2:03:38 Patrick Makau in Berlin
2:03:38 Patrick Makau in Berlin
He cheated had a whole team of Kenyan Pacers for 31K.
They should add 5 minutes to it, like they did the women's WR.
cheated :D:D:D:D run a sub3 marathoner with 100kenyan pacers for 42km then talk :D:D:D:D
Now the marathon record is really on par with the sub59 halfs of our time, quite crazy to run 1:01:45 and than lose only 8 seconds in the second half, now thats endurance!
The Kenyan pacers did kind of do a tag-team job on Haile at the corner at 25 km. Makau surged and they went with him until Haile was safely killed off. After that at least one of them dropped back to stay with Haile. Wonder how much Makau planned that with them in advance?
Berlin
Men
Patrick Makau 2H03M 38
Steven Cheplani(?)2H07M 56
Edward Kamaiyo 2H09M 51
Women
Florence Kipligat 2H19M 45 (Eigth women under 2H20)
Ingrid Mikiyenko 2H22M
Paula Radcliffe 2K23M 46
52.43 wrote:
Now the marathon record is really on par with the sub59 halfs of our time, quite crazy to run 1:01:45 and than lose only 8 seconds in the second half, now thats endurance!
THEN!!!!!!!!!!!
qwertqwertqwerty wrote:
52.43 wrote:Now the marathon record is really on par with the sub59 halfs of our time, quite crazy to run 1:01:45 and than lose only 8 seconds in the second half, now thats endurance!
THEN!!!!!!!!!!!
I do not get why this mistake is made so often.
The Homo Phoning of Your&You're has a logical reason but this one headscratches me.
Comparison of Geb's old record to Makau's time, and a breakdown of the race:
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2011/09/berlin-2011-inside-makaus-20338-world.html
Counting this as a WR and not Paula Radcliffe's 2:15 as a WR, is completely sexist. The IAAF is a bunch of bigoted sexist pigs!
Explain how you think they're equivalent.
jakethefake wrote:
Counting this as a WR and not Paula Radcliffe's 2:15 as a WR, is completely sexist. The IAAF is a bunch of bigoted sexist pigs!
yeah they're not equivalent Radcliffe ran her race with pacers to her side, Makau ran with them in front. So you are right Radcliffe's time is a more valid WR, good point.
jakethefake wrote:
Counting this as a WR and not Paula Radcliffe's 2:15 as a WR, is completely sexist. The IAAF is a bunch of bigoted sexist pigs!
I have a serious question. How does Florence Kiplagat's 2:19:44 in all this re-writing of the women's record books? How did Berlin do it? Did they start the women early, or did they run with the men?
I agree. It is a world best, not world record. http://www.patricktaylor.com/153
Kiplagat started at exactly the same time like all the others...WITH THE MEN
Like I said before, all women should boycotting all marathon majors for 2012 equals a 40 percent loss in revenue.
Self-correction:
All women boycotting the world marathon majors for 2012 would equal a 40 percent drop in event revenue.
Me thinks this was what Haile was afraid of when he was boycotting match ups with Wanjiru. He was afraid he would get beaten ans his WR taken in the process!
Quite simply, the IAAF has justified their ridiculous post-hoc decision on the claim that women running with men, pacers in front or to the side, represents an unfair aid, like a wind aided 100m race (from now on MA can stand for Men-Aided), and thus should not count as World Record. So is the problem the presence of men or pacers? As the issue seems to be that of "unfair aid" we must presume that it is the presence of pacers, in that they block the wind, worry about hitting the right marks, and allow the lead runners to relax a bit more through the early stages of the race. As most men in a marathon are slower than the elite women it makes little sense that the simple presence of men is in itself an aid. So, if the "unfair aid" comes from having pacers to run off of then Makau's world record should fall under the same guidelines and should NOT be a WR (as neither would Geb's former WR as he also used pacers).
If we divorce the issue from pacers and simply say that men and women in the same race allow the leading elite woman to run against the 2nd tier men and thus also have an advantage versus a women's only marathon where the lead woman would be all by her lonesome then we are in effect stating that "competing" is an unfair aid. Thus any WR, male or female, set when the two lead runners fight it out to the end should also not qualify as a WR. The logical conclusion of the IAAF ruling is that every elite runner should have to start in isolation 15 mins after each other. No pacers, no competing or team tactics, just every runner in isolation against the clock. So now I am being ridiculous but one absurdity begs for another.
But the heads of the Marathon Majors have spoken out against the IAAF ruling. Boycotting the races would hurt them and us but not the idiots who passed the mis-judgement.