Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Samuel Wanjiru New World Record Holder

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    26mi235
    Senior Member

  • 26mi235
    replied
    Citing SB in the 100/200/400/800/1500/ and 5000 makes the point about being good conditions (or at least not bad) but how many marathons have they run this year 0, 1, 2? This is a fast, flat course and if they ran Berlin in the summer or another marathon in not great conditions, a SB means very little. I got one every time I ran.

    Leave a comment:

  • malmo
    Senior Member

  • malmo
    replied
    Originally posted by Gebfan2
    Originally posted by gh
    Data point discussions aside, I would at least hope that most of you would now agree that yesterday's temperatures, regardless of where they might be on the optimal scale, were in no great way detrimental, and instead seemed to have some sort of salutary effect, at least empirically.

    According to Tilastopaja stats, of the top 30 men, only 3 didn't get either a seasonal best or a PR (places 1, 3, 6). Of the other 27, 20 got lifetime bests.

    On the women's side, 5 places (1, 2, 4, 5, 7) didn't get a best. Of the 25 who did, 20 got PRs.

    So combined, 40 of the first 60 got PRs, only 8 didn't get a PR or SB.
    Wouldn't have guessed this. Suggests that the ideal temp may be lower than the mid 40s F. I would have guessed that the cold temps cost Wanjiru at least 30 seconds, maybe more. But all those PRs suggest otherwise.
    ..
    Exactly how do those PR's suggest otherwise?

    Leave a comment:

  • Gebfan2
    Senior Member

  • Gebfan2
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Data point discussions aside, I would at least hope that most of you would now agree that yesterday's temperatures, regardless of where they might be on the optimal scale, were in no great way detrimental, and instead seemed to have some sort of salutary effect, at least empirically.

    According to Tilastopaja stats, of the top 30 men, only 3 didn't get either a seasonal best or a PR (places 1, 3, 6). Of the other 27, 20 got lifetime bests.

    On the women's side, 5 places (1, 2, 4, 5, 7) didn't get a best. Of the 25 who did, 20 got PRs.

    So combined, 40 of the first 60 got PRs, only 8 didn't get a PR or SB.
    Wouldn't have guessed this. Suggests that the ideal temp may be lower than the mid 40s F. I would have guessed that the cold temps cost Wanjiru at least 30 seconds, maybe more. But all those PRs suggest otherwise.

    Joel and 26.235:

    Good points. Excellent work on your previous post Joel. But he fact that none of the fastest marathons has a starting temp over 55F says something.

    Take the 2007 Chicago marathon as an example of how heat affects performance. 2007 was a statistical outlier for temps in Chicago with a starting temp over 70F, and a finish over 80F. Adere won the 2006 marathon in 2:20:42, and the 2007 marathon in 2:33:49. Patrick IVuti won the 2007 men's race in 2:11:11 (edging out Gharib), but ha placed 5th in 2005 in 2:07:46.

    But how much does heat affect distance running performance at different distances, and which temps are ideal? If your point is that there needs to be a lot more study of the data, I agree.

    One more observation. Wanjiru seemed to skip or drink very little at every water stop yesterday, and it didn't seem to affect him. He drank lots of water at the Olympics last year. He seemed to know exactly the amount of fluids he needed for the temp he was running in yesterday...

    Leave a comment:

  • gh
    Administrator

  • gh
    replied
    Data point discussions aside, I would at least hope that most of you would now agree that yesterday's temperatures, regardless of where they might be on the optimal scale, were in no great way detrimental, and instead seemed to have some sort of salutary effect, at least empirically.

    According to Tilastopaja stats, of the top 30 men, only 3 didn't get either a seasonal best or a PR (places 1, 3, 6). Of the other 27, 20 got lifetime bests.

    On the women's side, 5 places (1, 2, 4, 5, 7) didn't get a best. Of the 25 who did, 20 got PRs.

    So combined, 40 of the first 60 got PRs, only 8 didn't get a PR or SB.

    Leave a comment:

  • joeltetreault
    Senior Member

  • joeltetreault
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235
    It is a little misleading to look at the frequency distribution of the fast times (vs Temp) only without looking at the frequency distribution of the top races run at those temperatures. [For example, assume that one one top race was run when temps were 1-3C at start and that race was in the top marks (e.g., WR); it would only have one entry but the conditional frequency would be 1. I suspect that if you looked at Fukuoka, which had some cool temps and plotted times, adjusted maybe for the runners PRs etc. you could get some insight.

    I am not disputing the physiology comments and think 45-55 is best for start and 50-60 for finish, also depends on sun, wind, etc.
    I totally agree with all of the above...one runs into all sorts of independence issues when simply looking at weather. Quite frankly, there are a lot of other factors that go into a race that can neutralize or exacerbate whatever weather effects that may exist. When I first posted the weather conditions for the top 11 marathons, I also gave a similar disclaimer afterwards in the same thread:


    11 data points is way too small to draw any conclusions, and to really look at some trends, one would want to get stats on all the sub2:09 or sub2:10 marathons to do more rigorous statistics. Of course, it all depends on what you want to look at/prove. My feeling is that there are a lot of other confounding variables that make looking at the effects of temperature very hard: including the points above, there is quality of field, presence of Olympics that year, prize money, planned pace for the rabbits, etc. I think if you could get all this data for all the major races, and then normalize the times to the WR at the time, one could investigate the effects; of course, getting all this data would be very very hard. Well I haven't put too much thought into this...I suppose one could assume each individual marathon is fairly consistent from year to year and then look at the effects of temperature that year, and repeat for each of the top marathons. That "study" would be a bit easier to pull off.
    http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/discus ... torder=asc

    Leave a comment:

  • 26mi235
    Senior Member

  • 26mi235
    replied
    It is a little misleading to look at the frequency distribution of the fast times (vs Temp) only without looking at the frequency distribution of the top races run at those temperatures. [For example, assume that one one top race was run when temps were 1-3C at start and that race was in the top marks (e.g., WR); it would only have one entry but the conditional frequency would be 1. I suspect that if you looked at Fukuoka, which had some cool temps and plotted times, adjusted maybe for the runners PRs etc. you could get some insight.

    I am not disputing the physiology comments and think 45-55 is best for start and 50-60 for finish, also depends on sun, wind, etc.

    Leave a comment:

  • Gebfan2
    Senior Member

  • Gebfan2
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by Gebfan2
    Joel did this some time ago. See this thread.
    Thanks Decfan.

    Joel summarized the ranges for the 11 fastest marathons:

    Start time ranges:
    Temp: 37.4F - 55.4F
    Dew Point: 18.0F - 48.2F
    Humidity: 30% - 100%
    Wind Speed: 0 - 10.4mph

    End time ranges:
    Temp: 41.0F - 62.6F
    Dew Point: 21.9F - 50.0F
    Humidity: 47% - 87%
    Wind Speed: 2.3mph - 15.0mph

    The median starting temperature for these 11 fastest races was 44.6 degrees and the mean starting temp was 45.56F. The median finishing temp was 50.0F and the mean finiishing temp was 51.14F.......
    What the data doesn't show is what the median starting temperature was for, say the 50 fastest Big City (i.e., legit WR-attempt fields of the last decade) races, regardless of time. And if it did, suspect there are almost no (or none at all?) data points for one as cold as this start, so it doesn't tell us anything truly definitive.[/quote]

    Agree.

    kuha wrote:
    Is the question: How large will the piano be?


    Guitar sized...

    back to 3:00 ks after 2 2:54-55 at 36 to 37k markers

    14:34, 14:38, 14: 47, 14:51, 14:49, 15:07, 15:12, 14:58 5ks through 40k

    2:05:39CR

    How much did the 35F temp slow them down?

    36.2F, 4mph NW wind with gusts to 9 mph (HEADWIND) ... at time of finish...

    Was this the fastest marathon ever when adjusted for the temperature?

    Leave a comment:

  • gh
    Administrator

  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by Gebfan2
    Joel did this some time ago. See this thread.
    Thanks Decfan.

    Joel summarized the ranges for the 11 fastest marathons:

    Start time ranges:
    Temp: 37.4F - 55.4F
    Dew Point: 18.0F - 48.2F
    Humidity: 30% - 100%
    Wind Speed: 0 - 10.4mph

    End time ranges:
    Temp: 41.0F - 62.6F
    Dew Point: 21.9F - 50.0F
    Humidity: 47% - 87%
    Wind Speed: 2.3mph - 15.0mph

    The median starting temperature for these 11 fastest races was 44.6 degrees and the mean starting temp was 45.56F. The median finishing temp was 50.0F and the mean finiishing temp was 51.14F.......[/quote]

    What the data doesn't show is what the median starting temperature was for, say the 50 fastest Big City (i.e., legit WR-attempt fields of the last decade) races, regardless of time. And if it did, suspect there are almost no (or none at all?) data points for one as cold as this start, so it doesn't tell us anything truly definitive.

    Leave a comment:

  • bhall
    Former Resident Geek

  • bhall
    replied
    Originally posted by Pego
    Originally posted by Gebfan2
    Pego, do runners lose fluids faster or slower as ambient temps drop?
    I'd say slower, but it's been a long time since I paid much attention to respiratory physiology.
    Slower but the problem is that you aren't feeling the loss as much so have to remember to drink early and often. It doesn't look windy or wet which is what drains your energy in cold conditions. Seems like pace setting is going to be the key.

    Leave a comment:

  • Gebfan2
    Senior Member

  • Gebfan2
    replied
    14:34, 14:38, 14: 47, 14:49 first 4 5k splits

    1:02:01 at 1/2

    Sammy not taking much fluids, and seem to be doing better job of running the tangents as the pack has thinned...

    Leave a comment:

  • gh
    Administrator

  • gh
    replied
    I moved race talk over to a separate thread, because the physiology discussions here are great, and I hate to see them lost.

    Leave a comment:

  • LopenUupunut
    Senior Member

  • LopenUupunut
    replied
    The split table... (Are official live splits for Chicago '09 available anywhere?)

    km - Tergat - Lel         - Geb07 - Geb08   - Rot09  - Lond09 - Makau
    05 - 0:15:01 - 0:14:22 - 0:14:44 - 0:14:34 - 0:14:41 - 0:14:08 - 0:14:46
    10 - 0:29:58 - 0:29:10 - 0:29:27 - 0:29:12 - 0:29:18 - 0:28:30 - 0:29:14
    15 - 0:44:46 - 0:44:00 - 0:44:16 - 0:44:02 - 0:44:15 - 0:43:12 - 0:43:55
    20 - 0:59:45 - 0:58:58 - 0:59:10 - 0:58:49 - 0:59:05 - 0:58:14 - 0:58:37
    ½ - 1:03:03 - 1:02:13 - 1:02:29 - 1:02:03 - 1:02:35 - 1:01:35 - 1:02:06
    25 - 1:14:43 - 1:13:47 - 1:14:05 - 1:13:39 - 1:14:07 - 1:13:35 - 1:13:49
    30 - 1:29:25 - 1:28:29 - 1:28:56 - 1:28:27 - 1:28:52 - 1:28:35 - 1:28:56
    35 - 1:44:00 - 1:43:54 - 1:43:38 - 1:43:05 - 1:43:15 - 1:43:18 - 1:43:50
    40 - 1:58:38 - 1:58:53 - 1:58:08 - 1:57:34 - 1:57:54 - 1:58:32 - 1:58:36
    Fin - 2:04:55 - 2:05:15 - 2:04:26 - 2:03:59 - 2:04:27 - 2:05:10 - 2:04:48

    Leave a comment:

  • Gebfan2
    Senior Member

  • Gebfan2
    replied
    Originally posted by Pego
    Originally posted by 2 cents
    Here's your formal abstract malmo. Of course, this doesn't change the fact that this is a strict analysis of data, which can only tell you so much....
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17473775
    It is 7:30 CT and it is 34ºF (1ºC) and cloudy in Chicago. I attended my grandson's football game yesterday morning at 34ºF, and, boy, was it cold.
    I see that the above quoted analysis doesn't even extend as low as 1ºC. Their lowest is 5ºC, a whooping 8ºF higher.
    14:33 5k, 18:41 4 miles.

    Pego, do runners lose fluids faster or slower as ambient temps drop?

    Leave a comment:

  • joeltetreault
    Senior Member

  • joeltetreault
    replied
    Commentators are saying 4:35 first mile (fastest ever first mile in Chicago), and 8 seconds ahead of WR pace at two miles. Wanjiru is really going for it! At the start, commentators and some of the athletes (such as Deena) are actually loving the weather and there is minimal wind.

    Leave a comment:

  • Pego
    Senior Member

  • Pego
    replied
    Originally posted by 2 cents
    Here's your formal abstract malmo. Of course, this doesn't change the fact that this is a strict analysis of data, which can only tell you so much....
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17473775
    It is 7:30 CT and it is 34ºF (1ºC) and cloudy in Chicago. I attended my grandson's football game yesterday morning at 34ºF, and, boy, was it cold.
    I see that the above quoted analysis doesn't even extend as low as 1ºC. Their lowest is 5ºC, a whooping 8ºF higher.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X