Why was Kipchoge's race not "offical" by IAF rules?

The course is legit. The ineligible thing according to IAAF rules was the pacers- more than 3, and the fact that they kept changing through out the race, and also the car that provided a steady pace for the pacers.

Pacers who didn't run the full distance to the point they paced, and probably too many aid stations where they were handed bottles.

Were pacers to the finish another infraction?

I don't think there's any problem with pacers running to the finish, the problem is they have to start at the start.

He had the benefit of the pacers BLOCKING the wind for the whole race. This was the difference in his time compared to a legitimate race and course.

Nike Circus events do not count.

Another difference is the car (and I'm not referring to the car blocking the wind, which perhaps is another factor) setting a pace. The pacers only had to follow the car. I know that the pacing was exactly as planned, but it was much smoother and less variable than when you have only runners deciding how fast to go.

the wind as a tool...... wrote:

He had the benefit of the pacers BLOCKING the wind for the whole race. This was the difference in his time compared to a legitimate race and course.

Lapped runners can't be pacers.

Lapped runners are not allowed to interact with the people lapping them.

Was the event officially sanctioned?

The event wasn't open.

Was the distance legitimate?

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

Lapped runners can't be pacers.

Lapped runners are not allowed to interact with the people lapping them.

Was the event officially sanctioned?

The event wasn't open.

Was the distance legitimate?

Of course the distance was legitimate. That would be really stupid for them to openly state ahead of time what liberties they were taking with the rules to help him run fast, but then cut the course.

EK's run should be the world record. IAAF has many issues with their "rules" and what they believe a WR is. Take a look at the women's WR for 100m through 800m. These are WR but EK's run isn't.

No IAAF drug testing before/after the event is deal killer.

I'm not sure it's the number of aid stations. Isn't the point that they were handed drinks by the guys on bicycles. In regular marathons they have to pick up their own drinks from a table.

The shoes aren't legal either. Spring plate in them was allowed him to run 4:34 pace at what would have been 4:41-4:43 without.

car pacing wrote:

Another difference is the car (and I'm not referring to the car blocking the wind, which perhaps is another factor) setting a pace. The pacers only had to follow the car. I know that the pacing was exactly as planned, but it was much smoother and less variable than when you have only runners deciding how fast to go.

the wind as a tool...... wrote:

He had the benefit of the pacers BLOCKING the wind for the whole race. This was the difference in his time compared to a legitimate race and course.

You thik the pace car is "perhaps another factor"? IT IS THE WHOLE SHEBANG. Running in the cars slipstream is like running downhill. End of thread.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:

Was the distance legitimate?

1. Pacers that didn't race from the starting line.

2. Mechanical pacing by the Tesla.

3. Moving aid as runners were handed drinks from bikes whenever they wanted.

What if he ran it on a straight 26.2 mile track surface? Would that count as a record?

ogranbubrgbrgb wrote:

What if he ran it on a straight 26.2 mile track surface? Would that count as a record?

Not with the intermittent pacers and car. Why is that so hard to understand?

Gender bias wrote:

You thik the pace car is "perhaps another factor"? IT IS THE WHOLE SHEBANG. Running in the cars slipstream is like running downhill. End of thread.

While driving down the highway have you ever drafted behind another car?

Did you notice how close to the bumper you need to be in order to feel the slipstream?

Any benefit of drafting during the #breaking2 race was purely psychological, and NOT due to physics.