Henry Rono

Ventolin, please explain the one-third power rule.

I have a physics degree and have read the article. Are you saying that the blubber only has an effect because it makes you wider and increases the air resistance? There is nothing in the various drag formulae to model the extra effort of bouncing that blubber up and down - carrying it - on every stride.

Some people have said that excess fat affects speed linearly - so if a 72kg, 9-minute 3000 runner (72sec/lap) drops a kilo, they will run 71 per lap and 8:52.5. Your formula would say 8:57ish. My instinct says either one could be right and so could some point in between.

But any such formula would be an empiric generalisation and not something that drops out of a physical model of a runner bouncing along on a track.

you need to get a refund on that postal degree if you can't understand that article

surface area assumed constant - it woud likely be trivial for small weight fluctuations

the drop in weight is only the physics answer if weight is dropped or added immediately

it doesn't factor in gradual loss or gain in weight & associated gain or detriment in aerobic fitness

it is the time for running with a lead-weighted belt around your waist or liposuction immediately before a race

apologies, posted the article elsewhere

it's for rowing, but same principles apply to running

http://www.atm.ox.ac.uk/rowing/physics/basics.html#section5

Here is one that might convince you of the 15+ pounds.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=4862536076115&set=a.1080855976476.14375.1078616076&type=3&theater

eurodonkey wrote:

Ventolin, please explain the one-third power rule.

I have a physics degree and have read the article. Are you saying that the blubber only has an effect because it makes you wider and increases the air resistance? There is nothing in the various drag formulae to model the extra effort of bouncing that blubber up and down - carrying it - on every stride.

Some people have said that excess fat affects speed linearly - so if a 72kg, 9-minute 3000 runner (72sec/lap) drops a kilo, they will run 71 per lap and 8:52.5. Your formula would say 8:57ish. My instinct says either one could be right and so could some point in between.

But any such formula would be an empiric generalisation and not something that drops out of a physical model of a runner bouncing along on a track.

I agree with this, except for the generous statement that "either one could be right."

Ventolin's formula seems to be assuming that an increase in fat affects performance only because of increased drag caused by air resistance. In fact, at the speeds we're talking about, under rather normal sea level conditions with little wind, air resistance accounts for no more than about ten percent of energy expenditure. A lot of energy is used to move the body upward against gravity, and the potential energy when the center of gravity is at its highest point is almost all dissipated when the body crashes to the ground on every stride. Sports like rowing and cycling on a flat surface are, in this respect, very different.

As eurodonkey notes, some people (pretty knowledgeable ones) estimate that weight increase decreases speed in a linear fashion. This generally assumes that the weight gain is from fat or some other metabolically inert tissue or mass that does not significantly increase total maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max/min), such that normalized maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max/kg/min) decreases. Some claim that this would underestimate the effect of increased weight, because increased weight can be expected to decrease efficiency somewhat. But I've never seen any sophisticated analysis that assumes that increased drag is the principal effect of weight gain on running speed in a primarily aerobic event, on a fairly flat surface, under conditions that are typically found on planet Earth.

alejandro wrote:

I first saw Henry run at the Vandal Indoor Meet in Moscow, Idaho. Almost no-one had heard of him, I think he was in his first year at WSU. As I recall, he ran a bit under 4:00 for the Mile, almost on his own. In my opinion, at his peak he would be able to run close to 3:35-36 for the 1500.

Almost no one ever heard of Henry Rono then? Huh? He was NCAA XC champion in what is still them fastest NCAA 10k race ever, a race that included the next two 10k WR holders and two runners that would soon win two world championships apiece.

....but Henry was almost unheard of?

ventolin^3 wrote:

apologies, posted the article elsewhere

it's for rowing, but same principles apply to running

Of course they do.

I always carry a boat with me when I run.

When? Where? Why?

You are misconskrewing the facts. I did not say that Malinowski should have been number #1 in 1978 base on ONE FACT, I said that their heads up competition was the tipping point. There were/are multiple factors to be considered in the calculus to #1. Rono had the WR. Both met and defeated several top 10 steeplechasers during the season. The heads up competition should have been the tipping point to Brono's favor.

I've seen neither. Could you please help me out? I've seen nor heard of anything that would indicate that Rono could have run anywhere near 3:34, which, by the way, would have put him right with the best 1500m runners of the day. I know that you WANT to believe that runners can run very fast in the next shorter or higher distance, but that's not the way it works in the real world.

That was the 1978 NCAA heats and Larry Doubley of USC was the long jumper.

The thing about apocryphal tales is that pesky little adjective. You do understand that during Henry's 1978 NCAA heats sprints on the straights couldn't have been any faster than 14.0 for 100m? You do understand that long jumpers start their run-up from a dead stop, and generally lope for about 20m before accelerating another 20m to the board? So comparing the apocrypha from the reality, it would easy to be tricked into believing that "Rono blew past Larry Doubley on the straight in front of the West Grandstands" -- because he did ... and... he didn't. (I seen it with mine own eyes, I tell ya!)

Malmo, my memory could be failing me, but I think Henry ran his first WSU races Indoors, prior to running NCAA Outdoors.

The 27:29 victory over Salazar in '82 points to Rono's abilities. As with his record streak in '78, it's a great example of mind over matter.

I've often thought that Kenyan runners in the early days were less chained to the idea of linear time than European or American runners. It nicely opened up possibilities for them.

Rono after 1979 was notorious for getting out of shape and disappearing and going long stretches of not training.

In 1981 he came back and broke his own 5000 WR in 13:06. In 1982 a few days before Moorcroft ran 13:00 Rono ran 13:08 and was in the Moorcroft race way back. I think he let that devastate him and never got it back again. He was 31 at that point.

He doesn't really look all that overweight but probably dieted heavily to compete in that Salazar race and definitely was a little softer in the midsection and legs. He was always slightly big legged, kind of like the same build of Cheserek, at 5-7 144. He was probably over 150 when he won the duel with Salazar in 1982. After that there were reports of him weighing 200.

As a Kenyan in America with poor guidanship and he was exploited.

I believe there is little doubt that he is still the greatest clean distance runner that ever broke a World Record in the distances after 1980. His 3000 record lasted until 1989 and we know what was around when 12:45 5000's and 26:50 10k's started hitting around 1993.

Rono after 4 years of consistent focused training would have been the first sub 13 runner, the first sub 7:30 runner, and given that he probably could have not bettered 3:37 for 1500, the first sub 27 runner. All historic barriers he was capable of hitting by 1980 when he should have been at his all time peak and lost his chance for an Olympic Gold medal due to the boycott.

Actually he would have been 26 when he set those NCAA records.

break it up wrote:

He was always slightly big legged, kind of like the same build of Cheserek, at 5-7 144. He was probably over 150 when he won the duel with Salazar in 1982. After that there were reports of him weighing 200.

. . .

I believe there is little doubt that he is still the greatest clean distance runner that ever broke a World Record in the distances after 1980. His 3000 record lasted until 1989 and we know what was around when 12:45 5000's and 26:50 10k's started hitting around 1993.

Rono after 4 years of consistent focused training would have been the first sub 13 runner, the first sub 7:30 runner, and given that he probably could have not bettered 3:37 for 1500, the first sub 27 runner. All historic barriers he was capable of hitting by 1980 when he should have been at his all time peak and lost his chance for an Olympic Gold medal due to the boycott.

The reports of him weighing 200 were not exaggerated. A few years after his race with Salazar, I stood at a starting line next to a very overweight, middle-aged jogger in training shoes who obviously wasn't supposed to be there. Then the race announcer introduced him -- "the only person to simultaneously hold the world records for 3,000 meters, 5,000 meters, 10,000 meters, and the 3,000 meter steeplechase . . . ."

I don't know what Henry could have done at various shorter distances. For what it's worth, Bill Rodgers said that Henry had "49-second quarter speed." I'm pretty sure that Henry has claimed that he could have run about 3:26 or 3:27 if he had focused on the 1,500. The only real middle-distance race that I recall him running was the 1977 (?) NCAA indoor mile, when he finished behind Wilson Waigwa and ahead of Steve Scott less than an hour after winning the two-mile in about 8:24, I believe. (He also won the three-mile the previous day.) The circumstances of his 3,000 meter world record would incline me to believe that he could have run a really good 1,500 meters, but I'll defer to more knowledgeable track people on that point.

I still think that it's very difficult to know what Henry's limits were. Most of his world records were not anything like the heavily-assisted time-trials of more recent years. Moreover, he was drinking very heavily and having problems with weight control and intermittent training before, during, and after his string of world records. I do believe that, with a good support team and training environment, he could have been competitive with anyone today in the distance track events, cross-country, and most road-racing distances.

Avocado, you're all over the place. Not only are you the smartest and most educated person you've ever seen in the mirror, you're the most creative, as well!

Avocado's Number wrote:

I don't know what Henry could have done at various shorter distances. For what it's worth, Bill Rodgers said that Henry had "49-second quarter speed." .

I'm not sure where Bill Rodgers ever got that information?

Avocado's Number wrote:

I'm pretty sure that Henry has claimed that he could have run about 3:26 or 3:27 if he had focused on the 1,500. .

I doubt Henry ever said that, and if he did claim it he had to have been drunk.

Avocado's Number wrote:

The only real middle-distance race that I recall him running was the 1977 (?) NCAA indoor mile, when he finished behind Wilson Waigwa and ahead of Steve Scott less than an hour after winning the two-mile in about 8:24, I believe. (He also won the three-mile the previous day.)

.

Henry didn't run the 3 mile in 77 or any other year.

alejandro wrote:

Malmo, my memory could be failing me, but I think Henry ran his first WSU races Indoors, prior to running NCAA Outdoors.

At least you understand your situation.... and indoors comes after cross country.

pre841 wrote:

Here is one that might convince you of the 15+ pounds.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=4862536076115&set=a.1080855976476.14375.1078616076&type=3&theater

Henry has always been "thicker" than most of the runners around him.

here's a shot of the finish of that race. don't you think that rumors of 15 pounds might be exaggerated?

Does henry look much different than this?

or this?

this?

this?

malmo wrote:I've seen nor heard of anything that would indicate that Rono could have run anywhere near 3:34, which, by the way, would have put him right with the best 1500m runners of the day

Big Guy

I would never in my life believe this chap could have dropped from 12'56 epic-final in '06 to run 3'29 ( he ran Komen 1500PB ! ) & then 1'44 ( he ran almost Noah's PB - 1000m WR holder ) !!!

3'33/3'34 for Henry in '78 is not worth arguing against...

They can mix-up/down

Thanks for the link, Malmo, interesting stuff! Clearly, as a young non-American coach at the time (1975-76), I wasn't as aware of the 1976 NCAA Cross-Country results, as I should have been. Yes, I realize that Indoors comes after Cross-Country, at least in North America, and discounting the World X-C, which I was lucky enough to be at in 1979/81/84/85/86.

Does the extra weight really matter as much as the lack of training? My weight has not fluctuated more than 10lbs in the last 20yrs but my 5k time varies more than 3minutes based on my (lack of) fitness. So in my mind, his weight is not the prime determinant, but his lack of training is.

Ventolin has described the assumptions and limitations of his blubber model. Nothing more, nothing less. Who cares? It's just for yuks, the iaaf is not going to ratify anything.

Surely, he could have gone faster if he trained consistently and was not an addict. But that's life.