Why was Alberto Salazar's WR at NYC marathon disallowed?

I have heard form a legitimate source that hundreds of thousands of dollars were bet on that damn race and the the Bookies in NY were very busy that weekend! One theory is that the finish line was moved up 50 or so meters to make the distance a bit shorter, giving Salazar a better chance at the time. He announced well before the race his intensions to go after it, so the stage was set for some to profit if he came through!

Money on the line? wrote:

I have heard form a legitimate source that hundreds of thousands of dollars were bet on that damn race and the the Bookies in NY were very busy that weekend! One theory is that the finish line was moved up 50 or so meters to make the distance a bit shorter, giving Salazar a better chance at the time. He announced well before the race his intensions to go after it, so the stage was set for some to profit if he came through!

That Fred Lebow was so pesky.

new zealand wrote:

I think Alison Roe broke the women's world record that day too but it was also struck due to the course distance. Pulled a rare upset of Grete Waitz in NYC.

Yes she did. How often have the male and female records been set in the same race?

The finish line has not moved. Same location at the convolution of Tavern entrance and west drive since 1976.

Good Article----

http://www.runblogrun.com/2011/10/alberto-salazars-wb-marathon-102581-thirty-years-and-three-days-by-jeff-benjamin-note-by-larry-eder.html

The finish line has not moved. Same location at the convolution of Tavern entrance and west drive since 1976.

___________________________________________________________________________

The road in front of the Tavern was repaved in the Spring of 1981! All markings were removed and the supposedly repainted!

Sorry, but I love this part of the thread, because it allows me to put down what I believe is the real lay of the land between Clayton's first sub-2:10, and DeCastella's legit 2:08. Even though, all through the 70s, that big running boom, etc., it appeared Clayton had the record forever, and would have it forever.

Clayton 2:09.36 in 1967

Ron Hill 2:09.28 in 1970

Ian Thompson 2:09.12 in 1973

Shigeru Soh 2:09.06 in 1978

Rob DeCastella 2:08.18 in 1981

* Clayton's 2:08 was possibly a mid-2:09, so questionable if Hill ever held the record; either way it was Thompson in 1973.

* Salazar's 2:08 was possibly worth a high 2:08, and would have made him actually the world record holder, and first to 2:08, until DeCastella.

I wear Skechers wrote:

Sorry, but I love this part of the thread, because it allows me to put down what I believe is the real lay of the land between Clayton's first sub-2:10, and DeCastella's legit 2:08. Even though, all through the 70s, that big running boom, etc., it appeared Clayton had the record forever, and would have it forever.

Clayton 2:09.36 in 1967

Ron Hill 2:09.28 in 1970

Ian Thompson 2:09.12 in 1973

Shigeru Soh 2:09.06 in 1978

Rob DeCastella 2:08.18 in 1981

* Clayton's 2:08 was possibly a mid-2:09, so questionable if Hill ever held the record; either way it was Thompson in 1973.

* Salazar's 2:08 was possibly worth a high 2:08, and would have made him actually the world record holder, and first to 2:08, until DeCastella.

Believe what you wish and interpret how you want. These race courses were measured under guidelines and rules that varied in both wording and interpretation by measurers with varied levels of experience and technical competence. Worlds Best is the term and all this speculation should be taken with the proverbial grain of salt or perhaps with 24 scruples of Caster sugar.

I believe the list cited above is accurate, as long as Gerard Nijboer's 2:09.01 in 1980 is added, and he is recognized as the world record holder until Salazar's 2:08.50 (NYC 81 adjusted time) - though that time MAY have been eclipsed by Bill Rodgers running a 2:08.52 in Japan in 1976, on what may have been a short course as well.

The stunning thing here, too, is that Clayton, Hill, Thompson, Soh, Nijboer and DeCastella (and Rodgers) all ran times significantly faster than today's current Best US Marathon Runner ever. (G. Rupp)

The Antwerp course was accurately measured. Derek was running much faster then than in 1967. This myth about the course being short is "fake news".

mo'pak wrote:

The Antwerp course was accurately measured. Derek was running much faster then than in 1967. This myth about the course being short is "fake news".

True enough.

What's the clean marathon record progression from that point? I'm thinking Clayton's 2:08 is likely still one of the fastest clean marathons.

Course was short. Have to measure the shortest path (the tangents) and not the road centerline or course painted line. Still a very good time though when projected to the full marathon distance.

mo'pak wrote:The Antwerp course was accurately measured. Derek was running much faster then than in 1967. This myth about the course being short is "fake news"

no

the road racing stats guys don't accept it as legit

it is not listed in the progression of M records

Case closed.

Not addressing the subject of this thread, but:

1. Salazar ran more than 42.195 K that day in 1981. Anyone can watch the tape, like I did, and GPS what he ran, like I did, to see that.

2. The bigger tragedy here is that in 1981, and throughout the 70s actually, the marathon World Record was set a half-dozen times, yet Clayton's suspicious 2:08:34 was held up as THE WORLD RECORD.

Salazar's record was not, eventually, but it didn't matter once Deek ran at Fukuoka a few weeks later.

All you millenials claiming every single course on earth was short until you ran a road race need to zip it. The dude who claims they took a shortcut over the "dirt path" is retarded, plain and simple. I've gone over probably two or three dozen courses I raced in the 70s and 80s with GPS and phone GPS, and found just as many discrepancies with today's courses. Some are short, some are long. NYC is currently long. In 1981, a precise tangent route LIKE THEY RUN EVERY YEAR AT BERLIN, CUTTING OVER SIDEWALKS ON CORNERS, would likely make that course short. The way Salazar ran, it was not short.

What change was made to the NYC course between 1981 and 1982, allowing the times in 1982 to be valid for record purposes?

You have my pity Woody wrote:

No clue as to who you are but we are in agreement as far as him being credited. The man did everything but run the tangents. I've watched it many, many times and I truly believe that if anything he ran slightly longer, not shorter. Both him and Jose Gomez ran extremely close to the blue line and should be given credit for doing so. Alberto rarely came close to the curb in all those turns. 1982 was slower because of the wind that seemed to constantly be in their faces.

Yes, it's the COURSE that matters for record certification, not the individual runner's path. Tracks are measured 30 cm out from the curb to ensure that AT A MINIMUM athletes run 400m per lap. Same for road courses. If it's a marathon, runners have to AT A MINIMUM run 42.195 km. Thats for all runners. Obviously, runners can run longer than the race distance if they don't run the tangents. That's allowed but you can't run LESS than the certified distance.

Course watcher wrote:

What change was made to the NYC course between 1981 and 1982, allowing the times in 1982 to be valid for record purposes?

To David Katz

Was changing the entry point to Central Park to Engineers Gate instead of cutting in and up the hill at Girls Gate involved in this re-measurement or did the 102 St to 90th street modification happen earlier?

calculo wrote:

mo'pak wrote:The Antwerp course was accurately measured. Derek was running much faster then than in 1967. This myth about the course being short is "fake news"

no

the road racing stats guys don't accept it as legit

it is not listed in the progression of M records

http://www.arrs.net/RecProg/RP_wwR.htm

Hold up, that's not a running website.