Earlier today I posted a version of this going the other way, showing what a 2:03:00 would become with a performance boost of X. Here it is the other way - if the economy advantage of shoes is X, then the performance benefit = 0.65X, so what does a 1:59:40 equate to? Pick a line 
You can of course pick the bottom one - make the advantage zero, that’s cool. If so, then whatever improvement happened today was pacing/drafting/course related. If you set it at the lab, then today offered very little. At half, it’s Berlin 2018 with a small boost. Who knows?
Where we are now was entirely predictable in 2016 - the integrity of performances is impossible to evaluate, because the exact performance advantage is unknowable. All we know is that lab studies show it to be massive and universal (which is unprecedented). So guess its size
If you set it at half of typical, then today saw an unbelievably quick marathon, maybe the fastest ever, but impossible to evaluate exactly given all other contrivances. If it’ 4% (“typical), then either all other contrivances = zero, or it was a “slow” physiological run of 1:59!
Whole problem is that sudden & large tech impact distorts relationship between what goes in & what comes out. The SAME physiology may now produce a time 3:12 faster (at typical lab values, for example). Lack of regulation (of all contrivances) = no integrity of HUMAN contribution
In any event, incredible runner, the greatest ever based on Major Marathon results, and what a shame we didn’t see it confirmed in a 2:01:xx race recently. So good for him, good on engineers, but like the problem with pharmacists in sport, I don’t know how to evaluate the runner!
