Women's Mile: When will 4 minutes be broken? This year?

ElGuerroujFan wrote:

Not trying to sound hypocritical, I have never run under 4 minutes before(heck, I have never run under 5 minutes before lol), but given that men have broken 4 hundreds of times, maybe it is just a mental barrier for women?? I understand that women have biological differences from men, and the WR for women is respectable, but maybe it will be broken soon, given the recent technological advances(or technological doping as some may call it), perhaps there is more of a chance now? Who would you nominate for the female Roger Bannister? Who will break 4 minutes for the women's mile?

For the women reading this: If any of this seemed offensive to you , I apologize. I have done so unintentionally.

Probably in a few hundred thousand years.

Houlihan will be the first.

The same day men can run a 3:18 1500.

Mental barrier?

You make it sound like women are running 4:01 right now.

Considering the IAAF is looking the other way to blatant cheating, it won't be long before 4:10 is broken.

We're still nowhere near the level of drug use as the late 90s, when Elg, Komen, Geb, and the like were doing drugs without any fear of being caught, but I think a few more years of the IAAF doing nothing to stop the current drug farce we're in, and maybe athletes will become that brazen again.

Look at how pathetically doped the 2019 World Champs were. To me, that says 4:10 is close. Especially considering Dibaba's super doped 1500 world record. That's worth 4:09.

But a 3:59? Maybe in a century.

I am sorry. I meant a mental barrier like an incomprehensible achievement, like how it took me so long to break 19 in the 5k because I didn't think I could have run sub 19 in the first place.

I will also take into account the fact that Kipchoge broke 2 hours is half the percentage from the previous world record increase than it would be for a woman to improve to sub 4 from Hassan's WR. So to do it now, they would have to push twice the percentage than Kipchoge(about 5% increase)

A woman can do anything a man can do. If a man can break 4 minutes, a woman can do it.

ElGuerroujFan wrote:

I am sorry. I meant a mental barrier like an incomprehensible achievement, like how it took me so long to break 19 in the 5k because I didn't think I could have run sub 19 in the first place.

I will also take into account the fact that Kipchoge broke 2 hours is half the percentage from the previous world record increase than it would be for a woman to improve to sub 4 from Hassan's WR. So to do it now, they would have to push twice the percentage than Kipchoge(about 5% increase)

There is no such thing as a mental barrier in distance running. Most runners can push and train themselves to their limit and the difference is natural ability. The current women's 1500 WR is the fastest time achieved over 40 years of talented women trading hard and probably using PEDs. No woman is suddenly going to take an 8 second chunk out of the record.

American Runners wrote:

A woman can do anything a man can do. If a man can break 4 minutes, a woman can do it.

And a woman can beat the world heavyweight boxing champ and pole vault over 6 meters. Anything.

It's not unthinkable. The fastest women in the world at 400m can run 48.X and the fastest at 5000m can run 14:1X. The minimum 400m speed needed to run 3:59.99 mile is generally thought to be 51-52. A woman with world-class endurance plus 52-speed should be running around 4:03. Add in carbon spikes, bouncy track, perfect pacing, and I could see sub-4 happening.

The question is why women's 800m and 1500m is so weak (especially 800m). The math doesn't add up.

I mean, KK ran 14:26 5k while focusing on middle-distance and can only run 4:17 per mile. Most middle distance oriented guys who run 14:2X can run 4:09-4:10 mile.

If KK was fed meat and potatoes and trained like Makaloufi (10-minute miles for easy runs and 800/500/400 workouts and heavy squats) for a month, she would run 4:09 mile.

jamin wrote:

It's not unthinkable. The fastest women in the world at 400m can run 48.X and the fastest at 5000m can run 14:1X. The minimum 400m speed needed to run 3:59.99 mile is generally thought to be 51-52. A woman with world-class endurance plus 52-speed should be running around 4:03. Add in carbon spikes, bouncy track, perfect pacing, and I could see sub-4 happening.

The question is why women's 800m and 1500m is so weak (especially 800m). The math doesn't add up.

I mean, KK ran 14:26 5k while focusing on middle-distance and can only run 4:17 per mile. Most middle distance oriented guys who run 14:2X can run 4:09-4:10 mile.

The times aren't weak. They have been produced by the best doped performances, just as they have in the men's events. Further, with the physical advantages men have, of either greater strength or superior cardiovascular capacity, you can't simply transpose their relative performances over a succession of distances on to women.

jamin wrote:

It's not unthinkable. The fastest women in the world at 400m can run 48.X and the fastest at 5000m can run 14:1X. The minimum 400m speed needed to run 3:59.99 mile is generally thought to be 51-52. A woman with world-class endurance plus 52-speed should be running around 4:03. Add in carbon spikes, bouncy track, perfect pacing, and I could see sub-4 happening.

The question is why women's 800m and 1500m is so weak (especially 800m). The math doesn't add up.

I mean, KK ran 14:26 5k while focusing on middle-distance and can only run 4:17 per mile. Most middle distance oriented guys who run 14:2X can run 4:09-4:10 mile.

Men who can run a sub4 mile with just 51 / 1:51 400/800 m speed usually have decent endurance, like 13:30 5000 m, too.

Now this should show you that the mile is more of a distance event than a sprint, and unless you find a woman who can better the current 5000 m world record by about 40 seconds, and at the same time run a 51 s 400, your sub4 woman's record might be very much out of reach.

Depends on your definition of a woman. A man that identifies as a woman has probably already broken the 4:00 barrier. I mean, remember, the 1976 Olympic decathlon was won by a woman.

Women have been held back for so many years that it will take a few years of them realizing that they are as good as men, before they will actually break 4 minutes.

Women go byebye wrote:

Women have been held back for so many years that it will take a few years of them realizing that they are as good as men, before they will actually break 4 minutes.

If they are "as good as men", they won't break 4 minutes - they'll run 3.43 (or better). Which means they will have to be just like men. I'm picking you haven't had many dates.

It is the same reason that minorities do poorly on standardized tests. The have been held back for so many years that it will take time and intervention before it levels off. When they realize that they can break 4, they will train for it. Then the female category will be eliminated and women will start competing on the same level as men. Title IX can be rescinded and transgenders will compete without negative repercussions.

Women go byebye wrote:

It is the same reason that minorities do poorly on standardized tests. The have been held back for so many years that it will take time and intervention before it levels off. When they realize that they can break 4, they will train for it. Then the female category will be eliminated and women will start competing on the same level as men. Title IX can be rescinded and transgenders will compete without negative repercussions.

You need to read up on human physiology.

Partridge wrote:

Men who can run a sub4 mile with just 51 / 1:51 400/800 m speed usually have decent endurance, like 13:30 5000 m, too.

Not sure those numbers are completely accurate. There are guys who've done it on 1:52/13:50.

Of course, you never know whether other PRs were set at same fitness level and race conditions, but here is one example:

Former Husky James Cameron, with PRs of 1:52/3:58/13:51.