Radcliffe's marathon world record invalidated

[quote]PhillyResident wrote:

Assuming that the standard here is "no pacers faster than the person attempting the record," how the hell are you going to deal with every record that isn't an ultimate world record? Junior records, senior records, age group records, etc? You're going to tell me that basically all of our current american records are invalid because they were run with faster runners? An american male elite running with african "pacers" probably has a similar advantage to a woman elite running with sub-elite pacers (no offense to pacer of Paula intended). So, we'll invalidate all junior records run in mixed races, and all age group records run in mixed race, basically all records run where the record holder didn't lead the race and finish first?

[quote]just deserts wrote:

I agree with this. Genetic ability is not simply divided between men and women, but also between individuals from certain regions of the world. East Africans have a natural advantage versus white Americans (like Rupp). Since those Africans are naturally faster runners than Rupp, should Rupp's AR not be counted? National records that are pulled along by someone faster than them, are in essence the same thing as a woman being pulled along by men.

Jefe in the CO wrote:

Also, I definitely think that if they are going to yank Paula's record they need to yank Haile's record as well. Using pacers through 90% of a personalized record attempt is aided as much, if not more, than Paula and Deena running with men.

Excuse me, on WR Paula didn´t run with men, they way it was not an open run for both sex. It´s a late minute trick while permit that 4 men did pace Paula and just Paula, something that was never or after authorized. A unique exception. If Paula eventually will lost the lead, the men pacers just easy down to keep with Paula. Doný you see it´s different than everything. Migt be that in an open marathon for both sex, the men participants do act as pacers of the female, but in theory eacg female might have one or several men pacers, but the caee of Paula they just permit men pacers to help just Paula. It´s unfair and illegal.

toro wrote:

And if Korir won, he would have been the world record holder. It was a race. Rabbits are allowed to win.

Any man finishing ahead of Paula wasn't going to get the women's world record or be the winner of the women's race.

How is that relevant? The point is that if Paula got an advantage by being paced for the whole race to her WR, then Tergat got the same advantage.

So I'm right in thinking that from now on the WR can only stand if its in a women's only race? If this is true then surely the same rule must apply to men's races so the new men's WR should be Sammy Wanjiru from Olympics 2.06.32 and not the current one. As that was a mixed race. Forget about pacemakers etc its the basic point before all that. The rules must be the same for men's or women's.

The other women in the race couldn't hang with Paula anyway. They certainly could have gone with her, buuuttt they didn't.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

Excuse me, on WR Paula didn´t run with men, they way it was not an open run for both sex. It´s a late minute trick while permit that 4 men did pace Paula and just Paula, something that was never or after authorized. A unique exception. If Paula eventually will lost the lead, the men pacers just easy down to keep with Paula. Doný you see it´s different than everything. Migt be that in an open marathon for both sex, the men participants do act as pacers of the female, but in theory eacg female might have one or several men pacers, but the caee of Paula they just permit men pacers to help just Paula. It´s unfair and illegal.

Any other woman could have run with Paula and her "unfair pacer group" and then outkicked her at the end (Paula not being known for a devastating kick, after all). They would have had the same advantages and the same pacers. It's not like the pacers were there tripping anyone who was competing with Paula. Of course, nobody was fast enough, so they didn't.

Furthermore, ANY women capable of a world record attempt could EASILY arrange for a pace team, either with the help of a race or not. It would NOT be hard to find a few 2:15 guys to pace a CAPABLE woman to a record attempt in any reasonable race. Most races would love to help for the publicity, but even those that wouldn't, it would not be hard to set this up on the side.

There is nothing that says "only Paula can have pacer!" That would be unfair. The fact that she used them on others don't always choose to do so is not unfair.

I ask my question again. Are American Records in races with africans do be invalidated, as the Americans had "help" with pacing from more capable individuals?

Should we have a rule now where a pacer MUST have a PR slower than the person he is pacing, to be sure that there is no unfair advantage?

What if Paula had used male pacers that were 2:20 marathoners, while she was in 2:15 shape, thus negating any "faster pacer" logic? That eliminates the "male pacers are bad" logic, but this rule will still hold.

This stupid ruling is RIDDLED with inconsistencies and far reaching consequences that people seem to either have not considered at all, or were too stupid to even realize. When you consider the implications, it's clearly asinine.

The junior and senior record argument still holds too. Somebody tried to defend this by suggesting that these records have less scrutiny, so it's ok. That's also asinine. If your logic doesn't extend to reasonably similar circumstances, your logic is flawed, not the circumstances.

I usually don't agree with Renato and when I saw he posted here I thought that he would support IAAF so that Mary Keitany can grab a WR (I think there are some affiliations between Renato and Mary...?).

So I was surprised, Renato is spot on here. No issues with adding a non-mixed WR but can't take away what had been established in the past.

its this kind of s*** that ruins the sport of running. paula ran 2:15:25. if it was an unattainable time for women, she wouldnt have run it. it should absolutely count as a world record. she was the usain bolt of womens marathoning, and pacemaker or no pacemaker she could have ran this time.

nostra wrote:

toro wrote:

And if Korir won, he would have been the world record holder. It was a race. Rabbits are allowed to win.

Any man finishing ahead of Paula wasn't going to get the women's world record or be the winner of the women's race.

How is that relevant? The point is that if Paula got an advantage by being paced for the whole race to her WR, then Tergat got the same advantage.

Tergat was racing a competitor the finish. Paula was not.

If Paula could follow a woman all the way to the end then it would be a true competition.

The rule is about the spirit of competition.

I wouldn't mind if they did away with the rule and that people could jump in late in a race to help with the pace.

I am just trying to explain the logic of the rule.

She ran the full distance in 2:15 and there was no elevation drop.

Also note, it is pretty new to call it a world record. It was called a world best previously.

and the 2:15 is still being called a world best along with the 2:03:02 that Mutai ran in Boston.

If she cannot have males pacers, then no man should be able to have female pacers. Its only fair.

It was dirty anyway--that's what we call poetic justice folks.

I'm probably echoing similar sentiments, but the marathon is not really a world record worthy event. Event records, sure, but not some universal record.

The course, for one, has a big impact on time. Add to that, the climate and altitude. Sure, climate will affect any race, but that impact magnifies over distance. We've recently seen this in Boston (actually, in almost every Boston Marathon, weather is always a huge factor as it is so variable ).

So, if we all (who follow the sport closely) implicitly put asterisks next to marathon record depending on course,altitude and climate, then it is really no big deal to make fine distinctions about pacing/pacers.

To be fair, all world records are subject to distinctions based on the track (materials, wind in stadium) and altitude, climate, etc. But, as mentioned above, the small differences build up over the length/time of a marathon.

I agree with this. Throw down the time on a track if you want to claim the marathon WR.

PhillyR makes a lot of sense. Waaayyy to many instances where other people for other records were being pulled and paced along. Absolutely makes no sense what the IAAF did. I'm still trying to wrap my brain around how this cannot affect other records on the books.

Paula and Deena were within the rules before when they did this, in an effort to explore their human limits and be the best they can be. Women's records are being retroactively abolished...........simply because the rabbit was a male.

Simons15 wrote:

she was the usain bolt of womens marathoning

Nope. Bolt has Blake and Gay that are on his heels. Paula had no one. 2h15m will stand much much longer than Bolts current WRs.

toro wrote:

Also note, it is pretty new to call it a world record. It was called a world best previously.

and the 2:15 is still being called a world best along with the 2:03:02 that Mutai ran in Boston.

I'm glad someone brought up Mutai. I also thought his run at Boston was called a World Best. If a woman runs an extreme downhill marathon in 2:14:59, will that be the new World Best, beating Paula? That hardly seems fair. Do we need to add yet another classification, a Certified World Best to indicate a World Best that is run on a certified course?

Does anyone know what the catalyst was for this rule change? Was there a recent women's world record where male pace-making factored in, or is this another case of a bored board room pushing useless paper?

How many races will have to restructure their setups?

TrackCoach wrote:

No one can take that incredible performance away from Paula, but unless you are going to allow all women to do that, you have to put an asterist next to that performance.

Can you name one woman who is not allowed to run in a race with male pace makers? Sure, male rabbits are not allowed in every marathon (more precisely, they are not allowed to start with the elite women), but any woman who wants to can chose to run in a race where they are.

Paula's record was wind-aided, as she admitted, but because the distance between the start and finish is under 50%, it's a world record.

If the IAAF were serious about changing the record books, they should look at some women's middle distance records. It won't help anyone if someone runs 2:16 in a few years time, but instead of talking about the achievement, the story will be "ah, but Paula was even faster".

I am not even going to pay attention to the IAAF. As far as i'm concerned Salazar's marathon PR is 2:08:13 under the old rules. I think everyone will recognize 2:15:25 as the wms world record. If someone run 2:16 inder the IAAF's new rules I think they would not consider themselves the world record holder, but the second fastest of all time. I still don't understand why Deena's AR is invaldidated. Was her 2:19 with male pace setters?