First sub 2 hour marathon

[Lord Bamber]

Does the financial reward not perhaps hinder attempts to get close to two hours though?

I remember when Sergey Bubka was the undisputed king of the pole vault world back in, what, the late 1980s and early 1990s. He was so supreme, he won almost every time.

When he competed at (non Olympic) meetings, the sponsors used to offer athletes substantial financial rewards for breaking world records, but they got paid exactly the same whether they smashed it by miles, or nudged it forward by a few millimetres. So it was in Bubka's interests to only go, say, one centimetre higher each time. He was easily capable of going ten, twenty centimetres higher in one go, but he wanted (understandably, as a Soviet athlete) to get paid regular wads of cash. Ten times fifty thousand is a lot easier on the bank account than one.

So perhaps the marathon runners are conscious of that too? Maybe someone could go three seconds faster in one go, or maybe he'd rather reap the rewards of running one second faster three times.

(I have no idea if that's the case with runners, but I know Bubka admitted to doing it).

An excellent point in any event where the world record is not such a ground breaking feat or, like Bubka and others, its easy to rake in sponsors cash by breaking the record slightly each time. The difference with sub 2hr marathon is the individual will be so handsomely rewarded after breaking it, it makes up for taking small chunks off on the way.

Plus, how gutted would say runner A be if they took the world record down three times in a year, and made a lot of cash and then Runner B came along and nailed the 1st sub 2hr making oodles of cash and writing their name in history something which Runner A was capable of anyway but chose not too do.

 

[Stat Brother]

Blood spinning.

Thanks dbbb.

I'm think I'm beginning to sound like the crackpot maiden aunt rambling on to herself in the corner, at Christmas.

I'm loving the the theories and ideas being produced without even the hint of doping.
Anyone want to buy some magic beans?

Try googling Kenyan runners doping:-

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/...an-runners-blood-doping-performance-enhancers

 

[Lord Bamber]

Thanks dbbb.

I'm think I'm beginning to sound like the crackpot maiden aunt rambling on to herself in the corner, at Christmas.

I'm loving the the theories and ideas being produced without even the hint of doping.
Anyone want to buy some magic beans?

Try googling Kenyan runners doping:-

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/...an-runners-blood-doping-performance-enhancers

Do you think ALL marathon runners are on the doping enhancements, thus placing marathon running along side cycling for a 'whose who' of doping?

 

[Stat Brother]

Do you think ALL marathon runners are on the doping enhancements, thus placing marathon running along side cycling for a 'whose who' of doping?

Athletics 'dirty little secrets' run hand in hand with cycling, always has done for the best part of 50 years.
It's easy to say doping in athletics has been more systematic and more harmful than it ever has been in cycling.

That impacts on all athletes.

A major part in Lance's downfall was 'everybody else' getting popped.
If you easily beat dopers how can you alone be clean.
Now I'm not pointing the finger at Mo, for what it's worth I think/hope he's clean.
But the reams and reams of info about what is just the latest clique of doping within athletics helps nobody.
Until the IAAF actually deal with the problem, head on, like cycling there will always be question marks.

 

[Stat Brother]

Oh and I don't think the Bubka principle holds up here.

The difference being what's in store for the first man under 2 hours.
That will far outweigh anything they would get by knocking the record down in stages.

 

[Lord Bamber]

Athletics 'dirty little secrets' run hand in hand with cycling, always has done for the best part of 50 years.
It's easy to say doping in athletics has been more systematic and more harmful than it ever has been in cycling.

That impacts on all athletes.

A major part in Lance's downfall was 'everybody else' getting popped.
If you easily beat dopers how can you alone be clean.
Now I'm not pointing the finger at Mo, for what it's worth I think/hope he's clean.
But the reams and reams of info about what is just the latest clique of doping within athletics helps nobody.
Until the IAAF actually deal with the problem, head on, like cycling there will always be question marks.

Certainly the IAAF should deal with doping immediately with a 'ban for life' ban, rather than a whimsical 2 years.

In respect of whether cycling and athletics have always been that intrinsically linked, certainly cycling is really getting its house in order now and athletics are not
however historically, I am not sure whether this has been the case.

I do not have though, specific facts to back up my beliefs and I thought for a while Lance was clean, so what do I know. I hope and believe, for what its worth, that some of the marathon boys are clean and that a sub 2 hr marathon is never tainted by a drug failure.

 

[Stat Brother]

Certainly the IAAF should deal with doping immediately with a 'ban for life' ban, rather than a whimsical 2 years.

In respect of whether cycling and athletics have always been that intrinsically linked, certainly cycling is really getting its house in order now and athletics are not
however historically, I am not sure whether this has been the case.

I do not have though, specific facts to back up my beliefs and I thought for a while Lance was clean, so what do I know. I hope and believe, for what its worth, that some of the marathon boys are clean and that a sub 2 hr marathon is never tainted by a drug failure.

I'm just more jaded by doping than others, especially those involved in other sports.

Doping in athletics has been more organisational than cycling.
For every Lance 'team' there's, The Eastern Bloc, East Germany, Balco, now sub Sahara long distance.

For each Tour de France there's 'that' 100 metres, Olympic medals/record.

This is just from the top of my head.


Don't get me started on football.

 

[desprateseagull]

a lot depends on the course, altitude, hudity etc.. but i reckon by 2020 Olympics.

hudity? humidity, even..

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Oh and I don't think the Bubka principle holds up here.

The difference being what's in store for the first man under 2 hours.
That will far outweigh anything they would get by knocking the record down in stages.

Yep, fair enough. You're probably right. There would be a lot more prestige for a sub 2hr marathon.

Plus, with all due respect to the pole vaulters, it's probably a bit easier to break records in that arena.

On this subject, why is the long jump record so hard to break? Bob Beamon held the record from 1968 until 1991, when Mike Powell broke it. Since then, nobody has got close to Powell (I also read that Beamon's effort was nearly 2ft longer than anyone had previously jumped- I know it was at altitude but come on!).

Most other records seem to go or be threatened every few years, so why not the long jump?

 

[Stat Brother]

Yep, fair enough. You're probably right. There would be a lot more prestige for a sub 2hr marathon.

Plus, with all due respect to the pole vaulters, it's probably a bit easier to break records in that arena.

On this subject, why is the long jump record so hard to break? Bob Beamon held the record from 1968 until 1991, when Mike Powell broke it. Since then, nobody has got close to Powell (I also read that Beamon's effort was nearly 2ft longer than anyone had previously jumped- I know it was at altitude but come on!).

Most other records seem to go or be threatened every few years, so why not the long jump?

Now I know you're expecting the direction I'm going to come at this from, but hang on!!

If you list all the current track and field W/R's, asterixing!! all the suspicious ones and double asterixing the confirmed drug ones, you'll have a lot of asterixs!!. I might do that tonight.

When the omerta in football finally breaks down, some dunderhead on MotD will say:-
'no drug can make you kick a ball straight'.
(At that point I will kick in my TV, relinquish all worldly possessions and walk the earth till the end of time)

As much as that misses the point, it might just be the saviour of Powell and Edwards.
I think (and I'm just a fat postman) the technique required 2 paces from the board to the end of the pit far out strips the benefit of thundering down the runway at warp factor 4.
It's not possible for a human to get every sequence right, bang on, every time, esp in competition.
I'm sure the records have been broken in training but that's not an Olympic final.

Maybe they are the purest records and that's why they still stand.

 

[Lord Bamber]

Now I know you're expecting the direction I'm going to come at this from, but hang on!!

If you list all the current track and field W/R's, asterixing!! all the suspicious ones and double asterixing the confirmed drug ones, you'll have a lot of asterixs!!. I might do that tonight.

When the omerta in football finally breaks down, some dunderhead on MotD will say:-
'no drug can make you kick a ball straight'.
(At that point I will kick in my TV, relinquish all worldly possessions and walk the earth till the end of time)

As much as that misses the point, it might just be the saviour of Powell and Edwards.
I think (and I'm just a fat postman) the technique required 2 paces from the board to the end of the pit far out strips the benefit of thundering down the runway at warp factor 4.
It's not possible for a human to get every sequence right, bang on, every time, esp in competition.
I'm sure the records have been broken in training but that's not an Olympic final.

Maybe they are the purest records and that's why they still stand.

One world record which really backs up your point is the women's 800 metre record, broken in July 1983 by Jarmila Kratochvilova. It stands at 1:53.28. The best of the world leading times over the last 3 years stands at 1:56.72. Over 3 whole seconds behind the time some 30 years later. I believe this might be the longest standing world record and most likely to continue to be so.

It will be closely followed by the women's 400 metre world record, set by Marita Koch in 1985 at 47.60. Since then I do not believe anyone has got within 1 second of this time. The great Cathy Freeman only ran 48.63 and the USA women's record currently stands at 48.70.

These are not pure world records, just two athlete's who ran at a time (80's) where the Eastern Bloc did have the upper hand on running dirty.

Back to my point on the marathon, I do hope and pray the current guys are running clean and it is time, which, when broken, carries the same kind of frenzy (clean frenzy) that Bannister & Co achieved during the 50's and not one tainted, like the 1988 100m final.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

One world record which really backs up your point is the women's 800 metre record, broken in July 1983 by Jarmila Kratochvilova. It stands at 1:53.28. The best of the world leading times over the last 3 years stands at 1:56.72. Over 3 whole seconds behind the time some 30 years later. I believe this might be the longest standing world record and most likely to continue to be so.

It will be closely followed by the women's 400 metre world record, set by Marita Koch in 1985 at 47.60. Since then I do not believe anyone has got within 1 second of this time. The great Cathy Freeman only ran 48.63 and the USA women's record currently stands at 48.70.

These are not pure world records, just two athlete's who ran at a time (80's) where the Eastern Bloc did have the upper hand on running dirty.

Back to my point on the marathon, I do hope and pray the current guys are running clean and it is time, which, when broken, carries the same kind of frenzy (clean frenzy) that Bannister & Co achieved during the 50's and not one tainted, like the 1988 100m final.

There is plenty of support within athletics and the athletics media, to expunge those particular 2 records from the books. The 800m one is simply ludicrous. Beyond all the suspicions surrounding Kratochvilova's doping, and levels of testosterone, I'm not even convinced it was actually timed correctly.

 

[Stat Brother]

One world record which really backs up your point is the women's 800 metre record, broken in July 1983 by Jarmila Kratochvilova. It stands at 1:53.28. The best of the world leading times over the last 3 years stands at 1:56.72. Over 3 whole seconds behind the time some 30 years later. I believe this might be the longest standing world record and most likely to continue to be so.

It will be closely followed by the women's 400 metre world record, set by Marita Koch in 1985 at 47.60. Since then I do not believe anyone has got within 1 second of this time. The great Cathy Freeman only ran 48.63 and the USA women's record currently stands at 48.70.

These are not pure world records, just two athlete's who ran at a time (80's) where the Eastern Bloc did have the upper hand on running dirty.

Back to my point on the marathon, I do hope and pray the current guys are running clean and it is time, which, when broken, carries the same kind of frenzy (clean frenzy) that Bannister & Co achieved during the 50's and not one tainted, like the 1988 100m final.

As said I'll cross reference tonight, in the meantime I thought I'd look to see what, if any, records Marion Jones holds.

Only to find Florence Griffith Joyner still holds the 1 and 200 metre record.

Basically (very much off the top of my head, athletics not being my thing) the first sign of credibility in Women's world records appears with Paula Radcliffe in the 10km (road).


The bottom line for me is always:-
'cycling was very dirty, everybody still points at cycling, because all the time you do that nobody looks anywhere else'.

I shall bounce the NSC drugs in sport compendium.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Back to my point on the marathon, I do hope and pray the current guys are running clean and it is time, which, when broken, carries the same kind of frenzy (clean frenzy) that Bannister & Co achieved during the 50's and not one tainted, like the 1988 100m final.

Same here. I really do hope it is in my life time as well; I'd love to witness it.

 

[Stat Brother]

Same here. I really do hope it is in my life time as well; I'd love to witness it.

By any means?

If you can find it on t'internet this is pretty harrowing, and a must listen:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s0qbt

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

As an aside. I wonder how the sub 2-hour will be broken. Will someone actually come out and say they are going to attempt it at the blah-blah marathon? As far as I am aware most marathon world records just happen when a wide set of factors and circumstances all come good; Wilson Kipsang was vocal about his desire to break the world record a few weeks ago but whilst he had trained well there are so many variables which go into a marathon WR that he did not really know how the day would turn out. In fact he only knew it was on in the last few kilometers...he was actually well off the pace at 35k mark by around 30 seconds. A bit more head wind and he would have had failed.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

By any means?

If you can find it on t'internet this is pretty harrowing, and a must listen:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s0qbt

Not at all. I hope it is achieved clean.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

One world record which really backs up your point is the women's 800 metre record, broken in July 1983 by Jarmila Kratochvilova. It stands at 1:53.28. The best of the world leading times over the last 3 years stands at 1:56.72. Over 3 whole seconds behind the time some 30 years later. I believe this might be the longest standing world record and most likely to continue to be so.

It will be closely followed by the women's 400 metre world record, set by Marita Koch in 1985 at 47.60. Since then I do not believe anyone has got within 1 second of this time. The great Cathy Freeman only ran 48.63 and the USA women's record currently stands at 48.70.

These are not pure world records, just two athlete's who ran at a time (80's) where the Eastern Bloc did have the upper hand on running dirty.

Back to my point on the marathon, I do hope and pray the current guys are running clean and it is time, which, when broken, carries the same kind of frenzy (clean frenzy) that Bannister & Co achieved during the 50's and not one tainted, like the 1988 100m final.

Is the Ultra 50 miles LB? And am I right in thinking you did 4 marathons last year... in 2 months? Clearly this was not enough for you

 

[nwgull]

Now I know you're expecting the direction I'm going to come at this from, but hang on!!

If you list all the current track and field W/R's, asterixing!! all the suspicious ones and double asterixing the confirmed drug ones, you'll have a lot of asterixs!!. I might do that tonight.

When the omerta in football finally breaks down, some dunderhead on MotD will say:-
'no drug can make you kick a ball straight'.
(At that point I will kick in my TV, relinquish all worldly possessions and walk the earth till the end of time)

As much as that misses the point, it might just be the saviour of Powell and Edwards.
I think (and I'm just a fat postman) the technique required 2 paces from the board to the end of the pit far out strips the benefit of thundering down the runway at warp factor 4.
It's not possible for a human to get every sequence right, bang on, every time, esp in competition.
I'm sure the records have been broken in training but that's not an Olympic final.

Maybe they are the purest records and that's why they still stand.

You're a fair way off the mark. There's certainly tekkers involved in the long jump and triple jump, but power is by far the most significant factor. Jumpers spend hours in the gym doing lifts such as power cleans and snatches to build posterior chain power. It's certain taking the same banned drugs that sprinters take would help.

I think the reason that fewer jumpers do cheat is because the prestige if being triple/long jump champion, or even WR holder, is much less than being the 100m champion. The risks of getting caught don't outweigh the rewards.

 

[Stat Brother]

You're a fair way off the mark. There's certainly tekkers involved in the long jump and triple jump, but power is by far the most significant factor. Jumpers spend hours in the gym doing lifts such as power cleans and snatches to build posterior chain power. It's certain taking the same banned drugs that sprinters take would help.

I think the reason that fewer jumpers do cheat is because the prestige if being triple/long jumps is much less than being the 100m champion. The risks of getting caught don't outweigh the rewards.

Fair do's.

As said athletics is not my bag.