• Login
  • |
  • Contact

    LIVE SUPPORT

    SEND US A MESSAGE

    ContactCode

    OTHER

    Email:
    info@trackie.com

    Voicemail:
    1.877.456.5544
    *For quicker support use email when possible.

You are viewing page of 5.

Discussion Forum >>

International-conference-of-athletics-excellence
Reply to topic Go to last post
Avatar
Anonymous
Posts: 54784
thumbs_up 0
Report  ORIGINAL

Anonymous said 1 year ago

Many fast Canadians toeing the line in Houston

Show Original Post
  • josh-seifarth User since:
    Oct 31st, 2013
    Posts: 157
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #101 

    Josh Seifarth said 3 days ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "4% improvement on a 2:36 marathoner brings them down to 2:29:46.... Just saying"


    No study or source has ever cited anything close to a 4% improvement in time. I'd suggest educating yourself on what is out there and take the time to actually read the studies.

    The oft cited 4% is in reference to running economy, not finishing time. The correlation between economy and time is not 1:1, with people most commonly estimating a 2.7% improvement in time.

    However, Jared Ward published a study last summer showing only a 2.7% improvement in running efficiency (which, if the typically cited conversion factor holds, would predict a 1.8% time improvement on average). That is, 2.7% over the Adios, 1.9% over a streak.

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02640414.2019.1633837

    The study isn't perfect.. I don't particularly like all of these studies having such short bouts at such slow speeds (this one is 5-minute bouts at 6min/mile), but it is what it is.

    So, for your hypothetical 2:36 runner, this would bring them down to 2:33-2:34, assuming everything else remained exactly the same.

    This post was edited by Josh Seifarth 3 days ago . 
    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 54784
    thumbs_up 1
    Report    REPLY #102 

    Anonymous said 3 days ago

    Quoting: Josh Seifarth
    "No study or source has ever cited anything close to a 4% improvement in time. I'd suggest educating yourself on what is out there and take the time to actually read the studies.

    The oft cited 4% is in reference to running economy, not finishing time. The correlation between economy and time is not 1:1, with people most commonly estimating a 2.7% improvement in time.

    However, Jared Ward published a study last summer showing only a 2.7% improvement in running efficiency (which, if the typically cited conversion factor holds, would predict a 1.8% time improvement on average). That is, 2.7% over the Adios, 1.9% over a streak.

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02640414.2019.1633837

    The study isn't perfect.. I don't particularly like all of these studies having such short bouts at such slow speeds (this one is 5-minute bouts at 6min/mile), but it is what it is.

    So, for your hypothetical 2:36 runner, this would bring them down to 2:33-2:34, assuming everything else remained exactly the same."



    Thanks for this, as I think this is an important point (economy vs finishing time). Interesting though - a 1.8% improvement in finishing time is well within the scope of what other posters have noted for the improvement of Wodak.

    Quote comment
  • josh-seifarth User since:
    Oct 31st, 2013
    Posts: 157
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #103 

    Josh Seifarth said 3 days ago

    Quoting: Anonymous
    "Are you sure about this? I was under the impression she ran Houston this year in the %Next?

    If that is the case - then it unlikely to be the same shoe, as they were not released until April 2019. In which case she took 47s off of her PB (1:10:33 down from 1:11:20, or ~1%) after nearly 4 years of no improvement over either the 10k or the HM. Then this year took another 52s off (1:09:41, another 1.2%) in what is well accepted to be a faster shoe.

    So given the claims of anywhere between 2-4% improvements in the Nike vs other shoes (she was an Asics athlete before), I think it's fairly disingenuous to suggest that running in the Vaporfly/%Next isn't a major contributing factor to the performance improvement, especially when you consider she hasn't improved over the 10k in the same time frame."


    You're right - I largely view the VaporFly and Next% as effectively the same thing, particularly after that NYT analysis found no real difference (though of course this wasn't truly a scientific study, more of an analysis of field data).

    Houston is, by a large margin, the de facto half-marathon to run if you are an elite athlete and want to run a PB in NA. Her previous non-Houston PB (1:11:20) was from the NYC HM - a much more difficult course, in colder conditions, with less athletes to run with. You cannot just presume every single race is treated equally, with equal fitness/topography/competition/importance. Natasha finished 17th and ran the entire race in a group of runners in Houston, which is very rarely the case at these speeds in any other race.

    As for the 10k, are you even actually looking at her IAAF progression/season bests? She has consistently run within 15s of the Canadian record every year from 2015 - 2019, including being able to do it in championship style races for the win (Pan Ams - 31:55), which I'd weight as much more impressive than running 31:41 in a flat-out time trial at Payton Jordan (2015). You seem to be somewhat informed about all of this, so I'm certain you know that the 10,000 is basically a dead event with athletes typically running it once or twice per year (once at Payton, once in a championship), making the chances of running PBs every year that much harder.

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 54784
    thumbs_up 3
    Report    REPLY #104 

    insider training said 3 days ago

    word of mouth of the the Schumacher group is that the shoes will be banned from competition come the US olympic marathon trials...

    if a Nike group is saying it - it's happening folks

    Quote comment
  • anonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 54784
    thumbs_up 0
    Report    REPLY #105 

    Anonymous said 2 days ago

    Quoting: Justrun
    "How did Cam end up doing? He wasn't in the top 20 so i didn't see his time"


    31st place

    Quote comment
  • new-post-last-visitanonymous Anonymous
    Posts: 54784
    thumbs_up 2
    Report    REPLY #106 

    Anonymous said 2 days ago

    Getting kind of tired about all this talk about times and improvement based on shoes.

    So what if you improved your time by a minute if your competitors improved by more than a minute you actually did not improve.

    The point of racing at the elite level is to finish as high in the standings as possible. No, no the point is to win!!!

    When everyone is using the same shoe your improvement is nullified.

    Quote comment
Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
Anonymous

says…    

Quote Underline Italics Bold
Submit Preview

By posting on our forum you are agreeing to the following guidelines.

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

 

Benefits of creating an account!

  • No need to reveal your real name.
  • Quicker to post (no need to enter the "two words" above each time).
  • Gives you the ability to edit your own comments and subscribe to topics.
  • It's free & quick to create an account!
Submit & Create Account

 

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1

To help prevent spammers please
enter the two words below.


image-display1