This thread made me curious about what the current world record time for a half marathon. Wasn’t sure how much shaving off 13.1 miles would add to an elite runner’s pace.
The men’s half-marathon world record is 57:31, set by Ugandan Jacob Kiplimo on 21 November 2021 during the Lisbon Half Marathon.
The women’s record is 1:02:52, set by Letesenbet Gidey on 24 October 2021, at the Valencia Half Marathon.
Maybe? The origins of the marathon seem to be a mash-up of a few histories. And it’s not really decided.
Although the 26.2 miles thing can be blamed on London.
I saw a similar thing; a women’s long-distance race, it might have only been 15km, I don’t remember, but it was just on a cordoned off road. A couple of guys, looked about 18, got on to the track and tried to run alongside.
The commentator said words to the effect of “Oh some idiots have got on the track. Well they won’t be able to keep up with these athletes for long”.
Sure enough, only about 20 seconds later they had stopped and were bent over gasping for breath. It did bring home the athleticism and training required for these events.
I’ve suggested before, not entirely joking, that it would be good if athletic events could have one regular Joe compete, just to emphasize how amazing all the competitors are. But the pole vault might get unpleasant…
Regarding the OP, I am expecting carbon plate shoes to get banned. There is form for banning tech that seems to give too much advantage, and I think these shoes are there.
I’d be surprised. There was talk about that back in 2017, when the Vaporfly first appeared. But doing so would piss off Nike, the 300 lb. gorilla of running shoes, and the USATF, at least, appears to defer to the money - there’s a stink right now among elite racers over the organization’s decision to start next year’s Olympic marathon trials in Orlando at noon (presumably to accommodate NBC’s live broadcast), which risks dangerously hot conditions.
It’s not just Nike anymore, either. While they’re still the big dog of carbon-plated shoes, and the Vaporfly and Alphafly are the overwhelming choice of the elites, most of the other shoe companies - Adidas, Hoka ONE ONE, Mizuno, New Balance, Brooks, Saucony, Puma, Asics, hell, even Skechers and On - have released carbon-plated models.
Carbon plates are only one part of a supershoe, anyway - Nike et al. have poured equal amount of time and money into developing midsole foams. According to this article I found,, a couple of studies have shown that the carbon plates don’t per se deliver energy back to the runner; their benefit is in stablizing the midsole foams and facilitating motion.
TL:DR version, the IAAF would be fighting the industry that they rely on for sponsorships and support, if they banned carbon-plate shoes. I don’t think it’s going to happen.
I don’t think pissing off the sponsors is going to be the blocker, I mean, who made the superslick swimsuits?
But yeah the fact they’ve let this go for years at this point I think is a stronger reason that they may not be inclined to change now.
Better shoes(just like tires in auto racing) have always been part of the improvement of the marathon record. The difference here is the focus on making a record breaking shoe and the fact that these shoes are not available to the public and are vastly more expensive and only good for a race or two.
That’s nothing new, though. “Make customized shoes for elite athlete, athlete wins championship/sets record in said shoes, release shoes to public” is a strategy Nike’s been using since 1984, when they created the Air Jordan for Michael Jordan and subsequently made them available for sale in April, 1985. And it’s been a phenomenally successful strategy for them – the Jordan brand alone brought in $6.5 billion for Nike last year. As your link notes, Kipchoge, Lilesa, and Rupp all wore prototype Vaporflys at the 2016 Olympics. Nike started offering them for sale in 2017. So long as you’ve got a spare $500, you can buy the Adidas Adizero Pro Evo 1 that Assefa wore right now, from Adidas’ website (the webpage for which features a picture of Assefa breaking the tape at Berlin, just to drive home the point).
And from that page
You can try any of our performance running shoes for 30 days and return hassle-free. If you don’t agree that they’re the most comfortable shoe you’ve ever worn, you can return them free for a full refund, in any condition - no matter how many miles you’ve run.
Is 30 days enough training time for me to get in shape for a sub-2-hour attempt?
Not without the right shoes
Does $500 only get me the left shoe?
If you start at sub 2:01 shape, most likely.
I could make a sub-2-hour attempt tomorrow if I wanted.
I’d probably finish in double the time, but I could make the attempt.
The record for an 80 year old woman is 4:11. I doubt I could do that.
I’ve occasionally wondered how long it would take me to complete a marathon… I’d be walking for most of it, but if I could keep a 4 mph pace that would between 6 and 7 hours.
Maybe I could shave off a minute or two with the right shoes.
Having the right shoes can definitely make a big difference between finishing it, and having to drop out after a few miles.
Many years ago, a college in Iowa had a personal-development class where the final would be the Drake Relays Marathon, in Des Moines. If you DNF’ed you failed the class - and incredibly, everyone finished. The 18-24 age division had a lot of people from that region who finished in up to 8 hours, which IIRC was the cutoff.
That’s a very stupid idea.
At the 2015 Boston marathon, an amateur wanted to be leading the race at the mile mark, so he ran balls out and was just ahead of the elites. He then crashed and burned, but still managed to finish in a little over 3 hours.
He wasn’t a complete hack - he qualified for Boston with a 2:30, so he was legitimately running in the first start wave. Maybe not the best race strategy, though.
Just ballparking it … a 2:30 marathon has to be in the top 0.01% among all adults on the planet.
The under-2:05 crew can probably comfortably share an apartment.
You’re gonna need a bigger apartment. 93 under 2:05