriors, real life losers.
You must have pr’d in the new super spikes. How much time did you take off your 5k?