How in the hell did Paula Radcliffe run 2:15:25 for the marathon?

i think she doesn´t need a pacermaker, because at the track she always run in font alone....unfortunally she lost in the final sprint. And in 2008 she always run in front and won the race. I think at the moment there is one woman who is able to break the WR in the next 5 years.....i think its irina mikitenko.

i mean the new york marathon 2008

I can understand how you would want her to run well, but Mikitenko is maxed out. Unless she starts cheating, there's no way she gets anywhere close to 2:19 again, let alone 2:15.

The next world record in the women's marathon is going to be set by an Ethiopian. I would personally like to see Elvan Abeylegesse (Ethiopian running for Turkey) get it, and I think she can, but I also think there will be a stream of Ethiopian women running at the level of the current world record in the next ten years, and one or two of them are going to take that 2:15 down.

Avocados Number wrote:

I thought much less of her after that.

Are we supposed to believe you thought highly of her before that?

Avocados Number wrote:

I'm guessing that neither of your men claimed to set a world record in that race.

Neither was the woman, of course

we will see....this year she wants to run 10000m at the european championchips in barcelona. so good preparation for speed. she ran only 5 marathons. only 3 years experience of marathon, because of this there is much reserve.

Orca The Woman Killing Whale wrote:

EPO is one helluva drug.

Yes, it can do amazing things.

Gott lieben die Menschen Deutsch. So practical and so pragmatic. Cheers to you, sir!

Its all in here:

http://www.amazon.com/Paula-My-Story-So-Far/dp/074347869X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267290714&sr=8-1

http://la-coaching-academy.de/2007_trainingslehre/2007-11-01-paula-radcliffe.php

Orca The Woman Killing Whale wrote:

EPO is one helluva drug.

lane 8 wrote:

Yes, it can do amazing things.

It even removes most of the messages from this thread!

(Her subsequent whining about every little bump, bruise, spider bite, and tummy ache has further diminished her in my eyes. I still think that she's the best female marathoner in history. I just don't find her to be especially admirable.)

I admire her for being transparent and honest about her performances. Anyone who's been an elite understands how everything has to go right to perform at your best. One slip up can cost you minutes in the marathon. She's handled adversity as best as anyone could (stopped for a crap in one of her 2:17's, right?).

I'm not convinced any of the currently good Africans can get within 2 minutes of Paula, considering those who have tried are still wayyyyy off. The seasoned Berhane Adere (14:29/30:04) has run 2:20:42.... Gete Wami (14:30/30:22) has run 2:21:34.... Edith Masai (14:33/30:30) has run 2:27.... prolific marathoner Lornah Kiplagat (30:12) has run 2:22:22.... Derartu Tulu (30:17) has run 2:23:30. Catherine Ndereba is the only one, ever, to get somewhat close, yet she doesn't have near the credentials on the track (hasn't broken 15 minutes for 5K). If you've ever read up on Catherine, she pours her heart and soul into the marathon. There's something to be said about the work required for the marathon (and science/knowledge too, applying everything, pace-makers, not just relying on talent alone). Paula is the real deal: the speed, work ethic, resources.

jtupper wrote:

One of my women was following a couple of my men in a 10k once and the meet referee told me to get her away from them, and when I told her that, she went in front of the men and they sat on her the rest of the way and no-one said a word that it was illegal for them to sit on her.

And some people still ask why we don't thank race organisers more often!!!

some coked up brit wrote:

London didn't want her to do that and forced her to run the women's race, so that they could guarantee maximum TV coverage of her. As a compromise they offered her male pacers in that race, and she accepted their offer. But it hadn't been her idea.

That race does not count as the women's only world record race, it counts as the world record race for a mixed race. The two men were contractually obliged to run to the finish. This was really no different from Chicago.

I understand the course of events. Bedford (along with everyone else in Great Britain) wanted the television coverage of Paula that would be available with a women-only race, but also didn't want to give up the advantage of having male pacers, which he estimated might be worth ninety seconds off Paula's finishing time, and which Berlin and (to a lesser extent) Chicago had used to aid top female marathoners in achieving "world records" in mixed races. So Bedford proposed a scheme that was not so much a "compromise," but rather a farce resulting from a desire to have it both ways -- a women-only race with male pacers whose sole purpose was to aid Paula to a faster time than she could run on her own.

Although the scheme may not have been Paula's idea, she had the power to reject it, and to run without the assistance of male pacers. Especially after her competitors, as well as many others in the international running commmunity, criticized the scheme as unfair and illegitimate, I would have expected someone who had repeatedly trumpeted her integrity and sense of fair play to reject the scheme and to participate in a women-only race unassisted by male pacers. Paula didn't do that.

At first when she ran 2:17 I was skeptical. When she ran 2:15 I wouldn't accept that as being legit, as I didn't with the Chinese women in 1993.

I was a 28:30 runner that only ran 2:19. How could a woman do a 2:15 and be a 30:00 runner.

For one, she trained harder than I did in terms of volume, she did every little thing possible that was legal (altitude tents, massage,) she was financially comfortable, she had pace makers set up on a super fast course) and she had the confidence of a superstar.

I know a man who worked fulltime that ran 30:01 and hit 2:16 once to win Las Vegas.

However what I don't understand is an off day for her is like 10-12 minutes off her pr. This is suspicious. If Kannouchi back in the 1990's had a string of 2:13 marathons after his 2:06's nobody would believe he hadn't doped.

I was a 28:30 runner that only ran 2:19. How could a woman do a 2:15 and be a 30:00 runner...

Some people are gifted at certain distances, uniquely talented to specific demands. And as you say, she did every little thing possible to excel at the marathon. There's little surprise at her success. Just look at her debut, which with slightly better pacing might have been the WR.

MarathonMind wrote:

I was a 28:30 runner that only ran 2:19. How could a woman do a 2:15 and be a 30:00 runner...

Some people are gifted at certain distances, uniquely talented to specific demands. And as you say, she did every little thing possible to excel at the marathon. There's little surprise at her success. Just look at her debut, which with slightly better pacing might have been the WR.

I think it has to do a lot more with optimizing training and recovery than necessarily having a certain 'talent' over that distance. There is no doubt that a 28:30 guy should run 2:15 (or probably significantly faster). Paula had all sorts of physio testing done on her to figure out optimal threshold pace, vo2 pace, etc... not to mention massage therapy, etc. available to daily. It all boils down to training very smart, very hard, and having an unmatched support team around her to help her stay healthy.

I do agree that the excuse making can be a bit much, but she's had to deal with some unbelievably heavy expectations over the years. The general public (and 99% of letsrun) has no real understanding of just how well things have to go during the buildup and on race day to set a WR or win an Olympic medal.

Love her or hate her, she's a phenomenal athlete that ran some mindboggling times.

Yep, and don't forget those compression socks!

So what is the proper WR in a race with only women.