Share

cover art for Spotlight: A Women's Sub 4-minute Mile? / A Tale of Textbook Heat Adaptation

The Real Science of Sport Podcast

Spotlight: A Women's Sub 4-minute Mile? / A Tale of Textbook Heat Adaptation

In this Spotlight, Ross and Gareth become "bros" to discuss and critique a recent paper that forecasts a sub-4 min mile in women (specifically, Faith Kipyegon) if drafting strategies were improved. Ross explains his skepticism and reaction to straw man arguments in media about the paper, and the framing of the seven second improvement required as a "mental barrier". This ushers in a new segment for the show, "Grinds my Gears!".


We also learn from a Discourse member, @pauliuspeciura, about how to execute a textbook heat adaptation strategy for a race he participated in recently. We talk about the physiology of heat adaptation, and how to implement a downscaled, but necessary approach to heat in your next race. We also briefly touch on two bits of news, one concerning an increasing lack of physical activity in children in the UK, and other a peculiar, though not unique, explanation for doping contamination in the recent case of triathlete Imogen Simmonds*


*Ross mentioned a USA Sprinter who was cleared of a positive drug test after using "passionate kissing" as a defence. That was Gil Roberts, not Derrick Brew as mentioned (article link below). Roberts, incidentally, got cleared of this positive result in 2017, but then had another doping violation in 2022 (16 month ban) and then another in 2023, and is now serving an 8 year ban!


Show notes


Spotlights are inspired by Discourse, and then the discussion continues there after! If you want to become a member of that community, here's the link to Patreon, where you sign up, and then it'll direct you to the Discourse Platform where the floor is yours!


Links



More episodes

View all episodes

  • Trust Issues: Doping, the Media, and the Athlete’s Dilemma

    01:15:42|
    Join Discourse: you know what to do - small monthly pledge, and the community is yours!This week's Spotlight kicks off on the roads of France with a fast-paced Discourse Digest. Remco Evenepoel’s withdrawal sparks a discussion about whether he's fully healthy, or if affected preparation and fuelling challenges might account for his underperformance. Jonas Vingegaard seems to have narrowed one gap to Tadej Pogačar, only to find another expanding on the high-altitude climbs. Ross explains how their previously complementary strengths and weaknesses have evolved into a straight race with, so far, one winner. We also tackle Quinn Simmons’ controversial claims about motorbikes aiding Tim Wellens' stage win—ungracious perhaps, but correct and backed by aerodynamic science.In Center Stage (29:20), we dive into doping, the media, and trust in sport. Ruth Chepngetich’s diuretic case prompts a wider debate: what are media entitled to ask, and what responsibility do they bear in keeping sport honest? Is asking about doping unfair, or essential? A lively debate on Discourse spills over into the Spotlight!In Ross Replies (55:56) we take on Discourse member Larkim’s question: should sports equipment be modified for women? From volleyball to athletics, we explore where it already happens, and why more sports might benefit from doing the same. But what do women think, and how should sport consider the sometimes conflicting opinions on this issue?And Finally (1:07:20) a study of over 5,000 runners reveals that injury risk spikes after a single big jump in distance—not a gradual increase—reshaping how we think about training load.LinksQuinn Simmons on motorbikes and Tim Wellens' responseThe Aerodynamic paper on motorbikes and cycling performanceArticle translating the aerodynamic paper for a lay audienceDiscourse members only - discussion about Chepngetich, as featured in Center StageThe paper on single session running distance as an injury risk factor
  • 16. Hormones, Hype & High Performance: The Menstrual Cycle in Sport

    01:36:15||Season 7, Ep. 16
    In this episode, we dive into the intersection of the menstrual cycle and athletic performance—a topic often surrounded by strong opinions but surprisingly limited evidence. Joined by Dr Kelly McNulty, researcher and practitioner, and Sarah Massey, experienced coach, we break down the key phases of the cycle, highlight when ovarian hormone levels rise and fall, and explore the popular theory that certain types of training should align with these hormonal shifts. But does the science actually support that idea? Together, we take a critical look at the research—what’s known, what’s still unclear, and where the gaps are. More importantly, we focus on practical, athlete-centered approaches: being symptom-led, being "your own scientist", using tracking tools effectively, and how to open the conversation—especially with younger athletes—in a way that empowers and informs.Whether you're a coach, practitioner, or athlete yourself, this episode offers a grounded and positive perspective on managing training around the menstrual cycle without falling for the hype.Join DiscourseJoin Sarah Massey and hundreds of others on the best sports science chat community in the world! Discourse access is yours for a small monthly pledge, which you can make hereLinksOne of Kelly's papers that summarizes the literature and shows a trivial impairment during the early follicular phasePaper showing that the anabolic response to resistance training is unaffected by menstrual cycle phaseKelly's study on symptoms experienced during menstruation and their perceived effects on training and performanceResearchers raise the bar for studies on the menstrual cycle by calling for measurement, not guesswork"No influence of influence of women's menstrual cycle phase on acute strength performance or adaptations to resistance exercise training"Another of Kelly's papers, this one summarizing the literature on the effect of oral contraceptives on exercise performanceDeveloping a tool for ovarian hormone profile classificationKelly's educational resource, Period of the Period
  • 🚨 SOS: It WAS Too Good To Be True: Marathon World Record Holder Chepng'etich Provisionally Suspended

    27:31|
    Join Discourse - a small monthly pledge gives you access to the best sports science and sports insight community on the interwebs (yes, we are biased). Pledge here and join the conversation!In this emergency bonus episode, Ross reacts to the bombshell news: Kenya's Ruth Chepng’etich, who stunned the world with her record-breaking marathon in Chicago last year, has been provisionally suspended by the Athletics Integrity Unit after testing positive for a banned diuretic in March. The performance shocked the running community at the time — questions and doubts sparked a parliamentary inquiry in Kenya after a journalist’s pointed question at the press conference. We even released a podcast titled “Too Good To Be True?” analyzing the run.Now, that skepticism feels vindicated. Ross breaks down why the doubts were justified despite the usual defenses ("she's always been talented", "she worked hard"). He explains what a diuretic does, why this kind of doping bust leaves him cold and underwhelmed, and how it fits a familiar pattern in elite sport. We also explore the shadowy roles of agents and coaches — and ask why it's always the athlete left holding the bag?Finally, Ross reflects on the cycle of hope, hype, and heartbreak that defines modern sport — from the marathon course to the Tour de France, can we trust what we see? Why should we, when the characters and incentives remain the same? Same script, different stage.LinksThe AIU statement on Chepng'etich's provisional suspensionThe timeline as posted by Chris Chavez on XOur podcast on the performance at the time - we were highly, highly skepticalThe Discourse thread at the time of that performance - members onlyThe Discourse thread that is growing now, out of the announcement last night - members only
  • Staying Cool at the Tour - Gimmick or Gain? | Busting the Hype About Salty Sweat

    01:12:35|
    Join Discourse by making a small monthly pledge, to double your Science of Sport experience!In a packed episode of Spotlight, we kick off with a Discourse Digest that begins on the grass of Wimbledon, where Jannik Sinner and a dominant Iga Świątek took home the titles. Then it’s to the rugby fields of South Africa, where the Springboks—led by the ever-innovative Rassie Erasmus—have once again found a tactical edge. But is it genius strategy or a rule-bending loophole?In Center Stage (17:10), the Tour de France is in focus. Jonas Vingegaard's muscle has matched Pogacar on short, punchy climbs, but can he hold his own as the race hits the high mountains? We also break down Remco Evenepoel’s pre-race cooling technique - placing hands and forearms in ice water - to explore what the science says about its effectiveness. Plus, we revisit the ongoing issue of concussions in cycling to explain the paradigm shift that is needed to buy space and time for better concussion identification.In Ross Responds (52:07), we revisit the topic of cramp and sodium loss, answering a listener question about 'salty sweat' with a dive into how our bodies prioritize the regulation of sodium concentration, and why sweat testing is nothing more than a measure of the body's systems working to defend physiological 'normal'. In Listener Lens (1:00:10), Tim is looking to break a barrier over 10km, and our Discourse community zeros in on the key to unlock that performance: pacing. We offer some advice to help him nail it.And finally (1:06:53), a Zwift racing series has Ross questioning the platform’s 'fairness'. Are the game's efforts to simulate equipment and drafting creating more distortion than accuracy?LinksArticle on South Africa's innovative midfield maul set upStanford study that finds that palm cooling (with a vacuum device) improves performance in bench press and pull ups. Too good to be trueConversely, study showing that palm cooling does not improve interval running performanceAnd conversely again, study showing that immersing the hands and forearm in cold water improves sprint performanceHealy's power numbers from the day, the trigger for our IF discussionCycling's concussion policyFor Discourse members only, Tim's question about his 10km quest and discussions on improving pacingDiscourse members talk cramp
  • 15. The Science of Cramp

    01:22:24||Season 7, Ep. 15
    It's time to pour yourself some pickle juice and suck on a salt tab (or is it?) as we talk exercise-associated muscle cramps (EAMCs) - one of the most complex, and common, afflictions facing athletes. Difficult to research and predict, the causes of EAMC's can be varied depending on the individual, as are the solutions to fix them. In this episode, Prof. Ross Tucker and Mike Finch break down the most common theories around causes and then discuss the best long-term, medium-term and immediate solutions (yes, there are some!) to preventing this painful condition.DiscourseJoin Discourse now, and become part of the growing community whose stories and testimonies inspired much of the content of this (and other) podcast! You do so by making a small donation here on Patreon, and then the world of sports science insight and opinion will be yours!SHOW NOTESThe cramping thread on Discourse - members onlyAn Evidence-Based Review of the Pathophysiology, Treatment, and Prevention of Exercise-Associated Muscle CrampsSimilar review on crampsStudy showing how pickle juice works fast in low doses, via a neural reflexRon Maughan paper on muscle cramps, contrasting the hydration model with the neural theoryPeople who cramp have similar sodium and other electrolyte levels to those who don’t crampIf you drink more, your sodium levels drop, even if you drink an electrolyte containing drinkA paper that compares the two leading hypotheses for cramps: 
  • Vingegaard's Muscle: No Match for Pogacar? | Who is to Blame for Tour Crash Chaos?

    01:09:12|
    Discourse - the best thing about this Podcast, is all yours for a small monthly pledge. No exorbitant fee, no toilet paper advert every 510min, and access to hundreds of listeners who share great advice, insight, training strategies and opinion. Join now!The showThis week on The Real Science of Sport Spotlight world records fall and big questions rise. Faith Kipyegon and Beatrice Chebet lit up the track in Eugene—how fast can they go, and what happens if (or hopefully when) they clash over 5000m, 3000m, or possibly even 1500m? Their record-breaking performances headlined a meeting that showed track and field can be exciting, modern, and appealing to younger fans. Is the sport in better shape than critics thought? From spikes to strings, we then turn to Wimbledon, where Electronic Line Calling has come under fire. Is the system flawed, or just misunderstood? We break down the tech, the myths, and why perfection was never the point.In our Center Stage (27:44), we focus on the Tour de France, where concussions, broken bones, and questions of responsibility have again reared their head. Do race organizers or riders bear the blame? We explore the UCI's priorities, enforcement of their own rules, and creation of new rules with marginal benefits. We also discuss the race. Jonas Vingegaard says he’s heavier, more muscular, and more powerful than ever. Will that close the gap to Pogacar? The early signs, after the Stage 5 TT, suggest an emphatic "no"? Is he solving the 'wrong' problem, and how will that increased mass play out against a relentless Pogacar in the mountains?We also Spotlight listener insights in Ross Replies (52:00), with a focus on David Roche’s Western States DNF and his pre-race transparency. You wondered whether he created mental and emotional pressure on himself by being so open, and we discuss. In Listener Lens (58:25), we celebrate some Discourse success stories. And finally (1:02:16), are endurance athletes more likely to have daughters? A quirky study suggesting so closes the show.LinksUSADA statement on the father and son banned for testosterone useGuardian article on the tech failures and player mistrust of electronic line callingStrong criticism of the UCI/ASO for a hazardous stage finale in the raceThe Michael Woods Tour diary in which he describes the ASO approach to safety, including his thoughts on how to improve safetyVingegaard's comments about his power, weight and performance prospectsAre athletes getting older - for DISCOURSE only, Max's amazing analysis on age of elite athletes over the yearsEndurance athletes are more likely to have girls - the quirky paper we finished on
  • 14. What It's Really Like to be a Tennis Professional on Tour

    01:28:31||Season 7, Ep. 14
    Kevin Ullyett has won 34 career tennis titles - including two doubles (2001 US Open, 2005 Australian Open) and one mixed (2002 Australian Open) Grand Slams - and had a world ranking of 107th in singles. So he knows what it's like to fight his way through the ranks and play among the best. In this interview with Ross and Mike, Ullyett explains what it takes to make it to the top tier of professional tennis, the daily and financial pressures of just breaking even, how players cope with loneliness and the ups and downs and how modern developments in string technology have changed the face of the game in the last 10 years. It's a fascinating insight into the realities of a career where unwavering determination is one of the most important qualities a player can have,SHOW NOTESKevin Ullyett's Wikipedia pageAndre Agassi's mind games with Boris BeckerAnother funny Agassi story about a young Rafael Nadal
  • Spotlight: Failing to Science the Sh*t Out of Running / A Legal Lens on Liability and Sports Injury

    01:35:05|
    We kick off this Spotlight at the Western States 100, where much of the buzz centered on David Roche’s DNF. Roche, a polarizing figure who promised to “science the shit” out of the race, faced unfair criticism both before and after the race, and Ross reflects on how the scientific process often works best when the "hypothesis" fails, and why confronting failed hypotheses to explain under-performance is more beneficial than riding a wave of success .The "science the shit out of it" theme continues with Nike’s hyped attempt to help Faith Kipyegon break the 4-minute mile. It didn’t just fall short—it missed by a long shot, with Kipyegon never really giving the barrier a scare with a pacing strategy that reveals they all knew it was not truly feasible. Ross and Gareth unpack the science, pseudoscience and "hacks" behind the effort, with honorable mentions for the obviously flawed claims by scientists about drafting benefits, and criticism of many media who parroted hype points without critical thought. We wonder what the athlete who could break 4 looks like, and postulate that they probably don't exist. Yet. From ultra to ultra-short, we shift to the 100m, where Kishane Thompson clocked a blistering 9.75s—the fastest in a decade, leading Gareth to wonder why sprinting seems to have plateaued post-Bolt?In Center Stage (37:14), legal expert Matt Kemp joins us to dissect a recent rugby case where a player successfully sued an opponent for causing a spinal injury with a reckless off-the-ball collision. Could this open the door to more civil claims in contact sports? Matt explains the legal standards around recklessness and duty of care. Ross Replies (1:15:23) to Discourse member Paul on the purpose of sports science and what "truth" means when studies can't be replicated?And in Listener Lens (1:24:15), we explore ATP's role in exercise, wonder whether you can ever “run out” of it, and how the purpose of metabolism is to keep it in good supply. And Finally (1:31:17), we invite you all to join our Tour de France Fantasy League, and see if you can top Gareth and Ross' picks in our two leagues!Join DiscourseJoin the Discourse community, to hang out with the racers, analysts, legal experts, coaches and experts, by making a small monthly pledge at PatreonLinksAnalysis of the 100m event that inspired our 100m chatGymnastic medalists are getting olderReport on the decision ruling in favour of a player injured by opponentMatt, our new legal expert, is a partner at Becker Kemp Solicitors & AttorneysRoss' reply to Tony on the ATP depletion question - members onlyTDF FANTASY LEAGUE - play one of our two leagues
  • 13. The Science of Fuelling: Inside the Carbohydrate Performance Paradigm

    01:26:56||Season 7, Ep. 13
    Carbohydrates have always been part of the endurance equation—but how much, when, and which types remain hotly debated. In this listener-driven episode, we tackle those questions and more, exploring a new paradigm in performance fueling that’s reshaping how athletes think about energy during exercise. Dr. Jamie Whitfield, Senior Lecturer at Australian Catholic University’s Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, joins us to break it all down.For years, endurance athletes were trained to conserve carbs by becoming better fat-burners—adapting diet, training, and supplements to spare glycogen. But that thinking is evolving. As Jamie explains, the focus now is on maximizing carbohydrate use. Why? Because carbs are a more oxygen-efficient fuel source than fat—providing more energy per unit of oxygen. That efficiency improvement is a performance advantage in itself—like a supershoe, but internal.We dig into how elite athletes are pushing 90 to 120 grams of carbs per hour, and what it takes to train the gut to handle it. Are there limits? What happens when intake exceeds demand? Where does the glucose go? Are there health risks? We also explore carb types and ratios, strategies for carrying fuel without excess weight, and how to tailor intake to your individual needs.Jamie brings clarity to the technical details, helping translate complexity into actionable insight. If you’re fueling training or racing, this episode will reshape your approach to performance nutrition—and maybe your results too.Show notes and linksDiscourse is our VIP community, and it was questions from those listeners that inspired this interview. If you want to be part of the conversation, driving the content, and then engaging with other listeners after the show, you can join by making a small monthly pledge.The Podlogar paper that compared 90g/h to 120g/h, informing some of our discussionThe Jeukendrup study Jamie mentioned that managed to provide 144g/h of carbs with a glucose-fructose mixone of the studies mentioned in which glucose ingested spared liver glycogen use during exerciseA study that looked at performance and tolerance of carb solutions with different ratios of glucose to fructose