All those groups you listed are getting faster across the board because of shoe tech, better training, fast tracks, wave lights, etc.
Those factors cannot explain how Jessica Hull, who has already been able to enjoy the benefits of modern advances for the past several years, suddenly went from an also-ran to running right behind Faith Kipyegon.
So I said I still am giving the BOTD here - but it's really by a thread and these are the primary reasons why.
To be honest, if Hull has actually been a less accomplished/relevant athlete over this distance in the last 2-3 season it might incredibly be more convincing. Someone bought up Ruth Wysocki earlier and how she busted out a huge PR in the 1984 trials to beat Slaney. But she basically never ran the 1500m but was elite over 800m for many years so it's not a huge stretch to say she was just super untapped over the distance. Maybe if the 3000/5000 had been her premier events with the occasional foray into the 1500m then it's more palatable.
But that's not the case here. Hull is a locked in DL level athlete and has been now for at least 2 seasons. She's run the 1500m/mile in Monaco the last 2 years, same with Brussels - these are fast venues (no less "fast" than the Stade Sébastien Charléty) with wavelight and with respect to maybe the fastest of them all, Monaco, and "pacemaking", she has had Kipyegon there running the same perfect splits as a few days ago in Paris.
People need to stop it with the spikes. Trust me, the Zoom Vic spikes she wore are fundamentally no different to the ones of the previous two seasons. Some nice updates to the geometry of the foam which is purely visual and the zoom bags are the same. You want to know the biggest difference? They have gone from 6 spike pins to 4 (which I love btw you don't even need them) which probably saves them 10-12g in receptacle/spike weight.
So really we are left with training/focus/attitude. As you pointed out, does this explain how we go from front end of the pack, through to breaking away from the pack right behind the WR holder and best female MD runner ever? Does training work like this? Was she training so sub-optimally the last 2-3 seasons (despite being a 3.57 runner which is still very very good) and whatever the change was just flipped a switch and opened the floodgates? That's what we really have to believe here. If you choose to of course....
How many seconds is it to run on the rail the whole way, and also to have a draft for a lot of the race? (Compared to what she experiences in average in other races), and run a very well paced (optimal splits) race (I stead of slowing, surging, kicking, etc.). 2 sec for all of that? 2.5? If she ran 2.5 slower, would you think the same thing?
What this shows is that athletes are crazy not to dope. Here an established runner suddenly runs an insane time never even suggested in her prior competitive history and although there is some healthy skepticism, by and large it is the same credulous response. People will buy anything.
How many seconds is it to run on the rail the whole way, and also to have a draft for a lot of the race? (Compared to what she experiences in average in other races), and run a very well paced (optimal splits) race (I stead of slowing, surging, kicking, etc.). 2 sec for all of that? 2.5? If she ran 2.5 slower, would you think the same thing?
"Compared to what she experiences in average in other races"? What exactly do you mean here? What other races? I just rewatched this years Pre with her big (at the time) 3.55.97 PR from there. Here are the splits I got: I took the 1st 100m and then each 200m split from 1400m to the finish.
Visually watching the race the first 300m could definitely have been more efficient but by the time she hits 400m she is right behind ESP and that is where she stays running almost dead even splits (see above) until she passes her with 220m of the race remaining. In general that is phenomenally well paced and optimal way to race. She's on the rail/shoulder of ESP drafting for what, 900m of the race?
Subscribe to get all the latest USATF content: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCR69bettlgCtKUWIDh2PUJA?sub_confirmation=1Watch Live and On-Demand Coverage, ...
Here is the race - maybe you show us where the egregious slowing, surging, kicking happens? Her splits would suggest otherwise - even the final 200m is more a function of her holding her pace vs increasing it (it's the optic created by ESP slowing down) - in fact she even runs her final 200 slightly slower than the penultimate one.
What is a perfectly paced, optimally run race worth? Depends what you are comparing it to doesn't it.
What this shows is that athletes are crazy not to dope. Here an established runner suddenly runs an insane time never even suggested in her prior competitive history and although there is some healthy skepticism, by and large it is the same credulous response. People will buy anything.
This.
She has certainly had an interesting leap forward this year, and so far she is really only getting applause and cheers -- from both mainstream news and specialty journalists like Citius. (Serious followers of the sport are taking a closer look, and this thread surely reflects many raised eyebrows out there.)
Whatever she has done to suddenly improve by almost seven seconds this year, what runner would not want to do the same thing?
You unwittingly provide the answer to an interesting question: What what the reaction here be if an elite Kenyan runner suddenly dropped seven seconds in the 1500?
I'd say it's not possible to drop seven seconds in a 1500 when you're a highly experienced athlete already among the top in the world...unless you've had "help". I hope WADA is paying attention.
You can be clean and improve 7 seconds at this level if she changed her training e.g. increase in mileage by 25 percent but not by more of the same.
What is a perfectly paced, optimally run race worth? Depends what you are comparing it to doesn't it.
Great post.
She has been in SO MANY fast DL races, and until this year never ran a single one under 3:57, even while chasing faster runners who essentially provided pacing for the entire race. (And she has never won ANY of them.)
The idea that 'she just needed the right race' is simply outlandish as an explanation for this massive drop.
I think probably it has to do the widespread use of the Maurten bicarb hydrogel system. People have known about bicarb for a long time, but putting it in a hydrogel makes it so many people are able to take it without the extreme nausea. I think this is getting more widely adopted across a broader range of middle distance athletes. It's expensive, but legal. I know that Ingebrigtsen has been using it for a while, and the Coffee club boys talked about integrating it just maybe a year and a half ago. Perhaps now it is just standard for middle distance athletes.
Since it seems to be making a difference on middle distance times the most, that makes sense. The longer the race, the more variables come into play besides lactate buffering. I can imagine that for a marathon or even a 10K there are just more factors at play that can affect the race.
I'd say it's not possible to drop seven seconds in a 1500 when you're a highly experienced athlete already among the top in the world...unless you've had "help". I hope WADA is paying attention.
You can be clean and improve 7 seconds at this level if she changed her training e.g. increase in mileage by 25 percent but not by more of the same.
Really? If that were true and it was that simple don’t you think everyone would increase their mileage by 25% (or some other basic training adjustment)…3:50 is light years better than 3:57 (or 3:55).
I think probably it has to do the widespread use of the Maurten bicarb hydrogel system. People have known about bicarb for a long time, but putting it in a hydrogel makes it so many people are able to take it without the extreme nausea. I think this is getting more widely adopted across a broader range of middle distance athletes. It's expensive, but legal. I know that Ingebrigtsen has been using it for a while, and the Coffee club boys talked about integrating it just maybe a year and a half ago. Perhaps now it is just standard for middle distance athletes.
Since it seems to be making a difference on middle distance times the most, that makes sense. The longer the race, the more variables come into play besides lactate buffering. I can imagine that for a marathon or even a 10K there are just more factors at play that can affect the race.
It has to be the Maurten gel system for the widespread improvement across the board. Still doesn’t explain Hull’s performance.
Di they need to enable this Maurten gel to be widely available to ALL athletes. Can’t be easy for an unsponsored athlete to get this regularly.
Anyone have any objective good info on her father's coaching pedigree and experience? Given that she was already fantastically good at consistent 3.57 to 3.59 and with years of experience already, anyone who can enable this immense breakthrough must be quite a coaching wizard. This reads a little more cynical than is intended and I literally know zero about her dad but the query about his coaching input in her new environment is genuine.
Marion Jones, Barry Bonds and others showed over twenty years ago that an athlete could be "glowing" and it wouldn't result in a positive test. Those athletes were only caught because they were in their supplier's records. Howman said it was quite a shock for WADA to discover that athletes could easily "mask" their drug use. In the two decades since it has become an integral part of the doping process now, that the drugs being used will often contain masking agents to avoid their detection. It's one of the reasons there has been an increased reliance by antidoping on the bio-passport, to try to detect drug use through unusual physiological indicators when tests cannot detect the drugs being used. But even the passport can be beaten. Doping is one of the most sophisticated parts of professional sport today, it is at the cutting edge - and fans haven't a clue.
They can't exactly bust an athlete with the bio passport unless some levels are off-the-charts above certain thresholds; however, a knowledgeable person can pretty quickly determine if an athlete is "likely doping" (the leaked documents showed us this) and then they can develop a pattern of testing to try to catch them or at least give an athlete an idea that they need to cut it out (I think USADA is more likely to do this than to try to catch anyone). AIU got Shelby because they did two tests in quick succession within a few days of each other, and that pretty much never happens. Shelby thought she had the green light after the first test and then likely got caught because she took something the night before her failed test.
Updated USADA leaders in numbers of tests this year in case anyone was wondering:
12: ShaCarri Richardson (hahahahaha!!!!!)
11: Sean McGorty
10: Kiera D'Amato, Natosha Rogers
9: Anna Hall, Christian Coleman, Clayton Young, Elle St. Pierre, Fred Kerley, Nick Christie
8: Erriyon Knighton, Evan Jager, Galen Rupp, Grant Fisher, Hillary Bor, Hobbs Kessler, Karissa Schweizer, Miranda Melville, Payton Otterdahl, Quincy Hall, Sara Hall, Vashti Cunningham, Zouhair Talbi
Others of note: Noah Lyles (7), Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone (7), Yared Nuguse (7), Nia Akins (7), Nikki Hiltz (7), Ryan Crouser (6), Cole Hocker (6), Elise Cranny (6), Chase Jackson (5), Kenny Bednarek (5), Valerie Allman (4), Rai Benjamin (3)
So I said I still am giving the BOTD here - but it's really by a thread and these are the primary reasons why.
To be honest, if Hull has actually been a less accomplished/relevant athlete over this distance in the last 2-3 season it might incredibly be more convincing. Someone bought up Ruth Wysocki earlier and how she busted out a huge PR in the 1984 trials to beat Slaney. But she basically never ran the 1500m but was elite over 800m for many years so it's not a huge stretch to say she was just super untapped over the distance. Maybe if the 3000/5000 had been her premier events with the occasional foray into the 1500m then it's more palatable.
But that's not the case here. Hull is a locked in DL level athlete and has been now for at least 2 seasons. She's run the 1500m/mile in Monaco the last 2 years, same with Brussels - these are fast venues (no less "fast" than the Stade Sébastien Charléty) with wavelight and with respect to maybe the fastest of them all, Monaco, and "pacemaking", she has had Kipyegon there running the same perfect splits as a few days ago in Paris.
People need to stop it with the spikes. Trust me, the Zoom Vic spikes she wore are fundamentally no different to the ones of the previous two seasons. Some nice updates to the geometry of the foam which is purely visual and the zoom bags are the same. You want to know the biggest difference? They have gone from 6 spike pins to 4 (which I love btw you don't even need them) which probably saves them 10-12g in receptacle/spike weight.
So really we are left with training/focus/attitude. As you pointed out, does this explain how we go from front end of the pack, through to breaking away from the pack right behind the WR holder and best female MD runner ever? Does training work like this? Was she training so sub-optimally the last 2-3 seasons (despite being a 3.57 runner which is still very very good) and whatever the change was just flipped a switch and opened the floodgates? That's what we really have to believe here. If you choose to of course....
Exactly. The only variable that’s changed for her that I know of is she moved back to Australia sometime last year and started training with her dad. That’s what adds to my suspicion. Australia is far away from most of the track world. If someone is going to dope, a remote location like Australia would be a good choice. Sure, being home provides comfort. If your home happens to be a far away place like Australia, it can also provide cover.
Then when I look at the insane drops this year by other Australian women in the distance events, it makes me really wonder what’s going on over there.
TIL that Sydney with a population of 5.3 million is a remote location. Pretty sure a major urban area is not what they meant when they said "remote location". Alice Springs would be a remote location. Sydney is not.
Exactly. The only variable that’s changed for her that I know of is she moved back to Australia sometime last year and started training with her dad. That’s what adds to my suspicion. Australia is far away from most of the track world. If someone is going to dope, a remote location like Australia would be a good choice. Sure, being home provides comfort. If your home happens to be a far away place like Australia, it can also provide cover.
Then when I look at the insane drops this year by other Australian women in the distance events, it makes me really wonder what’s going on over there.
Australia is far away from most of the track world. If someone is going to dope, a remote location like Australia would be a good choice."
What is it with you idiots, no it's not, just because the country is "remote" from the rest of the world, doesn't mean it's third world, it's a first world country with the technology to go with it.
If you are an elite sports person taking PEDs you're going to get pinged, especially if you're a team member leading up to the Olympics.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
The technological know how to dope and cover-up said doping with assistance from national bodies responsible for administering drug tests.
Quit trying to paint lily-white, Anglo-Saxon Australia as some morally high nation above doping, this result, along with staggering performance increases among a few of of female distance runners, see below, suggests something fishy going on in the land down under probably preparing for the potential 2032 Olympics.
Rose Davies has improved her 5K time from 15:07 to 14:41. Isobel Batt-Doyle has improved her 5K time from 15:04 to 14:49. Lauren Ryan has improved her 10K time from 32:09 to 30:35. Her 5K PR before this year was 15:11 but now she can average under 15:18 pace for 10K! A lot of improvement from Australian women this year.
Times Falling Down Under07/08/2024 12:27pm EDT3 weeks ago
Rose Davies has improved her 5K time from 15:07 to 14:41.Isobel Batt-Doyle has improved her 5K time from 15:04 to 14:49.Lauren Ryan has improved her 10K time from 32:09 to 30:35. Her 5K PR before this year was 15:11 but now s...
Australia is far away from most of the track world. If someone is going to dope, a remote location like Australia would be a good choice."
What is it with you idiots, no it's not, just because the country is "remote" from the rest of the world, doesn't mean it's third world, it's a first world country with the technology to go with it.
If you are an elite sports person taking PEDs you're going to get pinged, especially if you're a team member leading up to the Olympics.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
The technological know how to dope and cover-up said doping with assistance from national bodies responsible for administering drug tests.
Quit trying to paint lily-white, Anglo-Saxon Australia as some morally high nation above doping, this result, along with staggering performance increases among a few of of female distance runners, see below, suggests something fishy going on in the land down under probably preparing for the potential 2032 Olympics.
Rose Davies has improved her 5K time from 15:07 to 14:41. Isobel Batt-Doyle has improved her 5K time from 15:04 to 14:49. Lauren Ryan has improved her 10K time from 32:09 to 30:35. Her 5K PR before this year was 15:11 but now she can average under 15:18 pace for 10K! A lot of improvement from Australian women this year.
It's beyond ridiculous to imply a country like Australia, with some of the strictest drug testing procedures and technology in the world, would be engaged in some kind of systematic doping along the lines of Kenya, Russia, etc, etc.