Gwen thinks she can improve a LOT in the half / full

I watched the video of her that was posted earlier in this thread. I don't see what the problem is. Her running mechanics are as good as any other NFL tight end. If she really can catch the ball and block even a little bit, she will likely get an invite to some team's training camp, and I would bet she will make the cut to a roster spot, though I don't see her getting a lot of playing time this season. But that depends on where she ends up -- she will do great in a wide open offensive scheme.

just a reminder her 15:15 5000m PR on the track was done in vaporflys which is vdot +2

(I've never heard of anyone using vaporflys on the track, how often is that happening now?)

so false vdot of 68 (real vdot 66) 1:10 half, 2:27 full potential

so her half time matches in vaporflys matches the exact theoretical

her previous 5000m performances are vdot 65

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/gwen-jorgensen-245384

If she's training in California, maybe she can get some extra training in as a grape-stomper at some vineyard. I think her form is well-suited for that, and the Vaporfly shoes will just make the process 4% better.

I don't think her limiting factor is her form or really anything else with one exception. Her success hinges on whether or not her body can take the mileage she'll need to (fairly quickly) ramp up to without breaking down.

If her form is terrible and she is undernourished then of course she can improve. Her half was impressive given all the limiting factors.

patti wrote:

Great for Gwen!

I'm rooting for her.

She stated heavens goak...wow! Who does that? Shes awesome.

Yeah, she has a bit to learn, but nothing new. It's work, work, and more work

Gwen, I hope the world for you!

Gwen who, dammit? No last name given so how am I supposed to know?

Stefani? She ain't no holla back girll.

Considering the short amount of time between now and the Olympics, I'm not sure it would be a good idea for Jorgensen to start tinkering with her form. What little research I've seen about forcing changes in form suggests it can make a runner less efficient. (I don't dig into the running research much, so I could be wrong about that.) The best she can hope for may be to put in the miles and hope her form changes naturally.

I think she can improve. In a way she strikes me as very cerebral and looks at constant refinements. I figure she did win an Olympic Gold, and thus, knows that killer mindset in order to win. I don't know if she's got the goods to qualify but it will be fun to watch and see if she can.

just the stats wrote:

just a reminder her 15:15 5000m PR on the track was done in vaporflys which is vdot +2

(I've never heard of anyone using vaporflys on the track, how often is that happening now?)

so false vdot of 68 (real vdot 66) 1:10 half, 2:27 full potential

so her half time matches in vaporflys matches the exact theoretical

her previous 5000m performances are vdot 65

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/gwen-jorgensen-245384

She ran the 5K in her own spikes. She ran the 10k in 4%s

Sit and kick wrote:

I don't disagree with her capability to improve, but wasn't her recent half perfectly in line with that Stanford 10k race she ran a couple weeks before it?

In other words, her half performance was EXCELLENT, given her recent 10k, unless that was sandbagged

The Half is worth 1127 points (IAAF), which is a 32:14.27, almost 20 seconds slower; her 31:55 was worth 1:10:09. Not too different but not the same, especially with some added training.

The comments about her biomechanics might be right but her body is different than most distance athletes, so it is not clear to me what needs to change (I do not know enough).

Her 10,000 > HM wrote:

Sit and kick wrote:

I don't disagree with her capability to improve, but wasn't her recent half perfectly in line with that Stanford 10k race she ran a couple weeks before it?

In other words, her half performance was EXCELLENT, given her recent 10k, unless that was sandbagged

The Half is worth 1127 points (IAAF), which is a 32:14.27, almost 20 seconds slower; her 31:55 was worth 1:10:09. Not too different but not the same, especially with some added training.

The comments about her biomechanics might be right but her body is different than most distance athletes, so it is not clear to me what needs to change (I do not know enough).

Yeah but the half wasn't run on the track, it had hills and wind, etc. So how can you compare the two?

The comparison is through the IAAF tables, which do not rely solely on flat courses. However, if this course is harder than average then you need to quantify it if you think that it is not comparable to the courses that are the basis of the IAAF tables. Do you think that the difference is 10, 20 or 45 seconds?

Who is this Jorgensen girl? Outside of the US nobody knows her and nobody cares. Seems to be a marketing gag.

self-promotion on YouTube does not help you win races

This is what sucks about letsrun...it's comprised of a bunch of old farts that over analyze stupid things (the running form debate that hijacked the OPs original thoughts and this guy talking about "pregnancy doping" ). First off the benefit your referring to is eluding to the thought that some women were getting pregnant and aborting the pregnancy very early on as they had an increase in blood volume...this happens early on in pregnancy. When you carry and deliver a baby to full term yes you do still retain an increased blood volume HOWEVER, you deal with so many undersirable things that it really doesn't matter example: incontinence when running, unable to stabalize your core for weeks/months sometimes years and a myriad of pelvic floor issues. Next when your breastfeeding your producing other hormones that help you to care for another life but you have this constant underlying fatigue that I think heavy endurance training and longer races exacerbate. Gwen eats enough. She has been breastfeeding longer than most of the distance pros ever have so HUGE kudos for her! If she was not eating enough she would not be breastfeeding...she couldn't. Look at other female mammals that nurse...they all towards the end look like they might wither/blow away with the wind...it takes a lot if energy to do it. I think she is too hard on herself...she mentioned she's weaning and was terry eyed...I think she needs to know that she may not feel super for a couple months but depends on her body, but once hormones reset to normal and she catches up on rest she'll def. be able to put in more volume.

Peace out you old geezers! And I hope you all wished your mothers a happy Mother's Day yesterday!

Lazard said: This has probably been a pointless diatribe that plainly reveals my point of view on the limiting factors of road running performance ... versus this really outlandish notion that easily correctable aesthetic form flaws constitute the real barriers to improvement.

I have a lot of sympathy with your point of view. anyone who has watched a ton of good quality road racing over the years will have noticed that there are many different styles of running on display, and the idea that everyone needs to amend their form so that they gravitate towards some supposedly "ideal" running action deserves some outspoken critics.

however, there is a 5km road race starts a mile from my house every single Saturday morning. I often amble down there to watch and the one thing I notice over and over again is that as the first 20 - 30 runners go by you can hardly hear their feet touching the ground, it's almost as though they were ghosts going by. but as the field passes by the volume gradually increases until you get a herd of Wildebeest stomping by in Army boots they borrowed off the hippo's.

I don't think it's any kind of accident that this happens every week. the Wildebeest have never won. which convinces me there is something in the basic idea that better performance and better form go together. you do see nice technique at the back of the field, so good form on its own is not enough, but you never see a Wildebeest in Army boots in the top 20 or so runners. the conclusion I have drawn from this is that you can run badly with good form, but to run well you have to have at least reasonable form.

for me, Gwen does not run like a runner. she is not a Wildebeest in borrowed army boots but she runs like a swimmer. and it will take her a long time to unlearn those habits. and time is the one thing she does not have. the 2020 olympic marathon trial is 21 months away. and it isn't moving for her.

cheers.

People are putting way too much thought into this... Gwen was a great triathlete (one of the all time bests) and is still brand new to just running. Time will tell what her ceiling is, and not even Nostradamas, let alone the 'wisdom' of a few LRC posters can predict that. As far as I'm concerned, she's progressed about as quickly as could be expected (especially for just having a kid/breastfeeding) and will only continue to go up from here if she can stay healthy. She's got some lofty goals, but kudos to her for chasing them.

Thanks for your sweet sentiments, millennial A-hole. You know full well our mothers have flown to heaven. Thanks for bringing it up. I'm taking you out of the will.

Running economy, of which form is a component of, does matter. To a degree. The more efficient, the less energy is expended, and the more you energy you have towards the end of a long race. That is part of Kipchoge's success.

But form is not the end all, be all, of a runner. It's a component, and often dependent on body type. Geb and Radcliffe had major hitches in their form and still set ground breaking world records.