Nike sponsoring sub-2 hour marathon attempt

This Fat Girl Runs · 12-12-2016 5:50pm #1

http://www.runnersworld.com/marathon/nikes-audacious-plan-break-the-2-hour-marathon-barrier-in-2017?

Should be interesting. I wasn't surprised to see Kipchoge involved. I don't know the other two.

TFBubendorfer · 12-12-2016 6:02pm

Lelisa Desisa had one of the fastest debut marathon times and is one of the best marathon runners at the moment, though Kipchoge is clearly ahead of him at the moment.

Zersenay Tadese is the best half marathon runner ever and was once tested to have the best running economy ever measured, though his marathons have all been very disappointing.

My guess is that they are on the team to keep Kipchoge on his toes. However, the whole thing is a stunt by Nike more than anything else.

adrian522 · 12-12-2016 6:12pm

Kipchoge is capable of breaking the WR I think. He almost did in London last year. I think if he runs Berlin and weather is ok he could go under Kimetto's time.

There's no way he is knocking 3 mins off the WR though. The only this could happen would be on a track or something and pacers coming in and out at different times and waiting for ideal weather conditions. Something like this could be what Nike are planning but it wouldn't count for WR purposes.

This Fat Girl Runs · 12-12-2016 6:12pm

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Zersenay Tadese is the best half marathon runner ever and was once tested to have the best running economy ever measured, though his marathons have all been very disappointing..

What would be the reason for that? I'm curious.

rom · 12-12-2016 6:20pm

Just an ad to get on radio shows/ podcasts/ web and print media as a free ad that they don't have to pay for. They don't have the best interest of the sport at heart and making money is all that matters to them. i.e. [font=Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://tinyurl.com/gwo29b9 [/font]

El Caballo · 12-12-2016 6:30pm

This Fat Girl Runs wrote: »

What would be the reason for that? I'm curious.

Economy is just one aspect of running and some people just never adapt to the marathon, it took Haile Gebreselaisse years to get it right and he is arguably the greatest runner of all time. Leonard Komon holds the 10k road WR and a low 59 half pb but has "only" run 2:14 for a marathon. Renato Canova who is one of the most successful coaches on the planet says that these athletes who went through years of intensive training on the track struggle to adapt to the marathon(Bekele and Kipchoge proving this differently of course) because of the different nature of the events fueling, an exceptional track runner can run an exceptional half marathon because the events are very similar but the nature of the marathon is a bit different so some very good athletes may struggle with running a fast marathon.

I think the simple answer is that you can't be great at everything expecially at the very peak of a sport where specialisation is such a big part nowadays.

Sandwell · 12-12-2016 8:07pm

This is a total stunt and given their continuous support for known dopers I'd be extremely sceptical of any record set by a Nike sponsored project.

jamule · 12-12-2016 8:15pm

Sub 2hr,marathon attempt. Wow

Sponsered by Nike...I've lost interest aleady

UM1 · 12-12-2016 8:40pm

jamule wrote: »

Sub 2hr,marathon attempt. Wow

Sponsered by Nike...I've lost interest aleady

ur waaaaaaay to cynical

Peterx · 14-12-2016 10:32am

UM1 wrote: »

ur waaaaaaay to cynical

Not cynical enough by half. Purely economically why would anyone take 177 seconds out of a record when one single second is worth $50,000 in a new record bonus if done in a big city marathon.
That's every time you do it, or your countryman does it.

nike would have to give about $4,000,000 if this was done to compensate for the loss of all the other world records that didn't get to happen on the way down to two hours.
We saw it for years with the pole vaulters, easily* beating the WR in training and then breaking it by 1cm in competition

*easily for a supremely talented world class pole vaulter.

UM1 · 14-12-2016 10:55am

UM1 wrote: »

ur waaaaaaay to cynical

⬆⬆sarcasm⬆⬆⬆

El Caballo · 14-12-2016 12:03pm

Peterx wrote: »

Not cynical enough by half. Purely economically why would anyone take 177 seconds out of a record when one single second is worth $50,000 in a new record bonus if done in a big city marathon.
That's every time you do it, or your countryman does it.

nike would have to give about $4,000,000 if this was done to compensate for the loss of all the other world records that didn't get to happen on the way down to two hours.
We saw it for years with the pole vaulters, easily* beating the WR in training and then breaking it by 1cm in competition

*easily for a supremely talented world class pole vaulter.

They're not going to break the world record, they will just find a downhill point to point stretch of road and wait for vortex like tailwinds to pick up and off go the runners, guaranteed. It won't be done on a record eligible course so there will be no world record, it will be a world's best time if they do it.

Djoucer · 14-12-2016 12:08pm

Reckon the first man to run under 2 hours would easily make up any money lost out on lowering the record. Make millions in terms of sponsors etc

Which raises another point. We could be much closer to a sub 2 hour than we think. Runners have no motivation to smash a world record or even attempt to run their fastest times. With big cheques for a win and podium places, there is no need to smash times. Seen plenty of major marathons were the elites were risk adverse.

Easy to be cynical but could be a fascinating project.

El Caballo · 14-12-2016 1:05pm

Djoucer wrote: »

Which raises another point. We could be much closer to a sub 2 hour than we think. Runners have no motivation to smash a world record or even attempt to run their fastest times. With big cheques for a win and podium places, there is no need to smash times. Seen plenty of major marathons were the elites were risk adverse.

Not in years though, the marathon at the very top major marathons now are just straight up time trials. In London nearly every year for the last 6, they've gone out at a stupidly fast pace and carnage happens soon after. Berlin has being the same for nearly a decade, this year Bekele went through halfway in 61:11!!!(The first 5k was at sub 2:01 pace).

Dubai has being the exact same too with them breaking the previous 30k WR before all imploding again up the homestretch, that 30k WR is broken nearly 2 or 3 times a year now so I don't think it's a case of risk aversion, most of these marathons of the last few years have had crazily fast starts and implosions. All the athletes have being doing for the last 10 years is chasing fast times, so much so that Chicago dropped pacers for the last two years because they thought the art of racing was being lost when every other race was a timetrial.

El Caballo · 14-12-2016 1:19pm

El Caballo wrote: »

They're not going to break the world record, they will just find a downhill point to point stretch of road and wait for vortex like tailwinds to pick up and off go the runners, guaranteed. It won't be done on a record eligible course so there will be no world record, it will be a world's best time if they do it.

^^^

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nike-recruits-top-runners-to-break-2-hour-marathon-barrier-1481596293?emailToken=JRrzdfp8Y3qSgdw2b8w61V4lK7MFAPWUR0/MaWzNIg3WqXrTrPi6grkywtGtrGqsABw/59cZ9Ss6TCfYnGptWoqbkqRlkFq%2BPiAB/siZgFPRax8%3D

The company says that while the run won’t be world record-eligible on a sanctioned course, the attempt will “show the potential to break it and enable future times to fall.”

walshb · 14-12-2016 1:27pm

2 hrs is definitely achievable...I have said before if the money is right you will see it happen.

El Caballo · 14-12-2016 1:29pm

walshb wrote: »

2 hrs is definitely achievable...I have said before if the money is right you will see it happen.

Eventually but it's a long way away yet.

Djoucer · 14-12-2016 1:41pm

El Caballo wrote: »

^^^

http://www.wsj.com/articles/nike-recruits-top-runners-to-break-2-hour-marathon-barrier-1481596293?emailToken=JRrzdfp8Y3qSgdw2b8w61V4lK7MFAPWUR0/MaWzNIg3WqXrTrPi6grkywtGtrGqsABw/59cZ9Ss6TCfYnGptWoqbkqRlkFq%2BPiAB/siZgFPRax8%3D

Oh for feck sake. So it's completely pointless then.

walshb · 14-12-2016 2:15pm

El Caballo wrote: »

Eventually but it's a long way away yet.

I don't think it is. Humans today with a real financial insensitive over this type of distance (that should have a lot more flexibility and leeway) will break 2 hrs soon.

Put it this way. I'd bet on 2 hrs being broken way before 3 mins 25 at 1500 or 3 mins 40 at a mile or 26 mins at 10 k for example...

average_runner · 14-12-2016 2:17pm

walshb wrote: »

I don't think it is. Humans today with a real financial insensitive over this type of distance (that should have a lot more flexibility and leeway) will break 2 hrs soon.

Yeah it is possible on a total downhill course, but not in Berlin or London.

walshb · 14-12-2016 2:19pm

average_runner wrote: »

Yeah it is possible on a total downhill course, but not in Berlin or London.

Of course, conditions will be important. A fair and flat course with the right weather and the right money and I see it happening within a few years. Maybe less.....

adrian522 · 14-12-2016 3:19pm

They could do it on a flat surface/track/loop of whatever duration and have one of their guys (Kipchoge) do the full distance with others taking pacing duties to provide wind protection and manage the pace. They could have Desisa pace half the race and Tadese pace the other half. Or even have them do 10K at a time.

As said above its a ridiculous PR stunt and takes away from the actual races that will be happening over the next few years.

The WR would presumably become devalued then.

For reference it took over 15 years for the WR to drop from 2:06 to 2:03 so its a bit unrealistic to expect this to drop another 3 mins overnight.

Personally I don't like all this time trial based racing, just beating the opposition on the day makes for a much better spectacle (see Chicago 2010 for example). This also takes out some of the main players from the spring marathons so they wont be nearly as interesting now.

El Caballo · 14-12-2016 4:09pm

walshb wrote: »

I don't think it is. Humans today with a real financial insensitive over this type of distance (that should have a lot more flexibility and leeway) will break 2 hrs soon.

Put it this way. I'd bet on 2 hrs being broken way before 3 mins 25 at 1500 or 3 mins 40 at a mile or 26 mins at 10 k for example...

26 minutes for 10k will have to be broken first. Bekele could have probably pushed it close at his prime. The media talks like we are close. They are miles away from it, over 6 seconds a mile, to put that in perspective, it has taken 20 years to progress that much to where we are today and that was with the likes of Tergat, Haile, Wanjiru, Kipchoge and Bekele on the radar. The fastest runners of all time stepping up after demolishing the previous era's idea of speed like never before taking nearly 30 seconds off the 5k WR and a minute over the 10k WR in 15 years. We would arguably need to see a similar progression again to find a sub-2 runner. The half marathon WR is 58:23(by one of the fastest ever 10k runners), most of the top marathon runners are about sub 59, they would need to be sub-58 and probably closer to 57:30 wheels to break 2 for the marathon which is 4:23 per mile or more than two back to back 27:15 10k's to run that time, very very few have run that fast on the road for 10k in history once. One 5k split wouldn't be far off qualifying a runner for the Olympic 5000m on the track.

The progression isn't linear but I'd nearly put my house on it not happening in the next 30 years on a record elligible course.

average_runner · 21-12-2016 11:40am

A Nike patent for a spring shoe recently filed. This is how they are going after their sub 2 hour marathon: https://www.google.com/patents/WO2016179265A1?cl=en …

Singer · 25-01-2017 11:38pm

Update of sorts here - the course could be certified according to the IAAF regulations, but won't be record eligible.

http://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/nikes-breaking2-team-goes-to-africa

robinph · 26-01-2017 8:37am

I got the impression that the Nike project is to stretch the spirit of the rules a bit for a laugh and see what happens. Not a downhill course wearing heelies, but might be indoor behind a pace car, or something just slightly outside of the current rules.

Gets them the permanent marketing opportunity as having broken 2hrs, regardless of if it is a ratified record or not.

Working class heroes · 26-01-2017 8:52am

Nike wouldn't stretch the spirit of the rules, would they? Really?

HigginsJ · 26-01-2017 1:32pm

Will these guys be running in races while this training is going on or is this their entire focus?

HigginsJ · 07-03-2017 5:10pm

Nike have announced that the marathon attempt will be a 2.4km loop around the Monza race track in Italy. They have released there sub 2 hour shoe as well, no springs on jet packs on them.

They are the Zoom Vapor Fly Elite

http://running.competitor.com/2017/03/news/nike-unveils-shoes-designed-to-run-a-sub-2-hour-marathon_162689

They are running a half marathon there today and aiming for a time of 60 minutes.

adrian522 · 07-03-2017 5:39pm

$250 for a pair of running shoes?

They'd want to be electronically propelled or something.

HigginsJ · 07-03-2017 5:41pm

adrian522 wrote: »

$250 for a pair of running shoes?

They'd want to be electronically propelled or something.

$250 is the pair that you can go and buy, they will weight 8.5oz, the ones the guys will be using will weight 6.5oz and you can't buy. :eek:

robinph · 07-03-2017 7:10pm

Looks like a rip off of Skechers Shape Ups.

https://www.skechers.com/en-gb/women/all?brand=/skechers-shape-ups

ThisRegard · 07-03-2017 7:15pm

The shoes are being investigated by the IAAF as being basically against the rules for such a record attempt

HigginsJ wrote: »

. They have released there sub 2 hour shoe as well, no springs on jet packs on them.

adrian522 wrote: »

$250 for a pair of running shoes?

They'd want to be electronically propelled or something.

Apparently there may indeed be springs

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/07/iaaf-investigation-concerns-springs-running-shoes-marathon

TFBubendorfer · 07-03-2017 9:38pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

$250 is the pair that you can go and buy, they will weight 8.5oz, the ones the guys will be using will weight 6.5oz and you can't buy. :eek:

Surely not.

The Lunaracers I used to buy years ago were lighter than 6.5 oz and my Saucony A6 are lighter than that as well.

El Caballo · 07-03-2017 10:12pm

Kipchoge ran 59:17 in very windy conditions for the half and said he was only running at 60% effort:pac:(impressive nonetheless). Tadesse ran 59:41 so it's safe to assume he was running hard if he didn't hang with Kipchoge. Desisa blew up to a 62 minute finish.

http://www.runnersworld.com/2-hour-marathon/sub-2-marathon-test-run-yields-fast-times-lingering-questions

Special drafting technique was implemented.

opus · 08-03-2017 12:22pm

El Caballo wrote: »

Kipchoge ran 59:17 in very windy conditions for the half and said he was only running at 60% effort:pac:(impressive nonetheless). Tadesse ran 59:41 so it's safe to assume he was running hard if he didn't hang with Kipchoge. Desisa blew up to a 62 minute finish.

http://www.runnersworld.com/2-hour-marathon/sub-2-marathon-test-run-yields-fast-times-lingering-questions

Special drafting technique was implemented.

I read that & either Kipchoge is just brimming with confidence or was being a bit tongue-in-cheek! To me that's just an amazing run for the half, makes me think they could well manage that two-hour target. Although tbh it's not like I've (as your average plodder!) ever though anyone who's running 2:05 and faster for a marathon is pedestrian or anything

robinph · 08-03-2017 1:13pm

Interesting that they have to have the car driven by an actual person or it doesn't count, although the record won't count anyway so not sure why that matters. Wonder if they have fiddled with the gearing any as it would actually be very tricky to drive a car at a consistent 13 miles an hour just using the pressure of your foot on the accelerator.

average_runner · 08-03-2017 2:47pm

robinph wrote: »

Interesting that they have to have the car driven by an actual person or it doesn't count, although the record won't count anyway so not sure why that matters. Wonder if they have fiddled with the gearing any as it would actually be very tricky to drive a car at a consistent 13 miles an hour just using the pressure of your foot on the accelerator.

Cruise mode would sort it

spurscormac · 08-03-2017 5:00pm

There's a lot of shoes that already include plates which could have been interpreted as springs in the past (Fila, Adidas & Hoka) but I guess the skepticism wasn't there to challenge them at the time.
How does a carbon plate in a road shoe compare to a carbon plate on the bottom of a sprinting spike?
Why should one be outlawed & the other not?

It looks like a very grey area to me.

This article on runner's world re Nike's Magic Shoes, delves a little into the questions around the shoes.

Peterx · 09-03-2017 2:48pm

From the runners world article

The next step for the team is to analyze the piles of data they collected from the runners during the attempt, from ingested core-temperature pills, taped-on muscle oxygen and skin-temperature sensors

Mad Ted.

clear thinking · 11-03-2017 12:36am

Nike exec from NY Times "We’re giving our athletes a benefit within the rules as they’re written,” said Schoolmeester, the Nike executive, adding, “We’re not using any sort of illegal springs or anything like that.”

To me a 4% energy boost that they're claiming and 13% increase in energy returned from impact to lift off is an aid.

Nike deeming it legal is a bit rich and they are admitting it is a spring, in any case something that stores and releases energy is a spring even if they didn't admit it.

If it's to be believed it is worth 30-50s on a 5k, 5-10m off a marathon.

Id certainly expect my club to ban them in club races and ask aai to do the same.

Only thing is if there ends up being loads of models you would need some sort of load test to approve all competition shoes, obvious money there if iaaf approve shoes like fifa do footballs.

TFBubendorfer · 11-03-2017 12:00pm

clear thinking wrote: »

To me a 4% energy boost that they're claiming and 13% increase in energy returned from impact to lift off is an aid.

To me that claim is pure marketing bull**** and I don't believe it.

Carbon plates in shoes are actually not completely new and those shoes are not particularly light for racing shoes. I can't see where all those magic improvements would come from.

Murph_D · 11-03-2017 1:32pm

Besides, a spring doesn't store energy until the energy is supplied, by the runner in the case of a shoe. Muscles, joints, tendons all have some spring-like characteristics. So do rubber soles. I don't see anything wrong with a device that reduces energy loss and increases energy return, as long as that energy is produced by the runner in the first place. By legal means of course.

clear thinking · 22-03-2017 12:23am

Murph_D wrote: »

Besides, a spring doesn't store energy until the energy is supplied, by the runner in the case of a shoe. Muscles, joints, tendons all have some spring-like characteristics. So do rubber soles. I don't see anything wrong with a device that reduces energy loss and increases energy return, as long as that energy is produced by the runner in the first place. By legal means of course.

Well that rules out showing up at a race on a bike! It is a legit point that shoes have energy supplied by the runner in the first place so it gets very grey as to where to draw the line.

HigginsJ · 11-04-2017 3:11pm

Nike have set May 6th as the projected date with May 7th or May 8th as back-up in case conditions are not ideal.

average_runner · 11-04-2017 4:38pm

Even if Nike do achieve this, it will mean nothing, as not valid course etc.

11-04-2017 4:53pm

Would switching by a day or 2 at short notice not be disastrous for prep?

HigginsJ · 11-04-2017 4:54pm

average_runner wrote: »

Even if Nike do achieve this, it will mean nothing, as not valid course etc.

Not a valid course but it is not the net downhill long stretch of road some people were predicting so would be a little more believable in that aspect.

Genuine query, aside from the fact that it is a staged time trial what prevents this from being a WR attempt? Could the not get the IAAF to come in and measure the distance to make sure that is all above board?

HigginsJ · 11-04-2017 4:55pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Would switching by a day or 2 at short notice not be disastrous for prep?

I would have thought this myself but it sounds like they will have the decision made early in the week so might not be that bad.

11-04-2017 5:17pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

I would have thought this myself but it sounds like they will have the decision made early in the week so might not be that bad.

Also there's the assumption that this is a serious attempt. :pac:

adrian522 · 11-04-2017 5:17pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

Not a valid course but it is not the net downhill long stretch of road some people were predicting so would be a little more believable in that aspect.

Genuine query, aside from the fact that it is a staged time trial what prevents this from being a WR attempt? Could the not get the IAAF to come in and measure the distance to make sure that is all above board?

Well nobody knows what they are doing. Are they going to have pacers come in and out during the race? If so that invalidates it as a WR attempt.

There are questions over the shoes they are wearing I'm not sure if they will stand up to scrutiny as being legal.

If they are drafting behind a car that is another problem.

Nike sponsoring sub-2 hour marathon attempt

Comments