4 years ago 100 men in the world ran 2:10:22 or better. In 2012 100 Kenyans have run 2:10:14 or better - so far. On the world list 2:08:36 marks 100th place, 119 are under 2:09, 164 sub-2:10 and 208 are under 2:11, and that's with quite a few international races left for the season. It's difficult to imagine a 2 hour marathon - 2:01:57 would represent the pace of Zatopek's best 10000 time of 28:54.2 extended to the marathon distance, but it seems we are headed that way.
Before getting too excited about the rate at which the 2-hour marathon is being approached (I do not think it will be soon but others do), it might be good to remember that chap Lance and consider the likelihood that not all of those great times are 'natural' (especially in light of the German reporter investigating Kenya, although I have no firm idea of how valid his search results are).
26mi235 wrote: it might be good to remember that chap Lance and consider the likelihood that not all of those great times are 'natural' (especially in light of the German reporter investigating Kenya, although I have no firm idea of how valid his search results are).
Who cares. You test people and if they flunk fine. Kick them out. But this endless babble about drugs and investigations....Why follow the sport if you think it is all drug aided and you think that is really awful.
26mi235 wrote:Before getting too excited about the rate at which the 2-hour marathon is being approached (I do not think it will be soon but others do), it might be good to remember that chap Lance and consider the likelihood that not all of those great times are 'natural' (especially in light of the German reporter investigating Kenya, although I have no firm idea of how valid his search results are).
Careful. If you are REALLY "serious" about being skeptical, then you will need to reserve doubt for nearly everything after the mid-1950s (steroids); the entire blood-doping era (probably beginning 1968); our old friend HGH (1983 on up?); and umpteen other kinds of hamburger helper. Is that really a swamp you want to wade into?
If the testing being done today isn't seen to mean much, then we need to just forget about it.
rhymans wrote:4 years ago 100 men in the world ran 2:10:22 or better. In 2012 100 Kenyans have run 2:10:14 or better - so far. On the world list 2:08:36 marks 100th place, 119 are under 2:09, 164 sub-2:10 and 208 are under 2:11, and that's with quite a few international races left for the season. It's difficult to imagine a 2 hour marathon - 2:01:57 would represent the pace of Zatopek's best 10000 time of 28:54.2 extended to the marathon distance, but it seems we are headed that way.
It would take an average per mile of 4:34.9 to reach 2:00:00 (or 1:59:59.9!!) in the marathon.
That means 13 two milers back-to-back in 9:09.8. That means eight 5K's of approximately 14:12.7 in a row, non-stop, then another 2195 meters!! That mean's two 10 milers in 45:49.0, then a 10K in 28:22 without any rest. That means four consecutive 10K's of approximately 28:25 each, non-stop. That means 105 laps of a 400 meter track in 68.75 each lap, then another 195 meters at the same pace.
Mind boggling. . and they are only 4 minutes out now..about 9 seconds per mile.. of course shaving that last nine seconds comes pretty hard if you are running 26 x 4:44....
26mi235 wrote: it might be good to remember that chap Lance and consider the likelihood that not all of those great times are 'natural' (especially in light of the German reporter investigating Kenya, although I have no firm idea of how valid his search results are).
Who cares. You test people and if they flunk fine. Kick them out. But this endless babble about drugs and investigations....Why follow the sport if you think it is all drug aided and you think that is really awful.
Is it in the back of my mind that at least of the the improvement in the marathon times is due to things not legit. However, it is a reason to keep from going overboard about getting to that mark. Part of the big rain comes from two sources: 1) the courses and the assistance during the races is so much better; and 2) the depth is so much bigger. On 1), we have probably seen the bulk of the improvement due to courses and assistance. As to two, depth is particularly important in the marathon because you can only do two a year and the likelihood that something goes wrong (weather -- warm or windy; cramp; etc) that you cannot rely on one person driving the improvement but on a dozen because then the number of 'chances' in a year is much larger.