We can definitely agree there is another level at play here.
The level where an experienced elite, who has raced at a high level every year for over a decade, suddenly lops seven seconds off their 1500 PB in one season.
All I'm saying is it's interesting.
It's very similar to Hiltz reducing her 1500 pr by 6 seconds at 29 from age 24. Distance runners appear to be getting better as they age. You might ask how.
She doesn't look as 'skinny as ever' as a different letsrunner suggests.
Hang on there, I’m just now starting to watch a replay of the race, and there is a nice frontal shot of her on the start line before the race, and she definitely looks leaned out.
using the general rule of "1500 time = 2 x 800 time" this means Jess should have about 1:55 800 speed
her pr before this season was 2:03.78, now 1:59.99, but clearly she's much faster than that
I use a conversion of 800 PB x 1.05 x 1.875 = 1500 PB as a well-trained athlete can run the 1500 5% slower than the 800, and the 1500 is 87.5% further in distance.
So working backwards, Jess Hull would need an 800 PB of 1:57.25 to run 3:50.83.
Hang on there, I’m just now starting to watch a replay of the race, and there is a nice frontal shot of her on the start line before the race, and she definitely looks leaned out.
I mean, like seriously leaned out, for Jess Hull.
This race replay is great. They have a closeup of Kipyegon and Hull down the home straight about 4seconds before they ring the bell for the bell lap. Right after the Spanish speaking commentator says “Jessica Hull, fantastico!”, right on cue, Kipyegon looks over her left shoulder with an expression on her face, like “What the %##%?”
There isn't a week goes by when a top runner isn't arousing questions here of doping. Taken as a whole the picture is of a sport in which the best can't be trusted to be clean. It doesn't matter how many explanations can be made here to try to justify any given performance the persistent suspicions they are the result of doping render such defences unconvincing, except to the wilfully naive. If any other sport was subject to such equivalent speculation - nay, suspicion - that sport would long have been consigned as 'dirty' and simply a vehicle for achievement through pharmaceuticals. That has been cycling, wrestling, body-building and weightlifting; so it also is with running.
This post was edited 38 seconds after it was posted.
An awful lot of very suspicious athletes there, not least Kipyegon! Very interested in the rapid progression of Georgia Bell but obviously British runners don’t dope…
I also think you have to add the mental aspect into this "leap" as we are calling it. Can one's stronger belief in their workouts add to a better time in a race? A look into her training logs would probably shut some people up on this blog. When I was in the military I ran a 4:28 mile in September one year. I had lost a little more weight, started running more speed workouts and consistently trained over the winter time more than the past couple of years. I ran a 4:19 mile in the spring at an open track meet. I felt very excited about that race, as I came through 1200 meters in 3:09, so I knew I still maybe had something in me. I was transferred to Europe late spring. I got involved/trained with the local running club and was able to get into a sponsored Reebok meet. I was in the "C" 1500 race. I ran a 3:54, which would probably convert to 4:12 or so mile. All this in about a years worth of training. Let me add that I was 34 years old at the time. My PR for the mile was 4:08 right after college. Being in that stadium sent chills up my back and the adrenaline flowing at an all-time high.
Valby has well over 50x the number of threads in which she was incessantly accused (by a couple of whack jobs in particular). I think you are pretending that factoid escapes you.
