What do some of the top coaches in the USA think of the ridiculous times? Is it just the shoes? Or is something else going on?

Is it OK to point out that these NCAA runners have never passed a drug test? Of course some of the superstars have attended pro events that test but a random '83 unknown guys from one school run mile 3 minutes below world record!!' type headline usually doesn't involve anyone who's ever been tested.

Same could be said for a lot of high school hype. It is well-known that other high school sports are a juice-fest. Seems to be OK to talk about it in respect to football. And if that's going on then NCAA football is absolutely not clean. Why should we assume running is any different?

At the very top pro levels, it is extremely well-known and 100% OK to point out. Think this line of thinking is way off? Then test them. At least try to convince us.

I will answer on Friday after 7pm ET then.

I thought most schools do random drug testing along with some random testing at nationals. Mine did at least. I thought that was the norm.

Good start. The shoes are involved, but other things are involved also.

That is part of why I never got the self-righteous attitude that some have when it comes to drug cheats. Maybe I've just turned jaded and pessimistic, but I operate under the premise that loads of top guys are doping, and thus that drug tests are more of an IQ/political test than anything else.

That being said, I don't think doping is a new phenomenon, and so the sudden increase in fast times comes mostly from shoes (but of course training, COVID years, and legal recovery methodologies too).

So you're saying the school, on it's own, tests only it's own runners? I don't disbelieve this. I will say that I don't think you're lying. Proves nothing definitively, but....

This tends to confirm my suspisions more than it assuages them. Salazar doped people then tested them. Admitted to doing it with his sons who weren't in the testing pool of any sports federation. A school's not going to ban their own team, but they could tell them the results so they can figure out how to beat a test if anyone else were to give one.

Pro cycling teams test, too. Of course they do. They have to figure out how to beat tests. No team has suspended its own riders. Difference between them and NCAA teams is they get tested by UCI and WADA as well. Then again, maybe this is way off. I'm just not convinced that an entire well-publicized category of performance enhancement hasn't been discovered by a huge group of excellent runners, many of whom seem to be very aware of it after graduation.

I'm squarely in the supershoes camp. But I think there are other factors in play here too.

1) I think there's an element to more distance runners taking the indoor season more seriously than before.

2) There are higher expectations and more people chasing faster times.

3) sort of related but people have realized that indoor tracks might be faster than outdoor tracks in many cases.

I think you get a much clearer picture of the shoe effect when you look at times from outdoor track.

Anyone who thinks it’s just the shoes producing these fast times is extremely naive. And you ask Ritz for his opinion?? What do you expect him to say??
anyone who thinks only the pros who tested positive are dopers is more than ignorant.

I know (of) someone who broke 9 who had a very suspicious progression since he increased mileage from 40 to 60, got faster, and became more muscular. He's not fast enough to be tested but I think he doped.

I'd be shocked if EPO usage were rampant among HS'ers, but I wouldn't be shocked about steroids at all.

the top athletes have always been doped up. but why are the top dopers now running faster than the top dopers of yesterday? ITS THE SHOES

I was drug tested whenever I placed very high at NCAA championship meets.

the top coaches know the shoes make huge differences in times. but the top coaches don't care about times, they care about medals. they can't celebrate 12:51 if it takes 12:41 to score.

the times shifted faster, but it's the same battle to earn a medal because all the pros are wearing the same shoes.

The drug argument doesn't make any logical sense. There is no reason to think drug usage at the NCAA level would suddently spike in the last 3 years, coinciding perfectly with the release of the super spikes.

Microdosing. Microdosing. Microdosing. All the pro clubs have a special doctor.

Records broken in field events too....

Said this before, partly the bigger talent pool for NCAA athletes-

-COVID years and increased red shirting (and maybe NIL) has kept the best guys in the system longer

-More international athletes than before

-A lot of Gen Zrs to choose from (a lot of kids were born in mid 90s and early 2000s, but that birth rate took a nose dive in 2008)

As a top US coach, I’m offended that you didn’t even think us top coaches’ top coaching could be responsible for the recent record tumblages.

... and super tracks with fancy curves.