NOW do you not think a sub-2:00:00 marathon will happen?

Caelia Shortface wrote:

According to mcmillan.com,

You lost me right there...

always been that way wrote:

it could be over 60 years (assuming 1-3 seconds improvement a year)

1-2???

Why assume that when it's been ELEVEN seconds a year since 2003 (when one of the greatest runners of all time Paul Tergat smashed it)?

Since the 10k record was not paced for that much and it is not competed in very much, it is worth better than 26:17. Even the 5k record was not paced to 2k.

always been that way wrote:

it could be over 60 years (assuming 1-3 seconds improvement a year)

Weird assumption.

2:05 barrier - 2003

2:04 barrier - 2008

2:03 barrier - 2014

Looks like about five years per minute off the WR. Almost exactly 11 seconds per year when you divide it out.

gdm wrote:

If someone put up, say, $5-10 million, the 2hr barrier would go down within 5 years. As it is now, these guys have an incentive to break the WR by as little as possible. Also, the pacers always go out right around the record pace, making a great leap in the record all but impossible. With enough incentive, you could get all the best guys in the same races, all gunning for it, and all you would need is one guy to have a really great day.

Lol. You forget about the WR attempts that failed. At London especially when the field went out too fast, they paid for it at the end. Breaking WR's isn't as easy as you think it is. They are records for a reason.

RCS, don't ever invest in real estate

Caleb's Hat wrote:

RCS, don't ever invest in real estate

:)

I am just trying to start the conversation here.

Just like the value of my place, the marathon WR is only getting better.

It would only be an idiot who doesn't think that 2:00:00 will be broken eventually. Unless we wipe out humankind (or come close enough that nobody is chasing marathon times), it will happen.

The question is when. I think that current improvement (which would see sub-2 by 2030 or so) will slow down a lot. So I'm betting on 2038. You?

Or do you ever actually add to discussions?

There IS a maximum to what the human body can achieve without drugs. Considering the conversion tables, it is HIGHLY likely the max lies above 2:00:00.

rupp-certified saladbar wrote:

2003 Berlin: 2:04:55

2014 Berlin: 2:02:57

Simple arithmetic could let you to believe 1:59:59 will happen in 15 years or so.

But then, the last decade has seen a sea change in the marathon talent pool, with runners "moving to" the distance from an early age, even their teen years. (Causing the inverse sea change in the now-stagnant 10,000.) We probably won't see a minute coming off the WR every five years once we settle into this "new normal."

But we WILL see sub-2. Before 2040.

Here's a thought. As runners get faster and faster, and closer to the 2 hour barrier, it's going to be harder and harder to make breakthroughs. As a result, we'll be dealing with smaller and smaller margins, and the COURSE will play a bigger and bigger role. It is clear that it will be a transcendent athlete who is able to dip under 2 hours, but also likely that it will be under conditions that are very, very favorable.

Here's the question: what happens if the barrier is "broken" for the first time on an illegitimate course. We all know that while Boston is a slow course on average, on the best of days, it can be even faster than Berlin. Isn't it very likely that the mark will first be broken during a perfect "storm" on an illegal course? The reaction after Mutai's run was one thing, but what would be the reaction if a similar circumstance breaks through the barrier?

I think this is a very likely result if marathoning continues the way it has been doing. We must be careful to have a consensus on this issue before the time gets close.

If they get drugs out of this sport, no one will ever break 2:06, because there has never been a drug free sub 2:06. Period. Fact.

But whoever runs 2:00 is not going to be a 12:20 5k runner. Equivalencies don't make sense in that context. That'd be like converting Michael Johnson's 200m WR to a 400 and saying "nobody will break Johnson's WR until 400m runners are running 42.xx." But obviously a supreme talent named Usain Bolt came along.

For what it's worth, Renato thinks Bekele and Geb could have run 26:00 if they had pacers who could actually last a large proportion of the race.

We will see sub-2 a lot sooner than you think. Kenyan marathoners still have a lot of improvement to do, not necessarily in training but in their daily lives and professionalism as an athlete. The simple fact that SO MANY Kenyans are running 2:03, 2:04, 2:05 means that these guys are not once-in-a-lifetime talents. That guy is still out there.

We currently have a host of guys capable of running at or near the WR. Can anyone really say Kimetto is clearly the most capable marathoner we will see this decade? The WR has changed hands constantly in the past few years.

That is NOT something you see for the other WRs. 2:03 mid could be the new 12:50, and we could see someone come along who is clearly above the rest running 2:01.00

Breathe in breathe out wrote:

Caelia Shortface wrote:

According to mcmillan.com,

You lost me right there...

Do you have anything better to offer, genious?

rupp-certified saladbar wrote:

Caleb's Hat wrote:

RCS, don't ever invest in real estate

:)

I am just trying to start the conversation here.

Just like the value of my place, the marathon WR is only getting better.

It would only be an idiot who doesn't think that 2:00:00 will be broken eventually. Unless we wipe out humankind (or come close enough that nobody is chasing marathon times), it will happen.

The question is when. I think that current improvement (which would see sub-2 by 2030 or so) will slow down a lot. So I'm betting on 2038. You?

Or do you ever actually add to discussions?

Yes and no.

The marathon has been improving significantly lately, but that was in part due to it being soft (at least based on extrapolations in fall offs from various distances to others) and is just now approaching a value comparable to the other great track records, and is why I personally believe the marathon has fallen so fast recently (combined with the fact that more people are running it at prime of career, higher prize incentive, etc.)

In order to say with confidence that 2:00:00 will happen I think you also have to be able to say with confidence that 12:20 and 25:45 and 57:00 will happen. I think those times might happen, but those sound pretty upper limit to me. Absolutely I have a hard time imagining sub 12 and sub 25. The only way I can start imagining times like that is if we develop new coaching systems that allow sprinter oriented people to develop legitimate distance runner endurance.

Bottom line is that I think 2:00:00 will happen, but I don't think a timetable can be put on it. It will take an athlete much, much better than Kenenisa or Haile to accomplish such a feat however.

On a related note, I can't help but wonder if we couldn't lop a good bit of the records you got the top guys all together to work together.

Pacers through halfway, say 60 second lap pace (for 5000), then you have the top 5-6 guys all running and in cycling style each one takes a 30 second pull at the front at 60 second pace before dropping back.

I could see being able to lop of like 1-3% of a record from a really well executed paceline. 15mph isn't going to have drafting effect like in cycling where it can be 30-40% advantage, but 15mph give or take is more than quick enough for wind resistance to be relevant.

[quote]rupp-certified saladbar wrote

Please once and for all , give an explanation for you're douche certified moniker .

It 's not original and never has been funny .

better clothing/no loose ends -> -25 sec

better pacing with no surges -> 50 sec

completely flat asphalt course shielded from sun with no bends (loop in forest) -> 40 sec

tartan track course with spikes on completely flat road in same: -> 40 sec

8 celcius instead of 12-14 -> 30 sec

I don't think anyone has split sub-61:00 yet (first or second half). Yesterday Kimetto's second half was like 61:15. You guys are talking about sub-60:00 back-to-back. I don't see anyone doing that until they are running close to 57:00-flat for a half. It will happen one day but we are still a long, long way off from that. I don't really see anyone running now (including Bekele) going much faster than 2:02-flat.

first thing, Dennis Kimetto, how tall is he?

the guy is not small and has some muscle.

lung rib cage is almost wild in proportion.

he has decent upper legs and high calves good for speed.

can't tell much about the inseam from photos.

low brow iaaf profile lists nothing about height and weight.

in any case kimetto is a superb specimen.

regarding the 2 hour marathon, no doubt bekele could run 57 something for the half marathon at peak, which means 60 minute halves are possible with excellent pacing.

old man bekele might run 202 low. we'll see.

there is no reason, no reason what so ever someone will not run under 2 hours.