No More Records?

[JZ]

Re: no more records

[quote="crouch"]There are a number of events, especially women's, that are close to having new world records eg, 5k, 10k (Ethiopia), steeple,JT, HT,TJ, PV,does the Proff suggest that the range of women who are closing in on these records are all on "medication"?
As Eldrick says, many of these Women's events are "new" or with altered equipment. All of the Women's WR's from 100M to 1500M as well as the 100MH and several of the Women's field event records have been shown to be unreachable over the last two decades. As far as I'm concerned, nobody alive today will live to see the Women's 4X400MR WR(3:15.17) go by the boards. [/b]

[eldrick]

Re: no more records

There are a number of events, especially women's, that are close to having new world records eg, 5k, 10k (Ethiopia), steeple,JT, HT,TJ, PV,does the Proff suggest that the range of women who are closing in on these records are all on "medication"?

the 5k record is only weak, because wang didn't run it in '93 ( wasn't a championship event at the time ) - she couda run ~ 13'57 based on her 1.5 & 3k times & of course this wouda buried the record for all-time (probably)

the ethiopian women have no chance of breaking the 10k wr, despite the fact that wang ran that time basically off her last 5k ( 15'05 / 14'26 ) & hence didn't run it flat out gun-to-tape - she couda gone ~ 29'09 if she had

the other events are with remodelled equipment ( jt - but i'm not sure menendez coud throw 80m with the ole jt, but she's a big strong gal, so who knows ? ) & the others are new events where some order is slowly being established ( although the tj wr of 15.50 is solid & has lasted 10y now - the best of the rest seem to be able to knock on the door of 15.40, but 15.50 won't let them in )

[crouch]

no more records

There are a number of events, especially women's, that are close to having new world records eg, 5k, 10k (Ethiopia), steeple,JT, HT,TJ, PV,does the Proff suggest that the range of women who are closing in on these records are all on "medication"?

[utkvol80]

These kind of articles have appeared periodically since the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Many have been written by physicians, physiologists, or statisticians. One the earliest I have read is by the British Nobel Prize winning physiologist A.V. Hill, who studied athletes in his research on respiration in the 1920s. I see these articles more as a reflection of the trends in sport, medicine, and science during the time in which they are written; and they are, as Kuha first suggested, entertaining in their assertions, speculations, and contradictions.

[TrackCEO]

This is the funniest thing I've read on the Web lately. Besides the laughable idea that many records are "already nearing their limits," the study is ageist on its face, not recognizing that world records are constantly being set in the age-group realm. Dozens every year.

And thankfully, precious few can be attributed to drugs.

My argument: Why should record-setting for folks over 30 keep going wild while records for under 30s cease? At what age does record-setting freeze? 36? 32? 28? A study of world bests should take into account the range of records for all age groups, not just the 20-30 open class.

Under the "plateau" theory espoused by the researchers, a corollary might be that age-group records also must hit a wall. This we aren't seeing. I've never tallied the number of world age-group records set year by year, but I sense no slowing. In fact, better nutrition, disease control and smarter training have led to an increase in world-record setting over the years, I suggest.

And again I suggest: If geezers continue to push the envelope, why would the kidlets stop?

K E N

[RMc]

Here's a link

Here's a link to the actual article. Search for "Nevill" on the page to find it.

http://www.ms-se.com/pt/re/msse/current ... 44!9001!-1

[tafnut]

challenges previous scientific research that there was no limit to human performance and that women would eventually run as fast as men.

May we assume that this 'scientific research' that we are challenging is on teleportation?

[Daisy]

Where do they get these writers?

From the article:
"The paper, co-written by Professor Nevill at the University of Wolverhampton and Professor Greg Whyte from the English Institute of Sports, challenges previous scientific research that there was no limit to human performance and that women would eventually run as fast as men."

Well I'm really impressed how the tore down that huge strawman argument. What a waste of space in the journals.

[Conor Dary]

'...challenges previous scientific research that there was no limit to human performance and that women would eventually run as fast as men.'

If there were no limits and somehow the women ran as fast as the men, then where do the men go? Do they just quit?

Where do they get these writers?

[kuha]

The link on the front page is amusing...particularly since it so utterly contradicts the women-will-surpass-men stuff of the early 1990s. I think the real message is: Dont take anything seriously that is said about track by any "professor."

The clincher for me was the last line of the article: "Professor Nevill stressed that the public would never lose interest in athletics, even if new records were no longer set."

Sure: public interest is at an all time high and climbing like a rocket...