How surprising is it that there are continual improvements observable in what is known to be a dirty sport? The contortions this place goes through to believe the performance leaps are legit are impressive.
It's obvious what you're fixed on. You can't see past my posts. Can you remember anything else you read?
Hey you’re locked into my passing comment. Point proven accurate. Spectrum case.
But you aren't locked into mine? I wonder who else you are responding to. You do know something about "spectrums". We are at the opposite ends of the IQ Bell curve. You of course are on the left hand side.
Better training and nutrition know-how, all of which is widely available to everyone. Also, shoes and slowly improving health care. Drugs too, but I'm not sure those have gotten much better.
What are the latest rumours with drugs and other PEs? With CRISP, protein folding prediction, biomechanics and motion analysis, and so on, yeah, maybe athletes with deep pocketted sponsors do have much better "drugs" that are still in the labs?
I think maybe we agree that shoes are part of it? But there is something else, aside from PEDS. I think there is a culture of how everyone works out now, the whole body, core work, a whole industry of optimizing physical conditioning, nutrition. The NFL combine this past weekend had boat loads of new records for the 40, the vertical jump...you name it. Big dudes, little dudes all not wearing superspikes. Athletes in non-supershoe sports are getting better too. Lebron James is twice the player Jordan was at his age? Brady was best QB in NFL at 43. Look at the brick-shi$-house-like bodies standing at the start of not just the sprints but even middle distance races! Coburn, McGee, McClean, Simpson before them...built like they were chiseled out of granite (Probably true for men too, but they actually wear shirts). The training is getting better and its a boring reason why records are going down as well. In track you add the surface and spikes and its augmented. I dont think we give enough credit to the conditioning culture. Yes you get the random Shelby H. too, but for most i think there is some hard work paying off. In my day it was yoga-real cutting edge.
I think maybe we agree that shoes are part of it? But there is something else, aside from PEDS. I think there is a culture of how everyone works out now, the whole body, core work, a whole industry of optimizing physical conditioning, nutrition. The NFL combine this past weekend had boat loads of new records for the 40, the vertical jump...you name it. Big dudes, little dudes all not wearing superspikes. Athletes in non-supershoe sports are getting better too. Lebron James is twice the player Jordan was at his age? Brady was best QB in NFL at 43. Look at the brick-shi$-house-like bodies standing at the start of not just the sprints but even middle distance races! Coburn, McGee, McClean, Simpson before them...built like they were chiseled out of granite (Probably true for men too, but they actually wear shirts). The training is getting better and its a boring reason why records are going down as well. In track you add the surface and spikes and its augmented. I dont think we give enough credit to the conditioning culture. Yes you get the random Shelby H. too, but for most i think there is some hard work paying off. In my day it was yoga-real cutting edge.
Yes, even hockey players are faster these days. I'm pretty sure they're not wearing vaporflys.
I’m not saying supershoes don’t have an effect because they definitely do, but does anyone else think the claim in the article that they affect miles times by 3.5-4 seconds and 800 times by 1.5-2 absurd? So no one has run sub 3:32 since 2019? No one sub 1:44 since then too?
I think it depends on the runner. Something Ritz said that didn't make it into the article is that he doesn't think the shoes help the very best guys as much. Which is in line with what I've heard some other coaches say -- that athletes who already had great running mechanics may not get as much of a boost.
But Vig was giving a ballpark estimate, and I think 3.5-4 seconds for a college athlete is a sensible guess for how much the shoes help in a mile.
This is a silly take. The shoes either work or they don’t. The fact that elites have not gotten faster means it’s probably something else.
Better training and nutrition know-how, all of which is widely available to everyone. Also, shoes and slowly improving health care. Drugs too, but I'm not sure those have gotten much better.
Singularity is nigh.
This is the most bs argument. nutrition, training blah blah blah… there’s nothing new with either of those .
I think it depends on the runner. Something Ritz said that didn't make it into the article is that he doesn't think the shoes help the very best guys as much. Which is in line with what I've heard some other coaches say -- that athletes who already had great running mechanics may not get as much of a boost.
But Vig was giving a ballpark estimate, and I think 3.5-4 seconds for a college athlete is a sensible guess for how much the shoes help in a mile.
There is no data to prove otherwise. Of course Ritz would be the one to say this.
Better training and nutrition know-how, all of which is widely available to everyone. Also, shoes and slowly improving health care. Drugs too, but I'm not sure those have gotten much better.
Singularity is nigh.
This is the most bs argument. nutrition, training blah blah blah… there’s nothing new with either of those .
It’s the stupid shoes.
I really hope you never become a coach if you think training doesn't find a way to change almost every year. I am not saying this is the reason but coaches are constantly learning what can work better for their athletes.
I’m not saying supershoes don’t have an effect because they definitely do, but does anyone else think the claim in the article that they affect miles times by 3.5-4 seconds and 800 times by 1.5-2 absurd? So no one has run sub 3:32 since 2019? No one sub 1:44 since then too?
3-4 seconds / mile for your typical NCAA runner is actually backed up by data. It's not impossible it's even a little more. I think the reason you don't see this at the top is the concept that the shoes impact the good-but-not-great athlete a lot more than the great athlete. That 3-4 seconds / mile is what it seems to be for the regional-qualifying level distance runner. I put this in another thread already, but it's really clear, so I'll re-post:
The impact on COVID 5th/6th years also plays a role at the top but is negligible when you go deeper. In 2019, there were 33 seniors, 34 juniors, 21 sophomores, and 11 freshmen in the top 100 5K times. The numbers were almost the same in 2022: 33 seniors, 32 juniors, 25 sophomores, and 10 freshmen. There were actually a few MORE freshmen and sophomores in 2022 in the top 100--they weren't being crowded out by 6th year seniors.
I didn't look up all the years for the other distance events, but here is the jump from 2019 to 2022 (2020 was shut down, and 2021 had limited travel).
1500m 2022: 3:42.11 2019: 3:45.62 (3.5 seconds)
10,000m 2022: 29:04.0 2019: 29:32.2 (28.2 seconds / 4.5 sec. per 1600m)
The biggest problem with the analysis is that any data in bulk captures tons of different runners, and the data for individuals troubles the analysis.
It also assumes they all wear the same type of spikes, or at least all switched to "super" spikes.
For example, here's a 5k runner who was/is pre- and post-"super" spikes:
2019 13:55
2021 13:49
2022 13:42
And another at 1500m:
2019 3:50
2021 3:48
2022 3:45
According to your analysis, neither runner improved in three years, because any improvement falls within or very near the window of 3-4 seconds per mile. (Arguably, they got worse from 2019 to 2021 despite running faster, because they improved less than 3-4 seconds per mile.)
This post was edited 9 minutes after it was posted.