Sub 2 Hour Marathon Discussion: My Thoughts and Yours

rfmaioral wrote:

Wejo made a comment saying that when Bannister broke the 4-minute mile, runners were able to run 3/4 of the race at sub-4 pace.

I think the situation with Bannister was different than there being people who could do it in a race. Bannister could go out and run a sub-3 3/4 in practice. I think the equivalent would be people doing 18-20 milers in practice at sub-2 pace.

Critical Thinking wrote:

rfmaioral wrote:

Wejo made a comment saying that when Bannister broke the 4-minute mile, runners were able to run 3/4 of the race at sub-4 pace.

I think the situation with Bannister was different than there being people who could do it in a race. Bannister could go out and run a sub-3 3/4 in practice. I think the equivalent would be people doing 18-20 milers in practice at sub-2 pace.

Sorry but this doesn't make any sense, as the distances are so different.

I can run about 1/3 of a mile at WR pace tomorrow. I will never be able to do the same for the marathon. It is way easier in terms of % to run at WR pace in middle distances than in longer distances as the marathon.

I am not defending the idea that in 10 years runners will broke 2h, but I don't think we are that far as some people say. Just consider two facts:

One: someone has already run about 60% of the distance at 2:00:20 pace (Kimetto 25k WR)

Two: The WR for the HM - 58:23. I agree with the post that someone made about Tadese being a 10k-HM runner instead of a HM-Marathon runner as Mutai, Kipsang and many others. If Tadese was like them, he could have already run a 2:02 for sure and maybe a 2:01.

A HM-Marathon oriented runner who's able to cut the HM record to 58 flat (hard but I doubt people here will say it's impossible) might take a shot at the sub 2h. ( I am not saying it would be the first sub-2h but the first real attempt).

Here's how the 2:00 marathon can legally be broken

A course must start and finish within 50% of the race distance

So have a marathon course go east for 10.5 km and west 31.5 km, finishing 21 km west of the start line... somewhere in the middle east with very low humidity would be ideal. Bonus: make the first 10.5 km eastbound portion of the course in the city, with lots of buildings or trees to block wind.

Wait for a day with a strong east-to-west wind and good temperature

Start the race in the morning, when the wind hasn't picked up, run the first 10.5 km into the weakened headwind with a LOT of pacers etc to neutralize the wind. Then, enjoy a strong 31.5 km tailwind to the finish. This can easily be a net aid of 3-5 minutes, maybe more, but all certified.

Ok, here's my suggestion:

Just let Red Bull sponsor it. Believe, they will find tricks to do it, that noone of you did even think about...

Hardloper is right, there are ways to make sure you can run sub 2:00. (good wind and descending).

To prevent these tricks I suggest that from now on all marathons who wants to brak records etc. should have a course with finish and start on exact same place.

jtupperd wrote:

Have the equivalent times been considered? How about 57:15 half marathon, 26:03 10K, and these would have to be on a road, not a track.

According to the Mcmillan calculator a 2.00 marathon equals a 25,35 10k. Nobody in their right mind believes that will happen anytime soon. The reason why people have these crazy ideas about sub-2 is because of the explosive development of the marathon WR the last 10 years. Well, that´s because the marathon was underdeveloped. Marathoners were either 2nd rate track runners or runners in the twilight of their career. Pretty soon the marathon will end up like the 5/10k: the development will come to a halt.

Your idea to tailor a special record eligible course is nonsense, as the pair of NOT sub-2:03s at Boston 2011 shows. Even the most ideal conditions possible have not yielded a sub 2:03. The guy talking about the shorter distances being nowhere equivalent to the marathon has got it right. Breaking the marathon record isn't a simple linear extrapolation of fitness in the shorter events, mainly due to the increasing effects of fuel consumption and dehydration with longer event duration.

Yes, but to break 2 hours, a marathon runner will still need a lot more speed over shorter distance than our current heroes. Low 12's for 5000?

most Ph.D.'s are more than useless in predicting anything in track and field. the record is abysmal.

even the guys that do dabble in track, they appear to be challenged with basic algebra, really are soft science guys that took math because they had to.

instead, i'd ask the african 203 guys, as unpredictable as they are what they think. and i'd ask geb, bekele, or rupp, not moe he's too foolish that way.

you might ask a Ph.D. whos onto the next great EPO PED though. If a hyper responding super phenom got on the right program (as seen in the super duper chines woman's program)2 hours is gone gone gone.

track is half fiction half reality.

MarathonMind wrote:

Your idea to tailor a special record eligible course is nonsense, as the pair of NOT sub-2:03s at Boston 2011 shows. Even the most ideal conditions possible have not yielded a sub 2:03.

WTF? Boston is far from the most ideal conditions possible

People were saying the wind aided them 3-4 minutes over a normal day, which sounds about right

Put a 2:03 marathoner on a FLAT course with the same tailwind and you might get a sub-2

Then use Hardloper's method to bend the rules and make the course record legal

I remember when "experts" said that no one would break 13:00 for 5000 and 27:00 for 10,000.

It'll happen just maybe not for a long time.

You would have to run 105.485 x400m in under 1:08.25 to break 2 hours

Nice way to look at it. And we still haven't seen a sub 70 second lap average, which is what you need for sub 2:03.

Cover a 1 to 3 mile loop in Mondo and see how they run. Then draw estimates.

runn wrote:

I remember when "experts" said that no one would break 13:00 for 5000 and 27:00 for 10,000.

It'll happen just maybe not for a long time.

Really? When did they say that?

Who, what experts? What you don't realize is that there are limits. Why not 1:57? Then why not 1:56? No one alive right now will see a sub 2 hour marathon on a certified course that is not aided. Have all the pacers you want, you still have to maintain that pace for just under 2 hours and it's not going to happen.

runn wrote:

I remember when "experts" said that no one would break 13:00 for 5000 and 27:00 for 10,000.

It'll happen just maybe not for a long time.

There are 204 seconds from 2:03:23 to 1:59:59. That's many opportunities to claim WR bonuses.. No reason to rush.

I agree with your points. I don't know how 2:03:38 is even possible. 2:10 is really fast and a runner would be well over a mile back of the record holder.

Methods of Success wrote:

Put a 2:03 marathoner on a FLAT course with the same tailwind and you might get a sub-2

You mean as opposed to a DOWNHILL course like Boston?