Exactly. I mean, at the end of the day, it will go down as the "Unofficial Marathon record" just like the Nike event did. So I am watching it with that in mind.

---

- Jordan

My Strava

Interesting is that are they even within 1% of breaking 2 in races? Have they broken 2:01:15?

So they are close but not really real world close *yet*.

So in reality this is beyond sneaky good marketing by Nike. Use all the controlled settings they want to produce the time and then just tweet out the Nike symbol as the reason it occurs.

It’s brilliant marketing.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

By "they" you mean Eliud. And he's at 2:01:39 not 2:01:15. The other "theys" are back at 2:03, so take Eliud out of the equation and sub 2 is still a full km and more up the road.

Everyone was stunned that he got within 25 seconds at first sub 2 attempt. Me included, obviously. I'm going out on a limb and saying that he fails on attempt 2.

By they I mean anyone. 1% of 2 flat is actually 2:01:12 but I rounded down to see if anyone is close to that.

So the WR is ~1.4% from sub 2 in real world racing situation.

And I assume these world class runners have all had access to this nike shoe snce it came out what ~2 years now. And they still aren’t within 1% of it in a race? So my point was more that I think that goes to show how much “controlling” impacts the time. And even then they came up short but oh so close of an attempt.

Ok sorry to rain on the parade attempt.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

In one way I hope you’re correct, getting close will just ratchet up the excitement for the next attempt. Getting another competitor in the hunt would really add to the chase.

its aobut as honset as calling a 12 m draft zone an individual race lol

more seriously the only thing that suprises me that this time is not a shoe manufaturer but a "petrol" company
and they are certainly putting in some money there, as they resurfaced part of the race course a couple of weeks ago paid by the sponsor.
ie its more a bilionair goal, than a marketing stunt. it i would assume if he gets it it, it will likley be the most well paid enduracne perforamce ever.
not the $47 000 one got for the half marathon world record last weekend.

Yes in a controlled environment it will happen. In an open race....that remains to be seen.

My point is that there is Eliud and there is everyone else. If you want to assess what controlling conditions does, all you have to go on is 2:01:39 vs 2:00:25. And, needless to say, this is too little on which to base any conclusions. Any variability in Eliud's actual performance on these days outweighs the variables of climate controlling.

And for everybody not named Eliud the bar is all the way back at 2:03. Not even close.

All I know is I am excited for the Breaking Bad movie on 10/11 and the next iteration of Sub2 on 10/12. I certainly would not bet against Eliud, but the conditions were pretty well controlled last time and he performed beautifully, so it is a mighty tall ask for all that went so well last time to be replicated and for another 25 seconds to be found. I'm betting against it.

 If you want to assess what controlling conditions does, all you have to go on is 2:01:39 vs 2:00:25. And, needless to say, this is too little on which to base any conclusions.

——

I think that’s what I said. He’s not even within 1% of his best controlled time. 1% is generally huge difference at the top of the world class level.

So to get basically a 1% boost from the course/pacer setup is a crazy good advantage. It’s kinda clear to me what that “experiment” allows.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

The difference between the 2 sports and “regulated” rules/procedures is huge. Triathlon has very little standards for distance control etc. running because of its reverence to records there’s no “bullshitting” allowed. You don’t get to set it downhill, you don’t get to add artificial elements etc.

It’s also why tri records I don’t think ever took off. Sure we clamour over the fast times but that’s only at a few distances and races. We generally don’t make a big deal of times for “records”. And that’s because we never made a real standard to follow. It’s basically impossible to dictate a standard so that we can measure 1 course vs other. Just too many variables so thus why we’ve never really rejoiced over times or made it a end all be all to breaking some “time barrier”.

We let companies/brands dictate a record simply because it was their race and so they can make the rules. That isn’t how run records occur.


So as I said I find it fascinating that there’s no one within even 1% of 2 in a real world race, they really aren’t close yet. Only in this artificial setup.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

You need to keep in mind that when he wins a normal marathon, winning is the goal(war's are secondary), which of course he almost always does. When he is doing the challenge, 2 hours is the goal, which he nearly did, 1 second a mile off. I doubt that he is burying himself when he has the wins in hand, but almost certainly running pedal to the metal in the challenge.

Also I would surmise that the prize at the end of the 2 hour barrier race, is a "lot" more than a normal marathon. SO those two incentives, the time and the money/history making of the latter, would lend to him actually going harder, thus some of the differential between his open and challenge times...

His Berlin marathon he negative split his run.

1:01:06

Means he ran the second half in
1:00:33

This idea that they aren’t running hard to the line I have to laugh at. You’re essentially saying there’s no advantage from the “controlled” conditions? Come on Monty that’s just not close to the truth. Or else they’d do it in a race.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I didnt say not advantage, just not all the gap like you are suggesting. When a runner negative splits like that, given all things equal(course and winds), it is because they went out easier than they otherwise could have. In the challenge that does not happen, the car and the runners get them on pace immediately, and then sits on that exact pace for him to see, no distractions, no surges, no negative splitting because he went out too easy.

And of course there is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. That is the incentive he needs to put the maximum hurt to himself in the last miles. When you are winning a race and nothing else is to be gained, people are just not going to hurt like they would otherwise, chasing a person, or a time...

How many marathon records have been set by not negative splitting? This one was in Berlin. His sub 2 attempt he didn’t, (obviously).

Also if you run the goal pace the entire time do you then have the ability to put the hurt in the end? He didn’t last time.

Maybe he can, maybe he can’t.

And I totally understand why they’ll have the pacer line. It’s the perfect “just hold this”.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Also if you run the goal pace the entire time do you then have the ability to put the hurt in the end? //

Maintaining the goal pace is the hurt. Like I said, it is understood pretty much by everyone, the way to run the fastest time, is to run it steady. His last attempt showed that, even though he fell off towards the end. The time was still fast regardless. If it were as you suggest, then all the coaches, scientists,(and the runner of course) and others that are involved felt that a negative split was the best way to achieve this, then they would start out slower, rather than on pace...

eccept they are only running on point because they have the luxury of adding fresh pacers throughout the run. Only 1 person has to run the whole thing. So he can be aided by “fresh” ppl at mile 20 like never before in real races. He gets luxury of them running on point while he “sits in”. He doesn’t have to put his nose in the wind ever. That’s huge benefit.

Thats why they are going at 2 from the start.

ETA: on point also actually lets him essentially negative split to actually split under 2:00:00. So not many coaches that I know don’t preach smart negative split running. Which essentially is what this is going to be.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

The thing about Kipchoge is that he is very exceptional. It's not just that he holds the official world record and has also run a very fast unofficial time.

In all of his marathons he has always performaned. Never had an off day. From winning the Olympics to running fast times in awful weather he always showed his class. Of course that streak will someday break. But he has nailed the mental and physical aspects of preparing and executing the marathon like noone else.

Imagine you have two days a year to shine and you always do it and deliver. No injuries, no jours-sans, no choking.

I don't say Kipchoge has it in the bag, but who is to do it if not him?

---

10k - 30:48 / half - 1:06:40

He did something like a 78s PR running more than half the marathon alone to sub 2:02...he was running his ass off to run that fast there was no “letting up” cus he was winning; you don’t let up and have that type of improvement....you just don’t. His Berlin race he was paid twice more for his time than his win. This ain’t Ironman triathlon where your in 1st and you “enjoy it to the line. He won by almost 5 mins, there was no “letting up” going on there.


He’ll likely for sure to do it. With being paced and protected the whole way, I just think that’s a huge factor that is absolutely going to help.

I mean for him to go sub 2 he has to run faster PR improvement than his last one. So hell yeah it’s going to help if your sitting on someone the whole time “saving” energy. Hell Yeah it’s going to help to have someone run goal pace for you, 1hr46mins in. That’s a HUGE advantage.

But again that’s the 1% difference that absolutely matters in order to make this goal.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II