Molly Huddle and Paula Radcliffe

Have you run a 2.15 marathon? Did you always run that fast?

I'm not sure If I would classify this as a major race (certainly not as important as the London Marathon, anyway).

Were there even pacers? Was this billed as a record attempt?

The men's marathon WR / 2 will also win many races.

She ran faster than Paula's half marathon debut.

agip wrote:

How in the world does Molly Huddle:

Win a major race on a nice day for running

set a course record

beat some fast people

...

yet run a slower pace than Paula Radcliffe ran for twice the distance - a marathon? It doesn't make any sense.

No male pacers. Not a fast course.

Huddle is going to be the AR holder in the Marathon in 3 years. She has a race saaviness that Flanagan lacks. I think Huddle gets the 10k AR either this summer or next...

I'd love to see Ray Treacy's training program for her. Such a terrific progression throughout her career, rarely looks overtrained.

the pacers are probably a big deal here yeah.

It's a fairly fast course tho - most people I know run plenty fast there. Although there wasn't a tailwind this year

and I suppose some mens half marathons are won in slower than marathon wr/2. but not this much I don't think.

agip are you trolling or stupid as well as bored?

agip wrote:

How in the world does Molly Huddle:

Win a major race on a nice day for running

set a course record

beat some fast people

...

yet run a slower pace than Paula Radcliffe ran for twice the distance - a marathon? It doesn't make any sense.

I really do.

Its very interesting. Perhaps women's sports are just not that good right now?

World records aren't equal, and WCs on each side aren't equal. A la Bolt and whomever on the other side. Rudisha etc.

sdfkjasdfj wrote:

She ran faster than Paula's half marathon debut.

^^^

Molly beat Joyce Chepkirui and Sally Kipyego. She's "major" now.

There must be something about monday morning that makes people want to post stupid shit, but agip's post should win a special prize for stupidity.

sdfkjasdfj wrote:

She ran faster than Paula's half marathon debut.

point being? this wasn't huddle's half marathon debut so I don't see the relevance.

Paula Radcliffe half marathon progression:

1999 69.37

2000 69.07

2001 66.47

2003 65.40

Bring Back the 880 wrote:

I'm not sure If I would classify this as a major race (certainly not as important as the London Marathon, anyway).

Were there even pacers? Was this billed as a record attempt?

The men's marathon WR / 2 will also win many races.

I think you would be hard pressed to find a 1st tier race with $20k in prize money in which the winner where the winner doesn't run at the pace of a distance twice as long. Men or women.

How many major league mens half marathons are won slower than 61:30? With decent weather and course anyway? I'm sure it happens, but it has to be rare. But women running 67-68 for HM is rare.

Not sure what I am arguing for other than pointing out again that the radcliffe record is astonishingly strong, and of course wondering if she was clean.

that stat showing that all the womens wrs are about the same % from the mens' is really worrying for radcliffe's reputation. the other records seem obviously doped - why not radcliffe's? Unless it was truly beamonesque.

agip wrote:

I think you would be hard pressed to find a 1st tier race with $20k in prize money in which the winner where the winner doesn't run at the pace of a distance twice as long. Men or women.

Have you never seen a race with Mo Farah in it? I agree with the other posters. Agip is just trolling.

Paula was able to run at 5.10 per mile with less than 2 mmol blood lactate.

That won't mean anything to a fool like your though will it?

agip wrote:I think you would be hard pressed to find a 1st tier race with $20k in prize money in which the winner where the winner doesn't run at the pace of a distance twice as long. Men or women.

for $100,000!

Okay, I don't know enough about the BAA course, so maybe it is tough, but Here in 2012, Kim Smith ran just under 1:11 for $100,000 (yes, she had to run a couple of ther races to earn that prize)!

agip wrote:

I think you would be hard pressed to find a 1st tier race with $20k in prize money in which the winner where the winner doesn't run at the pace of a distance twice as long. Men or women.

How many major league mens half marathons are won slower than 61:30? With decent weather and course anyway? I'm sure it happens, but it has to be rare.

Well Korir won in 61:07 yesterday on the same course in the same conditions at less than ONE SECOND faster per mile than the men's marathon WR... So with Molly and her 68:31 time, it's just under FOUR SECONDS slower per mile than the woman's marathon WR. You're crying over 5 seconds of difference per mile?!?!

To avoid the extremes of the records of the marathon, lets look at the 5th fastest marathon of both the men and the woman:

Men- Wilson Kipsang Kiprotich 2:03:23 (9/29/13)

PACE: 4:42 mile

Woman- Mary Keitany 2:18.37 (4/22/12)

PACE: 5:16

Molly huddles nyc half pace was 5:14 which is two seconds faster.

Korir's nyc half pace was 4:41 which is only one second faster!

What say you now?

Bring Back the 880 wrote:

agip wrote:I think you would be hard pressed to find a 1st tier race with $20k in prize money in which the winner where the winner doesn't run at the pace of a distance twice as long. Men or women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_2012_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_5000_metreshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_World_Championships_in_Athletics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_5000_metreshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_2004_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_5000_metres

for $100,000!

http://www.baa.org/races/half-marathon/results-and-commentary/2013-recap.aspxhttp://www.baa.org/races/half-marathon/results-and-commentary/2014-recap.aspx

Okay, I don't know enough about the BAA course, so maybe it is tough, but Here in 2012, Kim Smith ran just under 1:11 for $100,000 (yes, she had to run a couple of ther races to earn that prize)!

http://www.baa.org/races/half-marathon/results-and-commentary/2012-recap.aspx

good points

well the whole point is NOT to avoid the extremes of radcliffe's record.

but I see what you are saying