Updated Study on Super-Shoes (Now Includes 2022 and 2023 Data)

Ffff wrote:

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

And it's not just training but it's also that we have seen a massive shift in the preferred physiological makeup of the 1500m runner/miler. For decades the consensus was you were an 800/1500m guy or a 5000/10000m guy. And this goes all the way back to your Peter Snell, Jim Ryuns and your Zatopek, Virens and of course with respect to the 1500, the most era which was Ovett, Coe and Cram. But that world class 800/1500 athlete is a rarity on the mens side - you have Wightman at 1.43/3.29 and just prior to him Tim C at 1.43/3.28 but again, they are now outliers. Because the best milers are all studs over 3000/5000m too. Jakob, Katir, Farah, Kerr, Nuguse, Nordas - George Mills just ran 12.58! For years we believed that 1500m excellence was more suited to athletes with the requisite anaerobic power of the 800m runner and we now realize it's better suited to athletes with the requisite anaerobic threshold of the 3/5000m runner. Nobody realized the principals that went into elite 5000m running would actually be better suited for the mile than those of the 800, but turns out they are.

So I would argue that not only have we seen radical changes in training for the 1500m/mile we have seen a radical shift in the modern 1500m athlete which has pertained to that too.

Very few 1500m guys are running competitive 5000m. There have always been a few guys like Auotia and the like but go count the 5k winners over the past 50 years and most are still 5k/10k guys. Most 1500m guys are 1500m specialists. Not fast enough for the 800( running 1:44-1:46) or strong enough for the 5000m(can’t run sub 12:50). There are few guys who are competive in both but not many. And in general those 800/5000m times are good but not as good as their 1500m.

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

Ffff wrote:

Very few 1500m guys are running competitive 5000m. There have always been a few guys like Auotia and the like but go count the 5k winners over the past 50 years and most are still 5k/10k guys. Most 1500m guys are 1500m specialists. Not fast enough for the 800( running 1:44-1:46) or strong enough for the 5000m(can’t run sub 12:50). There are few guys who are competive in both but not many. And in general those 800/5000m times are good but not as good as their 1500m.

This has to be a joke post right?

The point isn't how competitive they are in an actual race (though I'm going to give some examples after this that are going to make you look incredibly stupid) - it's what their relative levels of competence are in either the 800m or 3/5000m and again, nobody is saying it needs to be at the same level as their 1500m ability (?) What we are doing is looking at reasons why we have seen a paradigm shift in the 1500m and it's because globally we've figured out that the anaerobic threshold competence of the over-distance guys is actually superior to the anaerobic power competence of the under-distance guys, especially when it comes to straight up time-trialling (because those are metrics being used here - "best" times).

Are Jakob, Katir, Nuguse (let's just use the top 3 on the 2023 world list to prove the point) making a Diamond League field over 800m? Not a chance. But they are all clearly automatic over 3000m (and in the case of J.I and M.K) the two highest paid guys in the 5000m.

Taking it even further, these are your 5 fastest ever 1500m runners and their credentials (for this sake either the 800m or 5000m) in their "off" distance.

El Guerrouj - 12.50 and the Olympic Champion over 5000m, 7.23 and 2AT in the 3000m

Lagat - 12.53 and the World Champion over 5000m

Ingebrigtsen - 12.48 and the two time WC over 5000m

Morceli - WR holder in the 3000m prior to Komen

Kiplagat - ran 1.44.8 and 7.39 so kind of average and the only "good only at the 1500m" guy in the top 5.

If you can't deduce that the best 1500m runners/milers in history have more competence "over" distance (and I've just proven it's to a very high degree), then you're just wasting pixels here pal.

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

DataNerd wrote:

NCAA male track data. Super Spikes introduced 2021, fully adopted by 2022 outdoor season.

100th NCAA Outdoor Track Performance
Year 1500 5000 10000
2023 03:42.47 13:49.80 29:05.27
2022 03:42.11 13:46.80 29:04.04
2021 03:43.15 13:52.11 29:18.77
2020 season cancelled
2019 03:45.62 14:03.28 29:32.21
2018 03:45.22 14:03.58 29:42.61
2017 03:45.44 14:04.27 29:43.43
2016 03:44.93 14:02.40 29:42.32
2015 03:44.61 14:04.40 29:46.66
2014 03:45.33 14:05.11 29:38.94
2013 03:45.68 14:06.41 29:47.66
2012 03:45.79 14:04.37 29:47.91
2011 03:46.34 14:07.59 29:56.68
2010 03:45.98 14:04.39 29:51.28

But this is like the NFL analytics that tell you it's better to go for it on 4th and 4 in a road playoff game when you can kick a 40 yard FG. This is just a data set and there are so many factors that could be behind this - like just think a little more holistically then what is easy and right in front of you.

And the most obvious one to me is that concept that we as humans are an incredible species that with the right stimulus and incentive can and do evolve to set new plateaus and shift paradigms of performance.

Just like when nobody thought a 4min mile was possible until it was and Bannister breaking that barrier not only showed it was possible but set a new level of incentives that the best milers in the world quickly adapted themselves to before joining him. In the late 90's driving a golf ball 300 yards was basically unheard of unless you were John Daly or Tiger Woods - until Woods in particular ushered in shift in training and dedication and now it's hard to make a cut on tour unless you have the clubhead speed to hit it 300+ when you need to.

The level of college distance running has exploded since 2020 but you can't simply say it's just spikes. The depth is better, these kids are adopting training methods, principals and methodologies used by pro's and this open source world we live in means if you want to know how Ingebrigtsen is training, or Kipchoge, or Cheptegei, or Nuguse, or Kipyegon - you can find it out 60 seconds of internet searching. I remember trying to find pro schedules in the early 2000's and it was really hard - stuff like that made it seem like those guys were just superhuman, but now we can see what the best are doing and have that to shoot for.

Again it's the theme of this thread - nobody is denying product isn't helping, but to simply attribute it all to it under this assumption that the evolution of running performance is just stagnant is simply short sighted.

Thomas Wastolife wrote:

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

But this is like the NFL analytics that tell you it's better to go for it on 4th and 4 in a road playoff game when you can kick a 40 yard FG. This is just a data set and there are so many factors that could be behind this - like just think a little more holistically then what is easy and right in front of you.

And the most obvious one to me is that concept that we as humans are an incredible species that with the right stimulus and incentive can and do evolve to set new plateaus and shift paradigms of performance.

Just like when nobody thought a 4min mile was possible until it was and Bannister breaking that barrier not only showed it was possible but set a new level of incentives that the best milers in the world quickly adapted themselves to before joining him. In the late 90's driving a golf ball 300 yards was basically unheard of unless you were John Daly or Tiger Woods - until Woods in particular ushered in shift in training and dedication and now it's hard to make a cut on tour unless you have the clubhead speed to hit it 300+ when you need to.

The level of college distance running has exploded since 2020 but you can't simply say it's just spikes. The depth is better, these kids are adopting training methods, principals and methodologies used by pro's and this open source world we live in means if you want to know how Ingebrigtsen is training, or Kipchoge, or Cheptegei, or Nuguse, or Kipyegon - you can find it out 60 seconds of internet searching. I remember trying to find pro schedules in the early 2000's and it was really hard - stuff like that made it seem like those guys were just superhuman, but now we can see what the best are doing and have that to shoot for.

Again it's the theme of this thread - nobody is denying product isn't helping, but to simply attribute it all to it under this assumption that the evolution of running performance is just stagnant is simply short sighted.

Another absurd Nike marketing comment. Seriously, your posts need to be tagged by Letsrun as advertisements.

What you are describing has never not been true, the sport has been growing steadily for decades, new principles have been adopted for decades. Growth throughout history has been (aside from outliers like Usain Bolt) steady, progressive, and happening at different levels in different parts of the globe. Cheater shoes are SINGULARLY responsible for the DRASTIC drop in times EVERYWHERE. Of course records are always going to be broken, but now they're broken every single year, and guys who don't even make the world final in the 5k or 10k are "faster" than medal winners from a decade ago.....people who couldn't break 4:40 in college are running 2:25 marathons when everyone knows they're in 2:45 shape without the tech they've attached to their feet...you could argue it's largely harmless except that cheater shoes are disrespecting the legacies of every great athlete up until the late 2010s.