The decline of Radcliffes star

2004 was Paula's first NYC Marathon and her first marathon after smashing the women's world record. Of course there is far less buzz this time around.

not correct - NYC 2004 wasnt her first marathon after breaking the world record. NYC came directly after the Olympic marathon where she dropped out

Much of the letsrun universe is still asleep. Me, I am just beginning to process the information.

But, you know, a lot of folks didn't think Radcliffe would be ready in NYC in 2007, after childbirth and all, and she did just fine. I wouldn't underestimate her.

PR is undefeated in marathons except for the two Olympics. And if someonle like me knows that, she surely must be aware of it too. And for a number of reasons, I see little sense, including commerically, in risking that track record for one payday unless she's convinced she has a good chance of winning it.

Radcliffe doesn’t give a toss about threads on Letsrun.

I guarantee, she still rates the highest appearance money (and publicity) in any of the American or British city marathons.

Only when she actually loses in one, will her fee drop to the level of the others.

Maybe people are wearying of the dramatics, and would prefer an athlete who competes with a little dignity, instead of turning on the waterworks any time things go wrong.

joe - you don't post often enough. you are one of the few voices of experience and intelligence - thanks.

I like Paula. She's a concrete runner and a pretty damn fast one if I don't say so myself.

I agree. She ran 2:32 on one leg and two months of pool running.

So true... Paula running on one leg can still beat most of the world.

This board tore her apart after the Olympics but she beat all the Americans and we had a very strong team.

1500 wrote:

This board tore her apart after the Olympics but she beat all the Americans and we had a very strong team.

We certainly did not. Lewy and Russell are nice runners but Kastor was the class of the team, by far, and she's been on an obvious decline for two years now. I don't blame Radcliffe one bit for not turning down a healthy payday. Just like I couldn't blame Geb for wanting to skip the marathon at Olympics for a much better payday (appearance fee + prize money + possible record bonus) in Berlin. Aside from London, NYCM probably can give her the best offer in terms of appearance fee. Her physical health since giving birth (not implying causation, per se) does not give much hope for her having more than a couple good years of racing left in her. I'd be surprised if she wins NYCM, just like I would have been surprised if she had won in Beijing. I could see Kastor also milking a few more years of appearance fees in the big marathons even if it's clear that she will never again be as good as she was even as recently as 2006.

Gary L wrote:

World record holder Paula Radcliffe announces she'll run the NYC marathon just a few weeks after failing to medal in the Olympic games. Within an hour of the announcement:

2004: Letsrun has gone into meltdown

2008: Not a single thread interested in it.

This could just as easily be a decline in Letsrun, such as, for example, the relative number of high school kids who don't know anything about marathoning.

Like she really gives a crap about some artificial track record that sounds like something CPTC would claim (undefeated in marathons EXCEPT for the two Olympics). She's a professional runner and can get paid a lot to run the NYCM whether she is in 2:15 or 2:25 or 2:35 shape. That's how she makes a living. End of story.

Just did a Google News search on "Paula Radcliffe New York" and about 280 stories on her participation in New York have been published less than 24 hours after her announcement.

Pretty impressive coverage for a distance running athlete...

Lucky for her things rarely go wrong.

"w4x800 35-39 indoor wr", you're thinking of a one-day payday rather than longer-term earning potential in her next event, the one after that, the one after THAT, etc. Her managers, unlike some managers, will clearly have that optimization model in mind.

In just about any sport, but especially the minor ones, winners, defending champions, etc. reap a disproportionate share of the upfront pay. So a quick-buck 6th place will hurt.

You are delusional if you think that a 6th place in the NYCM this year is going to kill her earning potential for a spring marathon. She's the world record holder and won multiple major marathons. Her reputation is a hell of a lot stronger than you are giving her credit for.

She turns 35 in December. Her window for taking in huge appearance fees for showing up to (and potentially winning) major marathons is rapidly closing. Good for her for cashing in now because she won't be able to for that much longer.

Tegla Loroupe completely dispels your mistaken belief that 1 bad race kills a career. She has been running subpar times for years but nonetheless gets invited over and over again to major races (and her reputation and achievements never even approached Paula's).

devon martin, you are a pain in the butt.

Skipping NYCM to wait for London and then run 3rd-6th there would hurt even more, certainly for the skipped payday for a theoretical 6th at NYCM that would have little effect on what she could command from London. A sub-par run at NYCM could always be written-off as lingering hang-over from hurry-up prep and finishing in Beijing, plus Wami didn't run in Beijing, etc. London will still pay a premium for their marathon queen, however she does in NYCM isn't going to have much of an effect on that. Not like she'd consider going anywhere other than London, either. Whatever she would get for "a quick-buck 6th place" at NYCM would still be better for her (both short-term and long-term) than a slightly better showing in Chicago. It's simply in her best interest to take the biggest offers she gets from the major marathons, regardless of her level of fitness, skipping potential paydays at this point in her life and running career would be flushing money down the toilet.