Radcliffe's marathon world record invalidated

WOMEN BOYCOTT THE 2012 WORLD MAJOR MARATHONS. When world major marathons' budgets shrink by 40 percent (40 percent of entrants are women), the women's advertising purchased for the events will cease, the men's appearance and prize money pool will shrink, a weaker men's elite field will toe the line, and major network coverage will diminish.

If the women do not act they have only themselves to blame. They must boycott. They must organize, publicize and act as a cohesive unit.

The IAAF is a complete disgrace as an organization and needs to go away. In what world did we allow them them to set these rules? How should I explain to a new female runner that they should run when this is what they have to deal with? A complete outrage. A total boycott is in order. What would we need to do to make that happen?

Look, I understand the frustration over this decision, and there are some valid points against, but c'mon people, you are reaching and grasping for absurd analogies to try and make your point. It's very simple:all international women's track races (in the past, present, and future), and all international women's marathons (present and future) have the women and men run separately. Therefore, by definition, none of these events can have male rabbits. However....In the past, women could run against men in the marathon (ONLY, as far as major olympic distances are concerned). Therefore, they could indirectly or directly (see Paula) be rabbited by men. This was different than the present and future in the women's marathon, and different than the past, present, and future in all women's track races. Therefore, the IAAF wanted to rectify the inconsistency and make the marathon consistent with track races, and with the current women-against-women-only marathons, which means disallowing male rabbits for record purposes. Which means that Paula had an advantage over recent, present, and future women marathon runners. She did not have an advantage over past marathon competitors, and that's a sticking point I suppose.Addressing some of your particular points:

Of the same gender, who are their legitimate "competitors."

Yes, again, the should be allowed, like men, to have rabbits OF THE SAME GENDER WHO ARE THEIR LEGITIMATE COMPETITORS.

Silly point.

A) female pacers are not an advantage to men, and could barely give them 5k of help

B) men DO NOT run against women in olympic distance races. Period. So it is a moot point, it doesn't happen, it isn't happening, it won't happen. Same with women, they don't run against men......except when they did in the past in the marathon only. Iaaf is trying to give present/future female marathon runners the same playing field that past ones had, which means either disallowing past male-rabbited records, or allowing male rabbits now. They chose the former.

Even sillier point. They could recruit world class 1/2 marathon women to pace 2:15/16 attempts. And guess what, just because someone is head and shoulders above everyone else, it doesn't mean they deserve different rules. Oh the pity of being too good to have rabbits help you for a long way. I guess Bekele deserves to have a team of rabbits help him break 26:00, since very few can help him 1/2 way.

Yeah, you missed a lot, but I filled you in.

Oh boy.

a) Haile had rabbits who were male "competitors". This situation is always allowed.

b) Paula had male rabbits. This situation has only been allowed in female track and field in the PAST and ONLY in the marathon. Yes, they've changed the rules to make the women's marathon consistent with all other male and female olympic track and field distance races.

c) For a male competitor, the most analogous situation to what Paula was allowed (which was a woman having a group of men pace her from start to the finish), would be having a group of rabbits who can jump in along the way to ensure that the man is paced all the way to the finish line. THIS IS NOT ALLOWED. So I am not surprised why you think Paula's situation should be allowed.

For the last time, summing up, for the purposes of records-

The rules in all other olympic distance running events allow LEGAL, LEGITIMATE competitors who start the race to act as "rabbits" if they choose to. A male runner is NOT a LEGAL, LEGITIMATE competitor in a female race. Period. End of story.

(for a period in the past, ONLY in the women's marathon, that was not the case. This inconsistency has now been rectified )

The current women's marathon situation is now consistent with all other races on the men's and women's sides.

Not so illogical after all.

FogRunner wrote:

WOMEN BOYCOTT THE 2012 WORLD MAJOR MARATHONS. When world major marathons' budgets shrink by 40 percent (40 percent of entrants are women), the women's advertising purchased for the events will cease, the men's appearance and prize money pool will shrink, a weaker men's elite field will toe the line, and major network coverage will diminish.

If the women do not act they have only themselves to blame. They must boycott. They must organize, publicize and act as a cohesive unit.

Idiotic. The average 4 hour women runner doesn't give a damn about Paula Radcliffe. They just want to slap 26.2 bumper sticker on their car. Boycott all you want. So revenues will drop in 1/2?? Great, men will make the same prize $ because they are GIVING half of it to women who finish well back in the 2:30 range.

You clowns are acting like this gender slam on the part of the iaaf. What total bullshit. Stop crying, get over it, and move one.

hahaha. gay will never touch any of bolts records. and i dont trust blakes 19.26. you dont go from being a 9.8 100m runner to a 19.26 200m runner in the span of a few weeks, unless the timing is wrong, the track is short, or you take drugs. you honestly think yohan blake would beat michael johnson in a 200m?? foolish. bolt will absolutely crop dust everyone in london. blake wont be within .2 seconds of him, and no one else will be within .35-.4 seconds of him. mark my words. no one is really on bolts heels.

as for paula, you are right. no one was close to her. she is the greatest, ever. and her time will always stand.

her record may stand longer than bolts current records, but what about his future records?? sub 19!!

Although you have a point comparing the same gender pacing for men vs women 3 arguments can still be made against taking away some of the women's records.

1) under normal conditions (no head winds) i think it is debatable that pacers make a real difference in the overall performance of every types of runners. This is no drafting benefits in running like there is in biking. Some runners do better leading than by following.

2) Considering the number of only women races available compared to mixed races, this rule is a huge disadvantage for the women trying to set valid Records compared to men. Every race a male runners enters has potential for a valid record, this is no longer true for women.

3) finally, and most importantly, (like it was mentioned earlier) No way is it right to take away a RECORD by changing the rules of a game after the fact.

Rules are in place to eliminate cheaters ( when caught) and validate performances that are within the established rules.

It is up to the athletes to follow and know the rules to be sure their performances are validated so as to avoid any potential arguments (ie.: Boston Marathon WR pretenders) . New rules mean new game and should never apply to "the old game". Changing the rules to an old game is like discrediting all rules to any games and we all know that a game without rules is just a game played by fools.

Why it makes sense:

Thousands of men can run a 2:15 marathon. Thereby a women gets to draft for 26 of 26.2 miles.

A man tries to go the the WR, he has a pacer who is slower than him and can't go as far. Maybe up to 18miles if they're extremely lucky.

So lets say drafting saves 5% energy. 5x8=40. At the VERY least, a woman has a 40% advantage over a guy in a marathon when going for a fast time.

Sure it's just a personal estimate, but you get the gist of what I'm getting at.

Women want equality in all aspects of life, but only if they get an advantage from it. That's exactly what feminism is and always will be. As soon as they get true equality and see that they're no longer a step ahead, they complain.

Good ruling IAAF. I approve.

Also. It has NOTHING to do with her being rabbited. It has to due with her being paced by genetically superior individuals that pulled her the entire way.

I can't wait for Blade Runner to break MJ's 400 record and have it be validated. I mean he ran it and did it on a track. His legs give no advantage at all...

I can see why they instated this rule but i think they didn't look into the practicality. Also it is not like their was a real problem in the sense that it was completely even. Every woman could use male pacers. Also i dont think that paula drafted very much in her WR, just used the pacer for competition. IN Geb's WR the pacer lasted until like 35k thats a huge advantage. Paula could not have such a female pacer because she was so good. No woman who could run 35k at 2:15 pace would just be a pacer bc she could win. Very few races have only woman competition, its a burden to have to block off the streets for another 30 minutes so the woman can start early.

lewickerman wrote:

Why it makes sense:

Thousands of men can run a 2:15 marathon. Thereby a women gets to draft for 26 of 26.2 miles.

A man tries to go the the WR, he has a pacer who is slower than him and can't go as far. Maybe up to 18miles if they're extremely lucky.

So lets say drafting saves 5% energy. 5x8=40. At the VERY least, a woman has a 40% advantage over a guy in a marathon when going for a fast time.

Sure it's just a personal estimate, but you get the gist of what I'm getting at.

Women want equality in all aspects of life, but only if they get an advantage from it. That's exactly what feminism is and always will be. As soon as they get true equality and see that they're no longer a step ahead, they complain.

Good ruling IAAF. I approve.

they didn't teach math in your school did they?

stunning that they'd do this the year before London Olympics, many years after arguably the greatest performance in running, done under standard conditions of the time, and with no concern whatsoever for stripping all the proven drug cheat medals from the 1970s and 1980s. If there had been any female close to her ability, if, that is, she hadn't been so off the charts in comparison to any other female marathoner in history, she would have had women rabbits for most of the way, just as geb and others have. Without Hall, for instance, rabbiting, you wouldn't have seen 2:03s at a windy Boston. Strip records for drugs, not for pacing.

It is ridiculous but if I had a choice between the fastest time and the world record, I would chose the fastest time.

The IAAF blew this one.

It’s ironic that the IAAF are willing to discount Paula’s 2.15.25 as a world record, yet are still prepared to accept,(for instance) Flo Joe’s 10.49, Koch’s 47.60, Kratochvílová’s 1.53.28 and Wang Junxia’s 8.06.11.

PhillyResident wrote:

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.

latently homosexual teenager and PhillyResident

I understand that every other runner could follow Pula and be paced by the men that were ther present in London. Simply they couldn´t becuse they were slower than Paula.

At this point you are right.

Reanato canova says that it´s not just Paula that have men pacers, some other fermale they also did.

But the problem is:

1/If it was permited on that run, that on every other comercial marathon should be permit BUT IT DOESN´T, then it was an illegal permition.

2/ If is permited for the best runners should be permited for every oother runner and only then would be fair competition.

THE RULES OF COMPETITION SHOULD BE EQUAL FOR THE SAME KIND OF EVENT IN THE SAME KIND OF COMPETITION. CAN`T BE MEN PACERS IN FEMALE RUNS IN LONDON AND NOT IN BERLIN, CHICAGO ETC.

DESPITE PAULA WAS THE BEST IT´S UNFAIR THAT SHE (and some others)GOT MEN PACERS AND SOME OTHERS DON`T

Not Lord Coe wrote:

It’s ironic that the IAAF are willing to discount Paula’s 2.15.25 as a world record, yet are still prepared to accept,(for instance) Flo Joe’s 10.49, Koch’s 47.60, Kratochvílová’s 1.53.28 and Wang Junxia’s 8.06.11.

Paula is just as doped as these women, yet will never test positive either. Not the best example.

Then Junior competitors can only run with Junior competitors and can't be helped along. Alan Webb, your high school mile record is being recalled..........LV, you too.

So they still have the 2:15 as the record.

If you look at the bottom they have a listing for downhill course (Boston).

Here is where they have Mutai (look at the bottom):

So I guess they will move the 2:15 from the main list and put on a mixed-race list.

It´s outdat. Will be update in the future, you will see.

Just to shed some light on the absurdity of the IAAF decision: The reason why that year (and not the others) the London Marathon had three male runners in the women's race is that the IAAF at the time would not recognise world bests (marathon world records did not exist) in women only races...