He’s also missing that the standard is now 3:34.2. If you’re trying to run sub-3:34 with a kick like many of these races are it’s a good setup for deep fields to go under 3:35.
exactly. when the standard is set, people chase it. Now that it's significantly under 3:35, all the people who come up just short still fall under 3:35.
It's actually the wavelights enabling these races to be hit in literal perfect splits. Why is this not being talked about more?
We had good shoes in the past (anyone remember the carbon fiber Vic elites?) and these shoes are not that much different (anyone who has run in the dragonfly will tell you that), and the training can't be THAT much different from what is done in the past.
But, we have an entirely NEW variable that we never had anything close to in the past: wavelight
Why does everyone focus on the slight tweaks to the shoes and the training and completely ignore the elephant in the room?
So the huge improvement of HS times in similar events, not just at the top but top 25, top 100, top 1000, etc, is due to wavelights and pacing, even though 99.9% of HS races are run still without wavelights or pacers, just like before? There is no elephant, what you see is just your own delusion.
Exactly. The shoes have made it easier to run fast.
The new training he is mentioning is probably a shift toward double thresholds, which isn't really new...
It's actually the wavelights enabling these races to be hit in literal perfect splits. Why is this not being talked about more?
We had good shoes in the past (anyone remember the carbon fiber Vic elites?) and these shoes are not that much different (anyone who has run in the dragonfly will tell you that), and the training can't be THAT much different from what is done in the past.
But, we have an entirely NEW variable that we never had anything close to in the past: wavelight
Why does everyone focus on the slight tweaks to the shoes and the training and completely ignore the elephant in the room?
These times are being recorded also in meets without WL. It's the shoes that allow pushing hard and often in training and, above all, threshold-heavy training methods spilling down at the fast end.
Booom!
"It's the Wavelights stupid!"folks go home devastated.
Why? Because there is not wavelight in the marathon where the shoes have decimated the times.
THere was no wavelight that mattered in Girma's WR as he was way ahead of it.
Now I did remark on the podcast that the 1500 pacing is now perfect, and I do think it makes a difference as Kiprop used to alway go out super fast (but that's what he wanted to do as I asked him about it), but I think the shoes are way greater than the wavelight.
People who act like shoes don't matter are people who have worn the new shoes. Go buy a pair.
Well Rojo, will be interesting what the new supershoes can do to my coached Kenyan Evans Bett in the 1500m if or when he will get them. Yesterday he made a great performance running a new PB 3:32.48 at 2:nd position after the new young Kenya star Reymond Cheruyiot ( 3:31:57 ) in the Kenya Nationals 1500m ( also qualification race for the African Games in two weeks time).I started to coach Evans 2 months ago ( ! ) when his PB was 3:39. I saw very early he had fantastic speed but lacked endurance , so I mainly worked on to correct that. E.g I had him to do a famous workout done by Mike Boit back in the -70s where Mike ran 2 x 800m@ 1:53 with 4 min rest between before he beat the world record then and ran 1:43.7 . Evans executed the same workout in 1:52 and 1:50 !
New PB with almost 7 sec in 2 months coaching without supershoes,must be a record in itself I guess,don`t you think?
There was no Evans Bett, and no one ran 3:31 or 3:32
Why? Because there is not wavelight in the marathon where the shoes have decimated the times.
THere was no wavelight that mattered in Girma's WR as he was way ahead of it.
Now I did remark on the podcast that the 1500 pacing is now perfect, and I do think it makes a difference as Kiprop used to alway go out super fast (but that's what he wanted to do as I asked him about it), but I think the shoes are way greater than the wavelight.
People who act like shoes don't matter are people who have worn the new shoes. Go buy a pair.
Okay pump the brakes Rojo. Because you are far too surface level here.
1) We are talking about vastly different product, used on vastly different surfaces for one. When you want to talk about the performance benefit of "energy return" it comes down to deflection of material under the foot and resilience (ability to return to its original shape). And the only material in these products that does this is the foam. The thicknesses of foam in track spikes are obviously different to those in road racing shoes (actual underfoot the difference is almost 2.5X - don't just look at the sidewall) and does not allow enough compression/deflection to create the same benefit. The most important elastic/energy return component in track running is still the track surface.
2) Wavelight itself is just the gateway or enabler to the ultimate performance benefit - even paced running. Wavelight isn't the performance enhancer - even paced running is. Again you can't compare the marathon and the track - it's far easier to run even paced at slower speeds, in your aerobic energy system. The marathon doesn't need wavelight as much as the track does. And also let's not act like the breaking 2 attempts where there essentially was a mobile wavelight helping Kipchoge, didn't help him understand his boundaries and pace judgement better for actual legit 'thons. And let's also not act like the motorbike which essentially rides in front of these guys with the running clock emblazoned on it doesn't act as an unofficial pacemaker (I'll let you in on a secret the driver knows exactly how fast to go based on what the lead guys want to run).
Bottom line, wavelight means a hell of a lot more to track than it does the marathon where the footwear is far more important.
3) No wavelight that mattered in the SC record? What race did you watch? Girma passes the front of the blue light at around 3min50-55 of that race. You don't think that the opening 50% of that race was crucial to what happened in the final 50% of that race? What if the pacemaker - instead of going through 400m in an even 63 seconds because he's right on the light, goes through in 61 because he's excited he's pacing a WR attempt. Or if he gets too conservative and runs a 64.5 and all of a sudden in both scenarios the pace has to fluctuate to get back on schedule? The two pacemakers who give him just over 3 out of 7.5 laps of perfect even pacing, do so because of WL. Before Girma passes the front of the blue light and moves away he is visibly looking down at it. When he does go past you don't think he is benefitting mentally from not seeing that light anymore? Every step he's taking he knows he's ahead of schedule - no benefit there?
4) This final comment - "people who act likes the shoes don't matter who haven't worn the new shoes". Firstly nobody is saying the shoes (spikes) don't matter - the question is how and to what degree, and more importantly how so in comparison to the other massive advancement we have on the track now (WL). In a way it kind of sucks that inadvertently, both of these performance enhancers came at almost exactly the same time so we didn't see a Cheptegei 5/10k attempt with only new spikes or vice versa with WL.
You can think the spikes are more important - I disagree. I worked first hand on and around these exact products for many years and I can tell you for a fact a net positive benefit is hard to quantify because we couldn't apply the same conditional testing logic we did in road product (mostly due to the surface and foam thickness differences) and we landed on it mostly being a cushioning benefit that helped athletes with short and long term cumulative fatigue (as Willis alluded to). That benefit was and is very athlete to athlete dependant.
The performance enhancement "pie chart" of total benefit?
At pro level (which is what we are discussing here when you are talking the Marathon WR, Girma, the current state of the 1500 etc etc)
Even paced running fuelled by Wavelight - 80%
"Super" spikes 20%
The spikes 100% help!
especially with certain lower leg phenotypes. Imagine your a bigger heavier athlete, you can now put more force into the ground and get more back also without losing much energy. The shoes is one of the huge reasons a lot of athletes can excel. I reckon someone should do a track meet that only allows old gen spikes and put some big money up and you’ll be surprised about how much slower people get
Why is it such a hard concept to understand that humans get better at things over time? Literally every sport, job, tech, ANYTHING humans do over time is better now than it was previously. It’s natural progression but everyone needs to have some sort of excuse to invalidate these.
Was interesting watching the NYC GP 1500 because it was so different and essentially a throwback. Sowinski was definitely instructed to try to put them on Worlds qualifying course. But there were no willing frontrunners (a factor I’ve cited) and after a crisp first lap (56-flat) he was having to slow the rhythm down lest he gap everyone. The race ended up being won in 3:37.0 with Holt running 54 for the last 400 and really opening up the last 150. This sort of race used to be frequent in the non-DL circuit and basically like every race in the US (earning mockery from Josh Kerr et al) but now is relatively rare. Holt certainly is in 3:34-35 shape, but there are multiple factors into the rash of sub-3:35 times and this race had only pacemaking, and thus went the other way. Also, no shade at all to Holt, he has the world ranking for Budapest and I presume his place score in this one will boost his spot even more.
This post was edited 54 seconds after it was posted.
Why is it such a hard concept to understand that humans get better at things over time? Literally every sport, job, tech, ANYTHING humans do over time is better now than it was previously. It’s natural progression but everyone needs to have some sort of excuse to invalidate these.
We're certainly getting better at doping.
New Zealand certainly is, but they aren't good for it to make a difference.
New Zealand certainly is, but they aren't good for it to make a difference.
Two distance athletes doped in their entire history. Isn't that about the monthly rate for Kenya? The US has done what it can to keep up, with the help of coaches like Salazar. Hasn't worked so well though, as we see from US results in distance running in global championships.
New Zealand certainly is, but they aren't good for it to make a difference.
Two distance athletes doped in their entire history. Isn't that about the monthly rate for Kenya? The US has done what it can to keep up, with the help of coaches like Salazar. Hasn't worked so well though, as we see from US results in distance running in global championships.
>Testing is ineffective and dopers are always ahead of the testers.
>Fewer failed tests means fewer athletes are doping.
You make both arguments but only one can be true. Pick one.
Okay pump the brakes Rojo. Because you are far too surface level here.
1) We are talking about vastly different product, used on vastly different surfaces for one. When you want to talk about the performance benefit of "energy return" it comes down to deflection of material under the foot and resilience (ability to return to its original shape). And the only material in these products that does this is the foam. The thicknesses of foam in track spikes are obviously different to those in road racing shoes (actual underfoot the difference is almost 2.5X - don't just look at the sidewall) and does not allow enough compression/deflection to create the same benefit. The most important elastic/energy return component in track running is still the track surface.
2) Wavelight itself is just the gateway or enabler to the ultimate performance benefit - even paced running. Wavelight isn't the performance enhancer - even paced running is. Again you can't compare the marathon and the track - it's far easier to run even paced at slower speeds, in your aerobic energy system. The marathon doesn't need wavelight as much as the track does. And also let's not act like the breaking 2 attempts where there essentially was a mobile wavelight helping Kipchoge, didn't help him understand his boundaries and pace judgement better for actual legit 'thons. And let's also not act like the motorbike which essentially rides in front of these guys with the running clock emblazoned on it doesn't act as an unofficial pacemaker (I'll let you in on a secret the driver knows exactly how fast to go based on what the lead guys want to run).
Bottom line, wavelight means a hell of a lot more to track than it does the marathon where the footwear is far more important.
3) No wavelight that mattered in the SC record? What race did you watch? Girma passes the front of the blue light at around 3min50-55 of that race. You don't think that the opening 50% of that race was crucial to what happened in the final 50% of that race? What if the pacemaker - instead of going through 400m in an even 63 seconds because he's right on the light, goes through in 61 because he's excited he's pacing a WR attempt. Or if he gets too conservative and runs a 64.5 and all of a sudden in both scenarios the pace has to fluctuate to get back on schedule? The two pacemakers who give him just over 3 out of 7.5 laps of perfect even pacing, do so because of WL. Before Girma passes the front of the blue light and moves away he is visibly looking down at it. When he does go past you don't think he is benefitting mentally from not seeing that light anymore? Every step he's taking he knows he's ahead of schedule - no benefit there?
4) This final comment - "people who act likes the shoes don't matter who haven't worn the new shoes". Firstly nobody is saying the shoes (spikes) don't matter - the question is how and to what degree, and more importantly how so in comparison to the other massive advancement we have on the track now (WL). In a way it kind of sucks that inadvertently, both of these performance enhancers came at almost exactly the same time so we didn't see a Cheptegei 5/10k attempt with only new spikes or vice versa with WL.
You can think the spikes are more important - I disagree. I worked first hand on and around these exact products for many years and I can tell you for a fact a net positive benefit is hard to quantify because we couldn't apply the same conditional testing logic we did in road product (mostly due to the surface and foam thickness differences) and we landed on it mostly being a cushioning benefit that helped athletes with short and long term cumulative fatigue (as Willis alluded to). That benefit was and is very athlete to athlete dependant.
The performance enhancement "pie chart" of total benefit?
At pro level (which is what we are discussing here when you are talking the Marathon WR, Girma, the current state of the 1500 etc etc)
Even paced running fuelled by Wavelight - 80%
"Super" spikes 20%
The spikes 100% help!
especially with certain lower leg phenotypes. Imagine your a bigger heavier athlete, you can now put more force into the ground and get more back also without losing much energy. The shoes is one of the huge reasons a lot of athletes can excel. I reckon someone should do a track meet that only allows old gen spikes and put some big money up and you’ll be surprised about how much slower people get
No one is saying they don't.
The question is how much they help and how much they help relative to the other performance enhancement aid used in top pro meets now - wavelight.
I have a theory on the spikes and the "over-advocating" of their impact. It's the easiest thing for ex-runners to point at as to why athletes today are faster and getting faster.
The glory days 5000m runner who might have run 13.59 and say 28.06'ish finds it easier to point at spikes as these magical implements others now have that they didn't. It's a much more tangible thing to blame it on rather than saying "man these athletes just run better physiological races because they are running a 5/10km with km splits all within a second of each other" (for all but usually the last one of the race where they have run so economically for 90% of the race they can close even faster).
Even pace running - while difficult without lights, has been available for every runner in history. Really cushioned spikes haven't been. Much easier to pin it on a physical item.
Now in the case of HS/college kids who don't have access to wavelight, it is different. Even paced running (LRC just wrote a massive article on how it's the way of the future because that's exactly what AT (anaerobic threshold emphasis is about), is still more of an art form and harder to execute in races. What spikes do for the college and high school kids is simply help them not annihilate themselves on the track like they used to, because well, kids want to run in spikes on the track and run fast and run long.
I have never had issue with saying the spikes are better and help improve performance. What I don't agree with is assigning a "seconds per lap" value to them (not scientific or logical) and I don't agree that when wavelight is available they are a better performance enhancement "tool" than the LED's.
I hadn't read these but these are right on the money.
I still can't understand why people can't envision/entertain the concept of what's going on here (with WL). Just bizarre
Or is it really that simple that people just need to assign "blame" or "responsibility" to physical items they can see/touch/procure because access to these items has obviously varied (from non-existent to now a choice) over the course of time?
Not to mention pacers in every race, even in many big high school meets. Combined with the lights we are talking seconds per lap.
Prior to the pace lights, at least 2/3rds of races were screwed up by bad pacing.
I don't think people remember how common it was for a pacer to be 20+ metres ahead of the field after a lap. That doesn't seem to happen anymore.
In the Diamond League, you might get one well paced race, with a stacked field, and a willingness to go all in. That tended to be Monaco - now it's every race.
In swimming it's rare for someone to come from behind. Now we are getting some of that in distance running because there seems to always be a good pacer. I wish the Pacer had to finish within a certain distance behind the winner for it to be a legal WR.
Okay pump the brakes Rojo. Because you are far too surface level here.
1) We are talking about vastly different product, used on vastly different surfaces for one. When you want to talk about the performance benefit of "energy return" it comes down to deflection of material under the foot and resilience (ability to return to its original shape). And the only material in these products that does this is the foam. The thicknesses of foam in track spikes are obviously different to those in road racing shoes (actual underfoot the difference is almost 2.5X - don't just look at the sidewall) and does not allow enough compression/deflection to create the same benefit. The most important elastic/energy return component in track running is still the track surface.
2) Wavelight itself is just the gateway or enabler to the ultimate performance benefit - even paced running. Wavelight isn't the performance enhancer - even paced running is. Again you can't compare the marathon and the track - it's far easier to run even paced at slower speeds, in your aerobic energy system. The marathon doesn't need wavelight as much as the track does. And also let's not act like the breaking 2 attempts where there essentially was a mobile wavelight helping Kipchoge, didn't help him understand his boundaries and pace judgement better for actual legit 'thons. And let's also not act like the motorbike which essentially rides in front of these guys with the running clock emblazoned on it doesn't act as an unofficial pacemaker (I'll let you in on a secret the driver knows exactly how fast to go based on what the lead guys want to run).
Bottom line, wavelight means a hell of a lot more to track than it does the marathon where the footwear is far more important.
3) No wavelight that mattered in the SC record? What race did you watch? Girma passes the front of the blue light at around 3min50-55 of that race. You don't think that the opening 50% of that race was crucial to what happened in the final 50% of that race? What if the pacemaker - instead of going through 400m in an even 63 seconds because he's right on the light, goes through in 61 because he's excited he's pacing a WR attempt. Or if he gets too conservative and runs a 64.5 and all of a sudden in both scenarios the pace has to fluctuate to get back on schedule? The two pacemakers who give him just over 3 out of 7.5 laps of perfect even pacing, do so because of WL. Before Girma passes the front of the blue light and moves away he is visibly looking down at it. When he does go past you don't think he is benefitting mentally from not seeing that light anymore? Every step he's taking he knows he's ahead of schedule - no benefit there?
4) This final comment - "people who act likes the shoes don't matter who haven't worn the new shoes". Firstly nobody is saying the shoes (spikes) don't matter - the question is how and to what degree, and more importantly how so in comparison to the other massive advancement we have on the track now (WL). In a way it kind of sucks that inadvertently, both of these performance enhancers came at almost exactly the same time so we didn't see a Cheptegei 5/10k attempt with only new spikes or vice versa with WL.
You can think the spikes are more important - I disagree. I worked first hand on and around these exact products for many years and I can tell you for a fact a net positive benefit is hard to quantify because we couldn't apply the same conditional testing logic we did in road product (mostly due to the surface and foam thickness differences) and we landed on it mostly being a cushioning benefit that helped athletes with short and long term cumulative fatigue (as Willis alluded to). That benefit was and is very athlete to athlete dependant.
The performance enhancement "pie chart" of total benefit?
At pro level (which is what we are discussing here when you are talking the Marathon WR, Girma, the current state of the 1500 etc etc)
Even paced running fuelled by Wavelight - 80%
"Super" spikes 20%
The spikes 100% help!
especially with certain lower leg phenotypes. Imagine your a bigger heavier athlete, you can now put more force into the ground and get more back also without losing much energy. The shoes is one of the huge reasons a lot of athletes can excel. I reckon someone should do a track meet that only allows old gen spikes and put some big money up and you’ll be surprised about how much slower people get
