Interesting article by RW on how the sub-2 marathon is possible

Wow very interesting.

I didn't know that the marathon WR was stuck at 2:06:50 for ten years between 1988 and 1998, and it only progress for 5 seconds at a time since the 70s.

Also interesting is that Paula Radcliffe's vertical jump increase from 11 inches to 15 inches, a far cry from Michael Jordan's 48 inch vertical, but still interesting to know that those muscles do matter.

I really like the scientific analysis with graphs displaying the progression of the WR along with a lot of factors that determine performance like VO2max, supply and demand of oxygen, running economy, etc.

To answer the OP's question, yes I believe a sub-2 marathon is possible, probably in 50 years.

The Brojos have the best point when they use tables to compare equivalent performances. Do you think a 25:30 10000m is possible in 50 years? Equivalent performance that just ain't happening. I'd like to think Bekele could have gone under 26:10 if he had pacing up through 8000m, but even sub 26 is a far cry from the record now. No way there will be 25:30, and therefore no way there will be sub 2:00.

The tables are only as good as formulas used to make them. It is a well known fact that humans are far better runners the longer the distance run. What if the marathon has been constantly underperformed throughout the years and those formulas used to make the conversion tables are wrong? The one thing that stuck out to me was the post-Wanjiru stats. Notice how the top marathoners age has come down and that the half split has dramatically sped up in just a few years. Who's to say that those ages and times won't come down even more?

True, but they have over 50 years to accomplish the feat. 50 years is about 2 generations. We may have a better Bekele than Bekele during that time. Advances in nutrition and technology will help along with new innovation in training methods that are still unknown, that to go along with more prize money to tap more potential talent from a larger population.The "experts" once said that the 4-minute mile is impossible, and now we have a 3:43.13 mile, a 7.58.61 2-mile, and a 12:37.35 5k which is only approx 11.7 seconds above a sub-4 pace for 3.107 miles. I think a sub-2 marathon is possible.

The Waterboy wrote:

The Brojos have the best point when they use tables to compare equivalent performances. Do you think a 25:30 10000m is possible in 50 years? Equivalent performance that just ain't happening. I'd like to think Bekele could have gone under 26:10 if he had pacing up through 8000m, but even sub 26 is a far cry from the record now. No way there will be 25:30, and therefore no way there will be sub 2:00.

Agree. Those formulas do well for interpolating results, but are horrible for extrapolating results, and the longer the distance the more impressive the performance of humans. What's mind-boggling to me is the 100-mile world record of 11.28.03. What is the equivalent performance of a 11.28.03 100-mile run in 5k, 10k, and marathon?

qwertypoiuy wrote:

The tables are only as good as formulas used to make them. It is a well known fact that humans are far better runners the longer the distance run. What if the marathon has been constantly underperformed throughout the years and those formulas used to make the conversion tables are wrong? The one thing that stuck out to me was the post-Wanjiru stats. Notice how the top marathoners age has come down and that the half split has dramatically sped up in just a few years. Who's to say that those ages and times won't come down even more?

When did they think the sub-4 mile was impossible? Gunder Hägg ran 4,01 in the 1940s.

well., wrote:

When did they think the sub-4 mile was impossible? Gunder Hägg ran 4,01 in the 1940s.

Google, learn how to use it.

marathoner no. 1 wrote:

Agree. Those formulas do well for interpolating results, but are horrible for extrapolating results, and the longer the distance the more impressive the performance of humans. What's mind-boggling to me is the 100-mile world record of 11.28.03. What is the equivalent performance of a 11.28.03 100-mile run in 5k, 10k, and marathon?

This is a great example. According to McMillan, 11:28.03 for 100 miles is "equivalent" to:

800m: 1:34.9

mile: 3:31.4

5km: 12:14

10km: 25:24

HM: 56:37

Mar.: 1:59:10

Remember that equivalence tables aren't magic formulas to be taken as fact ;)

emaciated runner wrote:

This is a great example. According to McMillan, 11:28.03 for 100 miles is "equivalent" to:

800m: 1:34.9

mile: 3:31.4

5km: 12:14

10km: 25:24

HM: 56:37

Mar.: 1:59:10

Remember that equivalence tables aren't magic formulas to be taken as fact ;)

Years ago they used to say we'd never see a sub-11:30 in the 100 miles. "Someone would have to be able to run a marathon in under 2 hours, so there's no way it can happen." Well, pffffft.

emaciated runner wrote:

marathoner no. 1 wrote:

Agree. Those formulas do well for interpolating results, but are horrible for extrapolating results, and the longer the distance the more impressive the performance of humans. What's mind-boggling to me is the 100-mile world record of 11.28.03. What is the equivalent performance of a 11.28.03 100-mile run in 5k, 10k, and marathon?

This is a great example. According to McMillan, 11:28.03 for 100 miles is "equivalent" to:

800m: 1:34.9

mile: 3:31.4

5km: 12:14

10km: 25:24

HM: 56:37

Mar.: 1:59:10

Remember that equivalence tables aren't magic formulas to be taken as fact ;)

Yeah, it might be equal.

But I don not think, like it seems most here, that you need 25:3x' 10k speed.

In my opinion the first man under 2:00:00 could be as "slow" as right around 26:00 - 26:15 with very good endurance.

So, something like:

12:37 (5k)

26:05 (10k)

57:low (HM)

1:59:5x (M)

I feel like those numbers could fit very well. When you see what Kimetto did in Berlin (throwing down low 14s for 5k towards the end) I think we are much closer to 2:01:59 than most people realize.

Pikachu

sports fan wrote:

http://rw.runnersworld.com/sub-2/

What does the LRC community think? Is it possible? If not why not? and are there other things that can be added to make it more possible(besides doping)?

Slick presentation, though separating causation from correlation remains a challenge. Agree with cold temperatures, and straight and flat roads being important. The physiological analysis was rubbish. Zersenay Tadese has the highest economy recorded and has a high VO2 max. He's short (1.60 m), light (54 kg), and fast (HM 58:23). Yet his marathon PR is 2:10. There is more to running a fast marathon than described. Note that a donkey like Clayton ran faster than Tadese twice.

Probably the greatest running post I have ever seen on that website. Well done RW!

Nice demo.

Anyone know the study from the French National Institute of Sport, Expertise, and Performance on the ideal race temperatures is located online?

4:35 x 26.2

All of that detail on how to do it and no mention of good drugs?

Why can't they get fresh pacemakers at the halfway point, then there will be rabits the whole way.

They should also have a red dot on the ground show the runners the 2h pace, then the pace will be as steady as possible.

It wouldn't be a true race, or world record (same as having male pacers for women), but could result in a sub 2h marathon.

qwertypoiuy wrote:

The tables are only as good as formulas used to make them. It is a well known fact that humans are far better runners the longer the distance run. What if the marathon has been constantly underperformed throughout the years and those formulas used to make the conversion tables are wrong? The one thing that stuck out to me was the post-Wanjiru stats. Notice how the top marathoners age has come down and that the half split has dramatically sped up in just a few years. Who's to say that those ages and times won't come down even more?

The statistical extrapolation of the VDOT is as sound as any evaluation method. It indicates 2:02:57 potential based on Wanjiru's 10000m PB, and 2:01:09 potential based on Bekele's 10000m PB, and

Thus, Wanjiru was not yet fully developed over the marathon distance to his aerobic potential. And Bekele was not running the marathon when he had that incredible fitness of the 2004-2005 era. Of note, Bekele's 5000m PB matches up perfectly with his 10000m PB according to the VDOT, thus he was fully developed aerobically over the 10000m based on VDOT evaluation:

Maybe a group should set up a course specific for this. Put up some big bucks for sub-2 - downhill within WR limits, straight, good weather time of year. Invite lots of pacers who are paid well and paid if they meet the goal predetermined before the race. $ for all who sub 2, not just winner of the race.

The VDOT says the 2:00:00 marathon is 12:30 5000m and 26:04 10000m fitness.