Yet Another Cycling Forum
Off Topic => The Pub => The Sporting Life => Topic started by: ElyDave on 12 October, 2019, 09:25:09 am
-
World record, but not an athletics record, because paced etc
But :o :o :o
Fucking superb, what next?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/50025543 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/50025543)
-
coverage... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-XgKRJUEgQ
-
I was watching on Youtube. That speed is just insane! Yes there were pacers etc - but he ran at >13mph for 2 hours. :o
And he still had energy to run about at the end...amazing stuff.
-
and it's not "just" sub 2-hour, it's 20 seconds under 2hours!
-
Will be fascinating to see how he does in future race conditions.
-
It's clearly an incredible achievement but it's one of those things that has more than meets the eye.
There's an interesting podcast discussion at the science of sport. The jist is that the shoe is returning energy so much more efficiently that it can improve running efficiency - the previous version was called the 4% because it was supposedly 4% more efficient in lab tests. This version is 2 generations on (well one gen but then tailored specifically for the individual).
Stick him in shoes that the customer can buy and he's 1 minute over the 2 hours. That's an incredible achievement in itself but it's not the superhuman feat as it might first appear.
-
So it's all about selling shoes? Okay, Nike or Adidas?
-
coverage... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-XgKRJUEgQ
Start is a full hour in.
-
I think it's well over 10 years since I managed to keep up that sort of speed on a bike.
-
And over on CC there are forum allegations that he cheated :facepalm:
-
MrsT would probably like a pair of those shoes for Christmas. Maybe I should start a Go Fund Me appeal.
-
So it's all about selling shoes? Okay, Nike or Adidas?
Nike Vapourfly: https://www.runnersworld.com/gear/a29447426/eliud-kipchoge-shoes/
3 carbon fibre plates, plus some fluid sacks to cushion the shock, and return the energy to the carbon plates and back to the runner.
-
And just a day later, the women's marathon world record has been broken by Brigid Kosgei!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/50035304 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/50035304)
(She was wearing the Nike shoes, as well, apparently.)
-
I read that the shoes they are "not homologated" by the relevant organisation. Why do running shoes have to be homologated? What do they look for, beyond presumably not falling apart in a race and the absence of external power sources?
-
I read that the shoes they are "not homologated" by the relevant organisation. Why do running shoes have to be homologated? What do they look for, beyond presumably not falling apart in a race and the absence of external power sources?
I suppose it's only a matter of time before they go full UCI on some sheddi with running soles made from washing machine door seals or something.
-
Shoes containing springs or wheels are banned.
Question is whether a rubber sole and carbon plates counts as a spring. Nike claim it gives extra rebound etc.
-
putting this in context, nobody is claiming this as a valid IAAF time, and irrespective of technology, pacers etc this is a marathon completed in about 30 mins more than I can do a half marathon. It's a fantastic achievement and should be celebrated as such.
-
So they've banned springs but not defined how springy something can be before it's a spring?
-
putting this in context, nobody is claiming this as a valid IAAF time, and irrespective of technology, pacers etc this is a marathon completed in about 30 mins more than I can do a half marathon. It's a fantastic achievement and should be celebrated as such.
Absolutely. When people say things like
Admiration for Kipchoge’s magnificent million-dollar achievement was only slightly undermined by the information that he was wearing a version of Nike’s Vaporfly running shoe so new that it has not yet been homologated by the governing body. Like other aspects of his run, such as the use of roll-in, roll-out pacemakers, this made it clear that his feat belonged not in the realm of sport but in the related field of science-assisted human performance. What you might feel about the value of such an achievement when it is entirely divorced from the sphere of rules-based competition is entirely up to you.
it's kind of nonsense. It's just swapped one set of rules for another.
-
Which was the better performance, this one or the 2:01:39 WR he ran in Berlin?
For me, probably Berlin. Homologated shoes, restricted pacemakers, no car with green lasers, actual race. Less publicity/discussion about that one though. ;)
-
I read that the shoes they are "not homologated" by the relevant organisation. Why do running shoes have to be homologated? What do they look for, beyond presumably not falling apart in a race and the absence of external power sources?
Maybe they shouldn't have inspector Gadget type springs ;)
[edit] really should have read the backlog huh? ::-) :-*
-
2. Athletes may compete barefoot or with footwear on one or both feet.
The purpose of shoes for competition is to give protection and stability to the feet and a firm grip on the ground. Such shoes, however, must not be constructed so as to give athletes any unfair assistance or advantage. Any type of shoe used must be reasonably available to all in the spirit of the universality of athletics.
Note (i): Adapting a shoe to suit the characteristic of a particular athlete’s foot is permitted if made in accordance with the general principles of these Rules.
Note (ii): Where evidence is provided to the IAAF that a type of shoe being used in competition does not comply with the Rules or the spirit of them, it may refer the shoe for study and if there is non-compliance may prohibit such shoes from being used in competition.
Seems the current IAAF rules about shoes are rather vague.
So what actually counts as "unfair assistance or advantage"? Presumably the latest Nike shoes are a custom prototype, so not yet "reasonably available to all".
Think the previous rules were more specific about springs. There was debate about Oscar Pistorious, and whether his blades are an "unfair advantage".
-
Which was the better performance, this one or the 2:01:39 WR he ran in Berlin?
For me, probably Berlin. Homologated shoes, restricted pacemakers, no car with green lasers, actual race. Less publicity/discussion about that one though. ;)
only if you think the shoes are worth 2 minutes.
Let's face it, those shoes will be available to all within 6 months, then it's up to the IAAF to decide if they fit within their vague rules or not.
REmember another unbreakable barrier? The 4-min mile, finally broken with (shhh!) the aid of pacemakers. Anyone want to denigrate Sir Roger as well?
-
Did the pacemakers for the marathon start the race? They did for the 4 min mile, I believe.
-
Did the pacemakers for the marathon start the race? They did for the 4 min mile, I believe.
It wasn't a race. It was a record breaking event. The pacers alternated, and were arranged to give the most aerodynamic benefit. There was also an electric car, which dictated the record pace. Dave Brailsford helped organise these 'marginal gains', as it was an INEOS-backed enterprise.
-
Which was the better performance, this one or the 2:01:39 WR he ran in Berlin?
For me, probably Berlin. Homologated shoes, restricted pacemakers, no car with green lasers, actual race. Less publicity/discussion about that one though. ;)
only if you think the shoes are worth 2 minutes.
That's if you think "better performance" means "faster time". Which in the case of a record breaking event it pretty much has to, but in a normal race, it might not; just as in football, a match in which your team plays superbly but loses might be better – or not – than one in which they play badly but win.
-
Which was the better performance, this one or the 2:01:39 WR he ran in Berlin?
For me, probably Berlin. Homologated shoes, restricted pacemakers, no car with green lasers, actual race. Less publicity/discussion about that one though. ;)
only if you think the shoes are worth 2 minutes.
Let's face it, those shoes will be available to all within 6 months, then it's up to the IAAF to decide if they fit within their vague rules or not.
REmember another unbreakable barrier? The 4-min mile, finally broken with (shhh!) the aid of pacemakers. Anyone want to denigrate Sir Roger as well?
No, it's not just the shoes. In the race there were pacemakers, but they didn't run in a flying V to shelter him (with a car to shelter them), they started at the start and ran until they couldn't hold the pace (25km or so). After that, he was on his own.
Bannister's pacemakers were the normal sort - the ones that start the race and run until they blow up. The rules at that point were such that they had to finish, so they dragged themselves around the last lap or 2 finishing ages down. The same conditions as Kipchoge's Berlin race in fact.
And I'm not denigrating the athlete. He's the world record holder, and he's run 3 marathon distances faster than any other athlete (he was the fastest of the 3 in the previous "Breaking 2" circus which involved running behind a Tesla around Monza (if they had chosen a flatter course he could have gone sub 2 that day)). He belongs in the pantheon of great marathon runners, and has a fair claim to be right at the top of that list. He's won 4 Londons, 3 Berlins, 1 Chicago, an Olympics and various other "smaller" marathons.
-
only if you think the shoes are worth 2 minutes.
Let's face it, those shoes will be available to all within 6 months, then it's up to the IAAF to decide if they fit within their vague rules or not.
Nike claim the latest shoes are up to 1% better than the previous version, which is over 1 minute anyway.
If those shoes are custom designs specifically for Kipchoge, they may not be able to buy. In 6 months time, Nike could have made a new even better version.
An interesting chart of how many top runners are wearing Nike.
https://www.runningshoesguru.com/2018/11/shoes-of-the-winners-of-the-2018-world-marathon-majors-infographic/
(https://cdn.runningshoesguru.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Top-3-Shoes-2108-Marathon-Majors.jpg)
-
Did the pacemakers for the marathon start the race? They did for the 4 min mile, I believe.
It wasn't a race. It was a record breaking event. The pacers alternated, and were arranged to give the most aerodynamic benefit. There was also an electric car, which dictated the record pace. Dave Brailsford helped organise these 'marginal gains', as it was an INEOS-backed enterprise.
Arguably it wasn't even a record-breaking event! I don't believe there was a recognised record for a marathon run under those conditions. (of course I think you knew that ... )
Bannister's run WAS record-breaking - there were established rules under which the record had been lowered many times over the years.
You can debate whether pacemakers are "sporting" , but those were/are the rules.
It's a publicity stunt, but certainly an interesting one :thumbsup:
-
The shoe homologation aspect is an interesting one.
At one end of the spectrum you have someone running barefoot. No cushioning, no extra "bounce" or "spring".
At the other end you have the theoretical case of someone using large springs attached to the bottom of the shoes (or integrated into the shoes), and probably making the average person able to run faster than 13mph for 2 hours.
All running shoes will be somewhere between these two extremes. Some offer more bounce/response/spring than others. The IAAF will have drawn the line somewhere.
What the IAAF allows in order for a shoe to be homologated will not be found in a vague two line snippet in its rules about shoes. There's probably going to be some big technical document in a dusty filing cabinet in the IAAF head offices that maybe Nike are aware of and have a copy of and knew how to push the limits of.
Those shoes will probably be tested at some point, or are already undergoing testing, by the IAAF. They'll either be found to be ok, and loads of people will want to wear them as they will be homologated, or the IAAF will kick up a fuss and say they offer too much "bounce/spring" and no-one will be allowed to use them in a standard race.
Either way, Kipchoge ran a marathon in under 2 hours on a near flat closed (to people and other competitors) course, with rotating pacemakers, laser pacing, in shoes that may or may not get the IAAF stamp of approval, and probably even some mild benefit from a car 15 yards or so in front of him (physics says it would be negligible given the pacemaker formation in front of him).
There are a lot of caveats there but, now that this has happened, I don't think it will take long before it's done again under normal marathon conditions (open event, no rotating pacemakers, no car to potential aid the draft, etc).
There are also other ways to run faster "marathons" that don't comply with the same rules:-
* Running down a big mountain would give you a really good advantage, but the marathon record rules prohibit excessive elevation loss between start and finish.
* Canicross could also give a good marathon runner a really good chance (I believe there are some sub 13-minute canicross parkrun times out there and one runner+dog combo was closing in on a sub-12 minute parkrun[1]
* etc
but, of course, these do not qualify as the "marathon record" since that has a bunch of stipulations which were ignored for the official record (some of which are entirely arbitrary too, such as the maximum amount of elevation loss).
1. https://www.fastrunning.com/features/ben-robinson-aims-sub-12-minute-5k-help-blake/9867
-
And that reminds me, someone has got a pair of them and tried them out and got a big PB on both a 10k run and on the track:-
https://twitter.com/Raworthontherun/status/1184100262182563840/photo/1
(Caveat: sample set size of 1, could have just been a good day for the runner in question and a result of rest and improvement from previous training.)
-
Did the pacemakers for the marathon start the race? They did for the 4 min mile, I believe.
It wasn't a race. It was a record breaking event. The pacers alternated, and were arranged to give the most aerodynamic benefit. There was also an electric car, which dictated the record pace. Dave Brailsford helped organise these 'marginal gains', as it was an INEOS-backed enterprise.
I asked a question. You went off on one at better than World Beating Event Pace!
-
It's not about the shoes :P
-
It's not about the shoes :P
I'm glad you said that before I did.
-
It's not about the shoes :P
I'm glad you said that before I did.
I've been holding back for ages :-[
-
Did the pacemakers for the marathon start the race? They did for the 4 min mile, I believe.
It wasn't a race. It was a record breaking event. The pacers alternated, and were arranged to give the most aerodynamic benefit. There was also an electric car, which dictated the record pace. Dave Brailsford helped organise these 'marginal gains', as it was an INEOS-backed enterprise.
I asked a question. You went off on one at better than World Beating Event Pace!
Both events resulted de facto records though, they just have different sets of rules applied to them.
Kipchoge's wasn't an official "marathon" record because:-
* Shoes not currently homologated by IAAF
* He used pacemakers that only ran sections of the run. The 7 pacemakers that started with him only ran the first ~5km with him, then they were replaced by another fresh 7 pacemakers who hadn't run the first 5km. Lather, rinse, repeat. I doubt any of the pacemakers ran more than their 5km stint.[1]
* Laser guided pacemaking and lead car
* It wasn't an open event like a public marathon, so there was no competition on the circuit
Anyone else is free to attempt to do the similar, with a similar setup, it's just prohibitively expensive. Hence the generally accepted "marathon record" criteria to be homologated shoes in an organised marathon event with no pacemakers joining fresh part way through.
Comparing Kipchoge's record and Bannister's record is pointless, both were completed under a certain set of rules/regulations and therefore are records within those sets of rules/regulations.
If you really want to go there, then on those 4 particular points, Bannister's sub 4-minute mile:-
* Shoes were ok obviously, no shoe doping in 1954
* He used pacemakers but they ran with him from the start and completed the full distance, he didn't benefit from fresh pacemakers coming in at any time
* No lasers and no lead car
* But it too wasn't an open event, there was no competition on the track (unless you try and claim the other pacemakers were competition)
The point is both of them ran to within the rules of the event they were running in. Both have records (or we wouldn't be talking about either of them). And there are way more than one set of rules (and therefore more than one type of record) for any particular distance.
1. One of the biggest logistical nightmares of the whole thing must have been the need to assemble 40-odd reliable runners capable of running a 14:10 5k all in one place at the same time
-
Did the pacemakers for the marathon start the race? They did for the 4 min mile, I believe.
It wasn't a race. It was a record breaking event. The pacers alternated, and were arranged to give the most aerodynamic benefit. There was also an electric car, which dictated the record pace. Dave Brailsford helped organise these 'marginal gains', as it was an INEOS-backed enterprise.
I asked a question. You went off on one at better than World Beating Event Pace!
You asked about a race. It wasn't one.
-
Did the pacemakers for the marathon start the race? They did for the 4 min mile, I believe.
It wasn't a race. It was a record breaking event. The pacers alternated, and were arranged to give the most aerodynamic benefit. There was also an electric car, which dictated the record pace. Dave Brailsford helped organise these 'marginal gains', as it was an INEOS-backed enterprise.
I asked a question. You went off on one at better than World Beating Event Pace!
You asked about a race. It wasn't one.
Hmmm.
"a. A competition of speed, as in running or riding."
"a contest of speed, as in running, riding, driving, or sailing."
etc.
So, in your view it wasn't about speed?
-
There's money in breaking records in competition, and there will be tremendous kudos for the first sub-2 hour performance in competition. The ideal progress towards that for the athletes is to shave as little as possible off the record each time, as that gives the most bites at that cherry. This record-breaking stunt is a proof of concept, but preserves the prospect of a sub-2 hour run in competition.
If another event is staged by a different team, with a different runner, to the same formula. Then I'd view that that as a contest.
-
The shoes seem a bit marginal gains stuff, a bit UCI rules about the shape of your saddle rails, etc. Not that the gains are small, but that they aren't actually gains, they're reductions in losses, efficiencies; the energy still has to come from the runner. Kipchoge might have started the runners' HPC.
-
... Bannister's sub 4-minute mile:-...
* But it too wasn't an open event, there was no competition on the track (unless you try and claim the other pacemakers were competition)
Pedantic point, but I'm pretty sure there were other people 'racing' Bannister, in the sense that there were 2nd and 3rd placed runners who were not the pacemakers. I don't think it was a set up just for him to have a crack at the time, it was a normal athletics meet.
-
Just give them all drugs and see what happens, records will tumble no doubt
-
Interesting thread dredge. Almost a year!
Just give them all drugs and see what happens, records will tumble no doubt
Sure, as will athletes tumbling to an early grave.
Allowing them to take drugs would be hugely unethical.
-
And only their third post, and the first since 2014!