How cool is That? Kipchoge went after it and was THIS close!!!!

I saw one estimate that cyclists save something like 27% of their energy, another that behind trucks, a car might save 40% of its energy, and a third that the slipstream extends 6x the height of the vehicle in front. They had a tall windscreen with a clock on top of the pace car. If the pace car was 4-5 ft tall, the windscreen was probably another ten feet. That slipstream might extend back more than 70 ft, on this assumption (maybe 6x14=84 ft!--that seems excessive at 13.1 mph), which would, I believe go back over all the pacers and Kipchoge certainly. I really think that Nike knew from the wind tunnel work that this was the only way that they would get him close to 2 on a flat course. Now that he has done it, however, I am convinced that there will be a major, major mental barrier lifted, just as there was after Bannister and after Boston 2011 with the 2:03:02>there will be numerous legal 2:01s and 2:02s in the next few years, and probably even a sub-2:01 legal. Shoe companies might also try to do something like this again next year to go under 2 illegally. Anyway: I'd like to see real calculations on the effects of that actual windscreen because 12k extra of pacers was not enough to account for much of the drop, even if the psychological effects of having people to run with after 30k prevented a big dropoff. And no matter what I have to say that Kipchoge's performance was staggering. Let's say it was 2:03 quality, but as a time trial. That in itself would be awesome.

Some of it was the even pacing (even if you notice they were a few seconds off here and there. You don't normally having a car pacing you so perfectly. THere were no surges to deal with, no covering a gap, or having to move within the pack. Also the extra zones for drinks/gels, likely helped.

But yes, I would say the drafting (both from the car and pacers) might have been the biggest factor.

It's nice to see Nike put a lot of $$$ into this project, which by all means was a time trial.

That said, perhaps if Nike would have set the goal at : First 2:00:00 marathon it would have made more sense. Did they set the goal too high? After all nobody has ever ran close to 2 hours flat until today. (sorry the world record of 2:02:57, those 2 minutes 57 seconds are a lot)

Speaking of time trials, I think the IAAF should consider a new category for the marathon distance: THE TIME TRIAL for events exclusively using conditions similar than today's.

Before signing off...anyone here ever saw the movie: "The Games"? 1970. In that movie a sadistic sick coach attempts the unheard: the 2 hour flat marathon by his protégé. I saw that movie in 1976 and laughed at the idea of a 2 hour marathon, which back in the days was the holy grail of long distance running, a dream impossible to achieve...not anymore!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065757/reviews

---

cvxxvzc wrote:

I saw one estimate that cyclists save something like 27% of their energy, another that behind trucks, a car might save 40% of its energy, and a third that the slipstream extends 6x the height of the vehicle in front. They had a tall windscreen with a clock on top of the pace car. If the pace car was 4-5 ft tall, the windscreen was probably another ten feet. That slipstream might extend back more than 70 ft, on this assumption (maybe 6x14=84 ft!--that seems excessive at 13.1 mph), which would, I believe go back over all the pacers and Kipchoge certainly. I really think that Nike knew from the wind tunnel work that this was the only way that they would get him close to 2 on a flat course. Now that he has done it, however, I am convinced that there will be a major, major mental barrier lifted, just as there was after Bannister and after Boston 2011 with the 2:03:02>there will be numerous legal 2:01s and 2:02s in the next few years, and probably even a sub-2:01 legal. Shoe companies might also try to do something like this again next year to go under 2 illegally. Anyway: I'd like to see real calculations on the effects of that actual windscreen because 12k extra of pacers was not enough to account for much of the drop, even if the psychological effects of having people to run with after 30k prevented a big dropoff. And no matter what I have to say that Kipchoge's performance was staggering. Let's say it was 2:03 quality, but as a time trial. That in itself would be awesome.

---

---

cvxxvzc wrote:

I saw one estimate that cyclists save something like 27% of their energy, another that behind trucks, a car might save 40% of its energy, and a third that the slipstream extends 6x the height of the vehicle in front. They had a tall windscreen with a clock on top of the pace car. If the pace car was 4-5 ft tall, the windscreen was probably another ten feet. That slipstream might extend back more than 70 ft, on this assumption (maybe 6x14=84 ft!--that seems excessive at 13.1 mph), which would, I believe go back over all the pacers and Kipchoge certainly. I really think that Nike knew from the wind tunnel work that this was the only way that they would get him close to 2 on a flat course. Now that he has done it, however, I am convinced that there will be a major, major mental barrier lifted, just as there was after Bannister and after Boston 2011 with the 2:03:02>there will be numerous legal 2:01s and 2:02s in the next few years, and probably even a sub-2:01 legal. Shoe companies might also try to do something like this again next year to go under 2 illegally. Anyway: I'd like to see real calculations on the effects of that actual windscreen because 12k extra of pacers was not enough to account for much of the drop, even if the psychological effects of having people to run with after 30k prevented a big dropoff. And no matter what I have to say that Kipchoge's performance was staggering. Let's say it was 2:03 quality, but as a time trial. That in itself would be awesome.

---

Sorry for the double post. I accidentally clicked on one of those effing adverts, and thought I'd lost my post.

---

Toby.,.,,-,. wrote:

Well, this is all cool and stuff, but the real question remains unanswered:
Can Eliud Kipchoge do a single pullup?

---

---

gloria wrote:

Yes, it was cool that he came close but remember the spirit
of the marathon is this to deliver a message of an invasion.
Pheidippides would be disappointment that Eluid ran back
to place of origin and possibly would've been victim of
the Persians' attack.
The race should've been run from Marathon to Athens,
to give it more credence.

---

Maybe next time they can run downhill and have cars with giant fans behind them to simulate a 30 mile per hour wind.

This really blows my mind. I didn't even think he'd run sub-2:02, let alone sub-2:00:30. Really, really impressive!

Thoughts:
(1.) How much did Kenenisa Bekele just s**t his pants?

(2.) Alternatively, how empowered might Kenenisa Bekele have just become? Kenenisa's 26:17.53 10k is equivalent to 2:00:58 on Jack Daniels' calculator. If Ken could develop the same consistency as Kipchoge, would he have run sub-1:59 (if paced that way)?

(3.) That was a really good PR for Tadese. Maybe he'll take on the marathon more seriously for the next few years.

(4.) I think going out too fast really hurt Desisa. Some guys (myself included, although I'm not even on the same planet as Desisa is with respect to talent) need to slowly ramp up to a certain speed, or have a max. initial speed for a distance that is slower than you might expect given their ability.

(5.) Thank you, Nike. It needs to be said. Even if Kipchoge gave a press conference tomorrow where he said that the shoes didn't help at all, Nike still put this together, organizing an event that allowed us to see so much of Kipchoge's greatness, and inspired a lot more people to dream or ponder (as the case may be) a lot more.

---

Kl wrote:

Maybe next time they can run downhill and have cars with giant fans behind them to simulate a 30 mile per hour wind.

---