Sir Lance-alot wrote:
In the interview, Solinsky states:
"QUESTION: You are a Nike runner. The stereotype of Nike runners is that they rely heavily on technology, using things like cryosaunas and altitude houses. Where are you at on the technology spectrum?
CS: I’m pretty fundamental when it comes to running. I definitely agree about altitude--trying to be at high altitude as much as possible. I think that is a good avenue to take the next step aerobically. I think that is where a lot of Americans are falling behind the East Africans. We are not nearly as aerobically strong. Take for instance Kenenisa Bekele, or any of the Kenyans that are able to throw down 55 or 56-second last laps, specifically with the 5K. They are so aerobically fit, they are not tired coming into the bell. They are tired, but they are not tired enough that they can’t finish very fast. I think that is where we’ve been lacking. For a long time, Americans thought that a 13:20 was the gold standard. We thought that if you can run under 13:20 then you are a very successful runner. We wouldn’t push the boundaries of aerobic strength. Now, we kind of are doing that. Altitude obviously has a lot to do with that. You get to that last lap you can roll with anybody, because it doesn’t matter so much how fast you are, but how strong you are to use whatever natural speed you do have. So that is the extent of the technology that I or anyone else in our group uses. "
Now, he is a little unclear or coy here. He talks about spending time "at altitude", not in a hypoxic house or at "artificial altitude." And he says this is the "technology" they use. This would lead one to believe the he IS discussing artificial altitude. But again, he could simply mean going to the real thing.
So......... my questions are:
A) Is he indeed stating that he and his group (Teg, etc) spend a lot of time in breathing in artificially created "thin air" ?
B) If so, how much has this technology helped bring about the great times we've seen from US distance runners the last few years? Think about some of the most shocking performances we've seen
1) Teg almost grabbing medal at WC's
2) Kara Goucher grabbing medal at WC's
3) Ritz running huge PR and 12:56, and then medaling at 1/2 marathon WC's
4) Rupp dominating US 10k runners while still in college
5) Solinsky running 26:59 in DEBUT, and then suddenly becoming consistent 12:55/56 guy
All of these people are apparently artificial altitude users. How much of an impact did this almost banned technology have on these performances? Before someone jumps on me, OF COURSE I AM NOT SAYING THAT THESE HYPOXIC HOUSES/TENTS HAVE SINGLEHANDEDLY CREATED THESE GREAT US PERFORMANCES. No, but one must wonder how much of an impact they have had.
And don't forget, Paula's 2:15, maybe the most amazing modern non-african distance running performance of all time, was run by one of the earliest users of artificial altitude.
(as far as recent US performers, of course Hall's 59:43 & 2:06 were equally mind-blowing performances compared to some of the ones I listed, and he does not appear to use this technology. However, he does live mostly at high altitude)