Letesenbet Gidey runs 44:20 15k, SMASHES WR. Equivalent to a 13:42 5000!

bartholomew_maxwell wrote:

JohnnyS wrote:

Surely a road race with hills can’t be faster than the track, no matter the type of runner? .

Wrong....You have to take into account the incline and decline length of the hills as well as the number of straightaways. A road race with hills can be faster than a track if hypothetical 1 mile road race was straight with no turns as opposed to turning on the track. The 5th avenue mile for example is one such type of course with a straight shot to the end.

Ask any sprinter how much faster they could run 200 meters if they didn't have to turn.

Compare the 5th Avenue record with the world mile record and report back to us.

The trolling here has really slipped in quality. ventolin^3 watches from his perch in Hades with disgust.

bartholomew_maxwell wrote:

JohnnyS wrote:

Since athletes, regardless of where they live, now can pass doping tests easily while being on the juice shows that negative tests mean nothing.

So why isn't every athlete making broundgreaing improvements if doping is so easy? You all make no sense. Try to at least be consistent in your logic. Assuming everyone else is on the juice, and Gidey is on the juice, then she is STILL the fastest.

Again, if she ran a minute or two slower, this thread would be about how attractive she is and not how fast she ran but when a beautiful woman can literally lap you in a 10K , suddenly she's a doper.

Broundgreaing? And who isn't making sense?

Ghost1 wrote:

Interesting to note that if Yuki Kawauchi had ran, he probably would have been beaten by Gidey.

Peds or no Peds, this performance by Gidey was one of the best if not the best by a female in this sport.

"PEDS or no PEDS"???

lol

The blatant drug use nullifies the performance. I'd argue that the shoes do too. She wasn't wearing running shoes; she was propelled by springs.

She probably could beat Yuki if she were riding a bicycle too, but who cares?

Most "retarded" performance of 2019.

If this was a 34 year old guy who just ran 2:59 for the marathon there would be a whole thread on here and a post on marathoninvestigation.com looking at race pictures and asking for GPS data. She ran 15k at 8 seconds a mile faster than her 10k personal best.

It really are the shoes what is the cause of this improvement. A friend of mine ran about 1.5 minute faster then expected with those shoes.

Show me where El G ran the 5th avenue mile...And ran it with a world record attempt specifically in mind.

YMMV wrote:

bartholomew_maxwell wrote:

Wrong....You have to take into account the incline and decline length of the hills as well as the number of straightaways. A road race with hills can be faster than a track if hypothetical 1 mile road race was straight with no turns as opposed to turning on the track. The 5th avenue mile for example is one such type of course with a straight shot to the end.

Ask any sprinter how much faster they could run 200 meters if they didn't have to turn.

Compare the 5th Avenue record with the world mile record and report back to us.

The trolling here has really slipped in quality. ventolin^3 watches from his perch in Hades with disgust.

ShilohDoesntCare wrote:

Bartholomew Maxwell and this other moron

Prothrombin here. Either true naive imbeciles or directly profiting from doping. You people are ridiculous. This is absolutely not a real performance and it is equal to a woman running 2:11:XX. It is not possible without illegal aid. Period.

+1

I suspect it's another El K account. In any case, most of the SJW posts taking over this board are likely in reality shills for doping groups making money out of young East African runners. Shame the Brojos and the mods don't appear to realize this yet.

what a runner. slim and muscular, going for it and styling on the men. Compare that to american women who dont want to change their body

bartholomew_maxwell wrote:

JohnnyS wrote:

Surely a road race with hills can’t be faster than the track, no matter the type of runner? .

Wrong....You have to take into account the incline and decline length of the hills as well as the number of straightaways. A road race with hills can be faster than a track if hypothetical 1 mile road race was straight with no turns as opposed to turning on the track. The 5th avenue mile for example is one such type of course with a straight shot to the end.

Ask any sprinter how much faster they could run 200 meters if they didn't have to turn.

There is a BIG difference between a sprinter at 40+kph going around a turn and a distance runner doing 25kph. Turns on the track are a very, very subtle loss. This course has hundreds of feet of hills. Yes, gradual and shallow will hurt less than a savage steep hill with an equally steep downhill...but it's always going to be slower than the track. By a wide margin at this level of hilliness.

An immaculate road surface that gains 15m of elevation going out for 8km and coming back dead straight in 7km? Yea maybe that would be a smidge quicker than the track.

The shoes appear to be a big factor in recent world records. Another factor for Gidey is that 15K times for women are weak, as the 15K is an event that is rarely run, let alone for a world best time. Out of the top-50 fastest 15K times, listed at "alltime-athletics", 49 of them were "en route in race at longer distance", indicating a strong potential for faster times in shorter 15K races.

Johnbeat wrote:

It really are the shoes what is the cause of this improvement. A friend of mine ran about 1.5 minute faster then expected with those shoes.

You fail to comprehend how audacious this performance was. 29'44 first 10km, net uphill. Then closed it with a 14'36" last 5k. She was closer to Cheptegei's WR pace than 3rd place finisher Eva Cherono to her. It's bonkers..

Mathexcellence wrote:

You fail to comprehend how audacious this performance was. 29'44 first 10km, net uphill. Then closed it with a 14'36" last 5k. She was closer to Cheptegei's WR pace than 3rd place finisher Eva Cherono to her. It's bonkers..

So what do the IAAF and Sir Seb think about this 'record' or is it not on their radar, as one might suspect. Coe has little interest in road events, but still it would be good if he and his team would acknowledge Gidey's phenomenal run, and to appease the naysayers and fence sitters -do some follow up tests on Gidey.

I appreciate the audaciousness. Another factor is that this was a mixed race, so she likely had the benefit of male drafting and pacemaking. It's also the Netherlands, a nation not particularly known for its hills, and the course "lends itself to fast times", with three men's worlds records, and one women's world record set at this course. Eva Cherono was nearly 2 minutes behind second place, Evaline Chirchir. This doesn't make Cherono a particularly strong reference.

Mathexcellence wrote:

You fail to comprehend how audacious this performance was. 29'44 first 10km, net uphill. Then closed it with a 14'36" last 5k. She was closer to Cheptegei's WR pace than 3rd place finisher Eva Cherono to her. It's bonkers..

Ghost1 wrote:

So what do the IAAF and Sir Seb think about this 'record' or is it not on their radar, as one might suspect. Coe has little interest in road events, but still it would be good if he and his team would acknowledge Gidey's phenomenal run, and to appease the naysayers and fence sitters -do some follow up tests on Gidey.

It was top news at

(IAAF rebranded) and is already entered as new WB in their Top-list.

rekrunner wrote:

I appreciate the audaciousness.

Another factor is that this was a mixed race, so she likely had the benefit of male drafting and pacemaking.

It's also the Netherlands, a nation not particularly known for its hills, and the course "lends itself to fast times", with three men's worlds records, and one women's world record set at this course.

Eva Cherono was nearly 2 minutes behind second place, Evaline Chirchir. This doesn't make Cherono a particularly strong reference.

Mathexcellence wrote:

You fail to comprehend how audacious this performance was. 29'44 first 10km, net uphill. Then closed it with a 14'36" last 5k. She was closer to Cheptegei's WR pace than 3rd place finisher Eva Cherono to her. It's bonkers..

There is absolutely no justification other than rampant EPO use buttressed by springy shoes for the absurdity of this performance. She literally could not run faster than 14:40 for a 5000m race three years ago. Now, she is practically doing it three times in a row on the roads. You are badly misguided (insane) if you think male pacemakers and a fast course alone would allow a woman to run 44:20 for a 15K... what a joke!

I literally do not know what to think of the sport anymore. Even with the best pharmacists in the world trying to drug up the best natural woman distance runner, I would never have guessed this time was possible. She literally closed a 15k race in a 10k time that would beat the 10000m time of every woman who has ever existed.. Her final 5k split is equally as astonishing, as it is faster than the majority of 5000m national records. Unequivocally, this is the most stunning display of female distance running that has ever occurred.

Could someone tell me unequivocally what the net elevation of the course is?

Not ‘it’s hilly’

Start and finish are at the same location, so no net difference. My watch measured about 120m elevation. First 5k is mostly climbing, second 5k is a bit hilly but net not much difference, one final climb from 10 to 11 and then from 11 to the finish is downward. For Dutch standards, the course is really hilly, but I expect for American standards it would not be that special.

https://www.nnzevenheuvelenloop.nl/parcours

-> the bottom video might help with a bit of information of the course.

Joshua Cheptegei ran a world best here in 2018 and the previous world best was also set on this course, so I suppose it's a fast course.

Zevenheuvelenloop 15k course analysis

First 2 k are flatish +- 2-3m : Gidey splits were 3:00 3:03

It climbs 2km from the start (38m) to Oeselenberg(57m), then after less than 1 km it follows it up with the climb to Langenberg(94m), also the 5k split point. Km 4 and 5 have an average gradient of 2.3%, although there are some flat and slightly downhill sections, so the toughest part of the climb is aroung 5%. Splits were 3:04 up the Oeselenberg, 2:59 flat part, 3:03 up the Langenberg.

Then it's a gradually downhill to the foot of Vlierenberg(8k) at 93m, climbing from 80m in 400m, average slope of 3.3%. Splits : 2:58 2:54 3:00(up the Vlierenberg)

Short gradual downhill and next up is Engelenberg at 102m from 89m, in 300m, average slope of 4.2%, it's the steepest hill.

Then, it's the same 'steep' downhill and up onto Meerwijkseelan, at 92m from 84m in 200m, average slope of 4%. This marks the 9km split. Split was 2:59 (short downhill and Engelenberg+Meerwijkseelan)

From there on is a pretty nice downhill, at 3% to the 10k point (2'44" from Gidey!!)

The last 5k of the race starts with a last long gradual climb to Meerberg(97m) from 68m in 2km, so a 1.5% slope, with the steepest parts at 3%. Splits were 3:04 3:02.

From there on is an equally gradual downhill all the way to the finish line at 38m, so 3km downhill at 1.5% average, but in parts at 3-4%, because in the 14th km is the last hill, the smallest one, Kwakkenberg 57m(from 53m, 200m at 2%). Final splits were : 2:49(steepest downhill of the last 3k), 2:52(downhill+up the Kwakkenberg), 2:50(slight downhill and flat the last few hundred meters)

Start altitude : 38m Finish altitude 38m Highest point : Engelenberg 102m Total Elevation gain : 126m(413ft) - Official data stats. This course is hillier than NYC for sure, and NYC ain't easy.

I didn't say "male pacemakers and a fast course alone". Nothing in my posts were exclusive of other potential factors. Three years ago, Gidey was an 18 year old junior. I would expect that she improves over the course of three years as she matures into a 21-year old athlete. I would not underestimate the benefit of pace-making. Recently Kipchoge run nearly 2 minutes faster in a marathon with optimal pace-making, and Paula Radcliffe also ran nearly 2 minutes faster in a mixed race versus a women only race, and Brigid Kosgei also benefited from male pace-making (plus shoes). Two minutes for the marathon would translate to ~40 seconds over 15K and ~30 seconds over 10K. In addition, we have seen significant benefit from the new shoes. Again for the marathon, the effect has been estimated at 60-90 seconds, or 20-30 seconds for 15K and 15-22 seconds for 10K. Adding these factors gives 60-70 seconds over 15K and 45-52 seconds over 10K and similarly 22-26 seconds over 5K. Contrary to "absolutely no justification other than rampant EPO", it seems there exist several other significant factors that intellectually cannot be ignored in any comprehensive performance assessment. Furthermore, for "rampant EPO use" to make such a massive difference now, and not before, suggests that the use of EPO must not have been rampant in the past. Or alternatively, if the use was similarly rampant in the past, this raises the question of why rampant use of EPO failed in the past to produce similar results, and why it should e considered "absolutely the only justification" now, despite its previous failures.