Thank you Paula!

215 was with male pacers. As has been pointed out many times before 217 women's only is not that much faster than the next women. 203 men 217 women sounds right to me. Actually 205 or 206 and 217 would be about right in my mind. The women's marathon is way behind the men's event.

What would happen if the best woman ran with men in track races? The world records would be much faster obviously.

She was just an aerobic monster who got better as distances increased and does not fit a traditional line of best fit. Comparing 800m to a marathon is retarded. Women Have better endurance than men. If a man can run 203 why can't a women with male pacers run 215 (2 and a half miles behind).

Sally V wrote:

Booster wrote:

That you imply she cheated says more about you than the facts.

Did Bob Beamon cheat?

Bob Beamon had only jumped 27'4" prior to his historic leap AT ALTITUDE.

Where in track and field do we find world records vastly superior to the runners-up? With the Chinese women runners and with old Communist 400-, 800- and 1500-meter record holders. Everyone here assumes the Chinese were doping just as they do with Koch and that other lady.

There's also a good deal of evidence that Beamon's 29 footer exceeded the maximum allowable following wind.

The conditions were literally perfect for such a jump, and the only time someone of similar talent to Beamon jumped in conditions that were similar, he jumped further.

Thank you Paula, you're an absolute hero.

Once an Expert wrote:

Sally V wrote:

Bob Beamon had only jumped 27'4" prior to his historic leap AT ALTITUDE.

Where in track and field do we find world records vastly superior to the runners-up? With the Chinese women runners and with old Communist 400-, 800- and 1500-meter record holders. Everyone here assumes the Chinese were doping just as they do with Koch and that other lady.

There's also a good deal of evidence that Beamon's 29 footer exceeded the maximum allowable following wind.

The conditions were literally perfect for such a jump, and the only time someone of similar talent to Beamon jumped in conditions that were similar, he jumped further.

https://youtu.be/GIzD7TS7AEo

Also, most sprinting and jumping world records were broken at the Mexico City Olympics. Beamon never even jumped more than 26 feet 11 3/4 inches after his world record jump.

Sally V wrote:

Let's look at it this way. Paula's marathon record converts (using McMillan race predictor) to a 1:47:8 800 meters. The oldest track record is a 1:53.28 set more than 30 years ago by a runner who looks muscular even for a man. The record is rarely approached even today. But a clean Paula ran the equivalent of a 1:47.8 800 meters - that is more than 5 seconds faster than a dirty runner who was supremely doped up. Does that seem reasonable?

You have shown just how much of an idiot you are by using McMillian for female equivalent times and using it in general without any other consideration.

And btw, there are plenty of male runners who have run 2.15 off a 30 minute 10k and women have better endurance than men. If you use equivalent times to prove doping, Bill Rodgers and Dick Beardsley would be some of the biggest dopers in history. Neither broke 28 and Beardsley didn't even break 29 iirc but they both ran sub-2.10 in the marathon.

When Beamon set his record, did the other LJers also far surpass their PBs?

Thank you! As someone who adores Paula Radcliffe, that means so much

Flat Stanley wrote:

215 was with male pacers. As has been pointed out many times before 217 women's only is not that much faster than the next women. 203 men 217 women sounds right to me. Actually 205 or 206 and 217 would be about right in my mind. The women's marathon is way behind the men's event.

What would happen if the best woman ran with men in track races? The world records would be much faster obviously.

She was just an aerobic monster who got better as distances increased and does not fit a traditional line of best fit. Comparing 800m to a marathon is retarded. Women Have better endurance than men. If a man can run 203 why can't a women with male pacers run 215 (2 and a half miles behind).

Well said - If we take all women’s races only, then Paula’s time is hardly that far ahead of other female marathon runners, Keitany being just over a minute behind that time.

And as Paula ran 30.01 for the 10,000 in pouring rain at the Europeans, she was obviously a sub 30 runner in good conditions so added to the fact she was in your words an aerobic monster, her 2.17 was hardly so outstanding as to have all those clowns screaming unclean.

Those idiot organisers of the London Marathon did her no favour at all when they added pacemakers to that race in 2003 race - she didn’t ask for them and there’s been controversy about it since.

I watched on the day and they seemed to be getting in her way at times, almost breaking up her rhythm

No surprise as male pacemakers have no experience whatsoever pacing female runners.

She was at her peak in 2003 and it would have been fascinating to find out just what sort of time she could have run on her own.

As I mentioned elsewhere, in response to a phone-in on the subject with my local radio station, I have pledged to give 100 gold sovereigns to my neighbourhood hospice should Paula ever be found to have taken any sort of performance enhancing drug.

Think those coins will be safe in my hands till I pop my clogs - and unless there is a collapse in the value worldwide of paper currency and I have to use my gold reserves, I have donated that coinage to the hospice in my will anyway.

Hey, Binks, thanks for taking time out from the royal baby watch to give us your thoughts. What do you have in the pool?

Wang Junxia -- perhaps.Flo Jo -- no.

Dope police wrote:

Rekrunner,

Do you think junxia wang doped? How about flojo?

While illustrative, it is not reasonable to draw any conclusions by statistically comparing 800m to the marathon.

Sally V wrote:

Let's look at it this way. Paula's marathon record converts (using McMillan race predictor) to a 1:47:8 800 meters. The oldest track record is a 1:53.28 set more than 30 years ago by a runner who looks muscular even for a man. The record is rarely approached even today. But a clean Paula ran the equivalent of a 1:47.8 800 meters - that is more than 5 seconds faster than a dirty runner who was supremely doped up. Does that seem reasonable?

Common Sensesical wrote:

So she didn't cheat? She is like 3 minutes faster than the next fastest runner (who likely cheated as well) BUT Paula didn't cheat? How can someone be so much faster than everyone else (and many of those are cheaters) yet she is the one not cheating?

But the Brojos her, him, whatever.

Common Sensesical wrote:

So she didn't cheat? She is like 3 minutes faster than the next fastest runner (who likely cheated as well) BUT Paula didn't cheat? How can someone be so much faster than everyone else (and many of those are cheaters) yet she is the one not cheating?

But the Brojos like her, him, whatever.

Sally V wrote:

Let's look at it this way. Paula's marathon record converts (using McMillan race predictor) to a 1:47:8 800 meters. The oldest track record is a 1:53.28 set more than 30 years ago by a runner who looks muscular even for a man. The record is rarely approached even today. But a clean Paula ran the equivalent of a 1:47.8 800 meters - that is more than 5 seconds faster than a dirty runner who was supremely doped up. Does that seem reasonable?

You're assuming the tables actually mean something.

reader of the forums wrote:

Sally V wrote:

Let's look at it this way. Paula's marathon record converts (using McMillan race predictor) to a 1:47:8 800 meters. The oldest track record is a 1:53.28 set more than 30 years ago by a runner who looks muscular even for a man. The record is rarely approached even today. But a clean Paula ran the equivalent of a 1:47.8 800 meters - that is more than 5 seconds faster than a dirty runner who was supremely doped up. Does that seem reasonable?

You're assuming the tables actually mean something.

The tables CERTAINLY mean something. You're quibbling about the tables's

precision!

2:15 by Paula. It's 1000% a cheat time no debate needed. No discussion required. Thankfully she never won an Olympic medal.

Why shouldn\\\'t her 2:15 WOMEN\\\'s world record not count? It doesn\\\'t matter how she did it. Plus I don\\\'t understand how people give her shit for having male pacemakers that morning. One, she didn\\\'t even run behind them. She raced them side-by-side. And two, men get pacemakers in almost every major marathon. What\\\'s the difference?

Her 2:15 record is incredible, but Paula is a once-in-a-lifetime athlete, and she\\\'s innocent until proven guilty. There\\\'s a huge difference between her and athletes like FloJo, Gatlin, and Armstrong. They found evidence against them.

Congrats to Paula on an amazing career. It was great to follow.

cheat cheat and s#it in the street

If other women around the world are butthurt about her having pacers in that race, which I doubt they care, then they should set a race up with pacers to help them. Simple as that.