WR Prediction Contest

[Jon]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>>>That does not mean that people don't have limits, they do, the question is
>what they are.

but I would counter by saying that whatever we might now
>consider limits, really aren't, because we have no idea what kind of changes
>genengineering will bring.




But there WILL eventually be a limit - it's not like the 100m is going to be run in under one second, now is it? If there's no limits, then maybe the marathon will be run in under one second too?

Of course not.

Somewhere along the way, there WILL be a limit in each event. But I also think that there's scope for improvement on all the current WRs (even if it takes 50+, 100+ or 200+ years, I think they ALL will be improved upon eventually).

[tafnut]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>>If there's no limits, then maybe the marathon will be run in under one
>second too?
>Of course not.

Well, actually, I DO expect instantaneous travel in the far future. And not even through a transmission of some sort - but now we really are far afield!

[Jnathletics]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

If you take the current rate of improvement 0.62% ( I used 4 years 2:05:42 KK in 99 to 2:04:55 PT in 03 ) and calculate it out based on the same improvement every four years the 2:00:00 barrier would be broken between 2027 to 2031. The variable this does not include is historically the % of improvement diminishes every cycle. (70's had 2.08% improvement, 80's 1.16%, 90's 0.9%, to 03 0.62%) So a more realistic guess would be around 2050.

[tafnut]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>If you take the current rate of improvement 0.62% ( I used 4 years 2:05:42 KK >in 99 to 2:04:55 PT in 03 ) and calculate it out based on the same improvement >every four years.

What happened in the last 50 years will prove to a very poor predictor of what while happen in the next 50 due to the accelerating curve of technological (and biological) innovation.

[Jnathletics]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>What happened in the last 50 years will prove to a very poor predictor of what while happen in the next 50 due to the accelerating curve of technological (and biological) innovation.<

I disagree. The world's knowledge and improvements have always been increasing but man's rate of improvement athleticly declines. (Unless genetic engineering creates a Superman.)

Knowledge of training and facilities has greatly increased since the 60's and 70's but those decades had a larger improvement rate then today. Man is closer to his limits so the improvements will be smaller over the same cycle, even with scientific advances.

[gh]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

All this talk of "cycles" ignores the 500lb gorilla in the closet: the fact that drugs bumped WRs so far ahead ofthe curve. It's going to take a lot of extra years to make that back up.

[tafnut]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>All this talk of "cycles" ignores the 500lb gorilla in the closet: the fact>that drugs bumped WRs so far ahead ofthe curve. It's going to take a lot of>extra years to make that back up.

That's easily taken care of - new and better ways to cheat. I truly believe that we are on the cusp (i.e., within 25 years) of using our rapidly growing knowledge of the human genome to alter ourselves in ways that sci-fi only hypothesized.

[Pego]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

The records cannot continue to improve in a linear fashion. The 20th century was so far the only one when serious athletics took place. In many areas we have reached close to our limits. A phrase "anything is possible" sounds good, but it is a meaningless cliche, because it simply isn't true. People who were predicted that we reached our top 50-75 years ago were quite premature, but now? Let's look at the high jump. In the past decade, how many athletes went over 240 (7'10'')? It happens so infrequently that one has to pause and ask the question if it is because it is close to human abilities.

[5k Guy]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

<<< In many areas we have reached close to our limits. A phrase "anything is possible" sounds good, but it is a meaningless cliche, because it simply isn't true >>>

Another meaningless cliche is "reached close to our limits".

Both are just speculation and are relative. IMHO we do not know what our limits are because we are constantly evolving and changing. I agree that WR improvement will slow down, maybe dramatically at some point but as we continue to evolve and learn more we will continue to improve. Maybe 100 yrs from now the marathon WR will be broken by a matter of a 2-3 seconds every few years rather than 30+ secs but we will continue to improve if we are set on it, history has shown us that.

From a purely physical standpoint as more track and field athletes breed together they will likely produce more physical traits beneficial to athletics, and so on and so on through the generations. So runners 300 yrs from now will probably be better suited for it than we are now.

< edited to include the following disclaimer: Pego I wasn't trying to bust your chops on this; I respect your opinion on most matters, especially involving athletes physical make-up)

[rosa saks]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>Nobody alive will collect. 200, the Marathon and HJ, I am afraid may never get
>below the mark you propose.

These were the three that leaped out at me as being wildly unlikely as well. Perhaps the hammer too.

[rosa saks]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>>Marathoners would only have to see and believe that 2:00 is eminently
>doable,
>before they will train the minds and bodies to do it.
>



Completely agree there, and that's precisely what has happened in the
>women's marathon. Looking at the alltime lists for women's marathon, it's a
>wonder Kristiansen's WR lasted so long (13 years). But once Tegla Loroupe broke
>it, within a couple years we saw the first sub-2:20 (Takahashi), closely
>followed by the first sub-2:19. Paula took it even further, and now we have
>five women who have ran under 2:20 - all within the last four years! The
>standard has dramatically increased over the past few years - 37 of the top 50
>performances all-time, have been acheived since 2000!

So if Geb, followed by
>Bekele, could start taking bitesized chunks off the men's WR, then the 2:00
>barrier would be well broken by 2050.

hahahhahaha

[tafnut]

Re: WR Prediction Contest

>>People who>were predicted that we reached our top 50-75 years ago were quite premature.

People who predicted that we reached our top now were quite premature.

Don't confuse a lull or plateau with statistical significance. The current lack of progression is merely the effect of more stringent drug testing.