You are reporting the following post to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum

RE: Breaking: Nike admits that its sub-2 hr attempt won't come on a legitimate course and won't count for a WR

Star wrote:

[quote]BullSlacker wrote:

Maybe RoJo meant to say "you potentially could benefit from wind, drop in elevation etc". I think you are being pedantic.

Nike could absolutely take advantage of a point to point course with a favourable wind behind and a course that is slightly downhill.

Meant to say?
He said what he said.
"If you are running the course on a non-records eligible course, then you are receiving assistance"
That is an incorrect statement.

You described the Boston course in that second part.
We know you can't officially break the record at Boston but it isn't nefarious to attempt a fast time there.[/quote]
Ok so that is my confirmation that you are being pedantic. You can set fast times at Boston i.e Hall.
Regardless, you could choose a course that has the attributes I mentioned, that is not Boston, and run faster than otherwise would be possible. Why on Earth have you started to try and refute that by bringing up Boston as a crude counter example?

If Nike wanted this to be legit they wouldn't have stated what they have stated and could absolutely get a fully IAAF ceritfied course.

The other illegal aids put forward such as more frequent drinks - I don't think will drop 3 minutes on a marathon. And Renato's idea about the runners being pacemaked the whole way by a motorcycle or something is even more farcical than a downhill course.

Hit the submit button below if you want us to review the post.

If you feel this is urgent or want a reply, email us at [email protected] about the post and please include a link to the thread the post is on and what page number/post on that page it is.