A see in this forum a lot of people explain the 1500m times we have seen resently with the improved shoes. Why do we not see this improvement in the mens 800m? Maybe the new shoes do not have that much to say.......
A see in this forum a lot of people explain the 1500m times we have seen resently with the improved shoes. Why do we not see this improvement in the mens 800m? Maybe the new shoes do not have that much to say.......
Imo the shoes help more the longer you run, the impact of the shoes in the 800m is quite small, a couple of tenths if anything, while at the double distance I'd say 0,5-1,5s is very reasonable at top level.
Same goes for women’s times.
the WL most years should be 1:53-1:54, and the WR for women should be closer to 1:51.
There is only so much a human body can do. If you ever ran the 800m, you would know that it is the HARDEST event in T&F
Idn123 wrote:
A see in this forum a lot of people explain the 1500m times we have seen resently with the improved shoes. Why do we not see this improvement in the mens 800m? Maybe the new shoes do not have that much to say.......
No Rudisha - nobody to chase.
The 800 is a weird event with times.
People wondered why the men's record was not broken or even threatened between 1981 and 1997. And it has only dropped 0.8 seconds in the last 40 years.
As far as the shoes, the 400 hasn't seen a lot of fast times either.
But honestly, the best athletes don't run those events. The 1500 is the mid distance glory. Good long sprinters like Kerley and Lyles have focused their efforts on the 100 over the 400.
Kipketer and Rudisha may have been 400m runners if they grew up in the US instead of Kenya. National culture influences choices.