WR in Boston Marathon (2.03.02)

ThePiedPiper

Mutai ran a world record in Boston. It won't be certified as the course is a net downhill. All the same, it's absolutely incredible. Mosop came second I think on his debut. Amazing time. There was also a WR in the women's wheelchair race so there must have been a good tailwind.

elvis jones

Indeed 2:03:02 I believe was the time

ElectraX

Very impressive time by the American runner Ryan Hall 2:04:58 too. He seems to have been the only non Kenyan/Ethiopian in the top of the field.

dermCu

Tailwind?

YFlyer

dermCu wrote: »

Tailwind?

Wind that blows in the direction of travel of an object.

TheRoadRunner

dermCu wrote: »

Tailwind?

It's a point to point course as you know so a wind behind the runners could definitely help. This time is amazing. Even though the net profile of the course is downhill it's not an easy course and is worth a 2.02 on a flat course like Berlin IMO

runsalot

http://boston.cbslocal.com/boston-marathon-live-finish-line/

JUST THE WINNERS!!
Great run by Ryan Hall.

Gringo78

Moses Mosops performance has to be one of the most impressive marathon debuts ever....set in a race with no pacemakers and plenty of surges.

BeepBeep67

I heard Cragg was a DNF - any info?

shels4ever

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

I heard Cragg was a DNF - any info?

2:03 pace for the first 12-15k may have killed him, would love to see him run something a little smaller like Dublin etc

dermCu

YFlyer wrote: »

Wind that blows in the direction of travel of an object.

Thanks for clearing that up. Keep up the good work.

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

It's a point to point course as you know so a wind behind the runners could definitely help. This time is amazing. Even though the net profile of the course is downhill it's not an easy course and is worth a 2.02 on a flat course like Berlin IMO

Looks like it was about 20mph. I don't know if I'd rate it the same as a 2.02 on a flat course but it was pretty incredible. Would no doubt have broken the CR under normal conditions.

G-Money

Haile will need to step up his game for London then if he's going to take the gold medal and set a new world record. As we all want him to do

TheRoadRunner

G-Money wrote: »

Haile will need to step up his game for London then if he's going to take the gold medal and set a new world record. As we all want him to do

eh I personally don't.

Itziger

Could anyone give a rough estimate of how many Kenyans could go under 2.08??

There must be a couple a dozen. Incredible depth of talent.

ecoli

Great race today. Pity bout Cragg pulling up just before the half. As regards the records though Neither G Mutai nor Ryan Halls times are eligible for world or American record due to the course being a point to point course

YFlyer

dermCu wrote: »

Thanks for clearing that up. Keep up the good work.

You're welcome

Caprica

We have had two great days of marathon running. The Beeb were saying that London set a record for the most women going sub 2:30, I think it was 22 or so.

Feel sorry for Cragg, he went through 20K in 61mins, the Boston website gave him a projected finishing time of 2:10. Getting the qualifying mark was easily within his reach. I wonder what he will do with the remainder of the season, will he go to the World Champs?. Great run by Ryan Hall, I wasn't expecting that, he seems to be back on the right track.

The Kenyans had a total of 11 athletes sub 2:08 last year, with a further 18 sub 2:10. There was one European under 2:10
http://www.iaaf.org/statistics/toplists/inout=o/age=n/season=2011/sex=M/all=n/legal=A/disc=MAR/detail.html

M cebee

great time alright for boston

old 'bill rodgers' would be struggling to keep up:)

BeepBeep67

Apparently Hall wrote 2:04 under his shoes before the race!

M cebee

seems like 2:04 is the new 2:10

woodchopper

ecoli wrote: »

Great race today. Pity bout Cragg pulling up just before the half. As regards the records though Neither G Mutai nor Ryan Halls times are eligible for world or American record due to the course being a point to point course

Hall already holds the American born record for the marathon although he does not hold the American citizenship record.

MrCreosote

Am I the only one that thinks the time is a bit meaningless?

Great running alright, and especially with no pacemakers, but it's not a world record. No point pretending it is. It does nothing to bring a sub-2 hr marathon closer. Unless it's a running downhill-with-a-tailwind marathon.

Personally I thought the London time was more impressive, especially the second half.

TheRoadRunner

MrCreosote wrote: »

Am I the only one that thinks the time is a bit meaningless?

Great running alright, and especially with no pacemakers, but it's not a world record. No point pretending it is. It does nothing to bring a sub-2 hr marathon closer. Unless it's a running downhill-with-a-tailwind marathon.

Personally I thought the London time was more impressive, especially the second half.

It's impressive because the Boston course was historically always slower than the other major marathons.

Pisco Sour

MrCreosote wrote: »

Am I the only one that thinks the time is a bit meaningless?

Great running alright, and especially with no pacemakers, but it's not a world record. No point pretending it is. It does nothing to bring a sub-2 hr marathon closer. Unless it's a running downhill-with-a-tailwind marathon.

Personally I thought the London time was more impressive, especially the second half.

I agree. Theres no doubt it was an incredible run but its being blown out of proportion. The tail wind obviously helped him hugely. Ryan Hall ran 2:04:58. Great athlete and all but hand on heart do people really think he is a sub 2:05 marathon runner?

Raighne

04072511 wrote: »

I agree. Theres no doubt it was an incredible run but its being blown out of proportion. The tail wind obviously helped him hugely. Ryan Hall ran 2:04:58. Great athlete and all but hand on heart do people really think he is a sub 2:05 marathon runner?

The analysis here seems to indicate he is not: http://www.sportsscientists.com/

An improvement like that at that level would be unprecedented, especially for the number of runners, so the facts here seem quite clear. Great race, but the times for the leaders running around the windspeed (14mph) and faster are inflated.

ecoli

04072511 wrote: »

I agree. Theres no doubt it was an incredible run but its being blown out of proportion. The tail wind obviously helped him hugely. Ryan Hall ran 2:04:58. Great athlete and all but hand on heart do people really think he is a sub 2:05 marathon runner?

Looking at previous PBs and what they ran yesterday, for the most part it looks like the wind knocked off about 90sec - 2 min in general. I say this would be true in Halls case to as i think he is only in shape for about a 2.07 at best at the moment

shels4ever

04072511 wrote: »

I agree. Theres no doubt it was an incredible run but its being blown out of proportion. The tail wind obviously helped him hugely. Ryan Hall ran 2:04:58. Great athlete and all but hand on heart do people really think he is a sub 2:05 marathon runner?

the 2:04:58 says he is and his sub 60 half marathon might make me agree and , not to mention his 2:06 from london . So 1min 19 second progrerss for him since 2008.. maybe he should be in 2:03 shape actually.

seanynova

copied this text out of the letsrun website, makes interesting reading regarding the wind:


The races were very, very exciting and Davila's bid for victory was truly special.

That being said, your statements go way to far. The times were amazing but so the tailwind was equally as amazing.

I remember back in college when Obadele Thompson ran 9.69 for 100m in a college meet at UTEP in 1996 back when the world record was 9.85.

No one in their right mind called it the greatest performance in history as the tail-wind was an ridiculous 5.7 mps (the time converts to 9.93 with no wind or 9.95 dependig on who you are talking to).

Well today let's say the winds were roughly 20 mph (i saw 19 with gusts to 33 mph).

What does a 20 mph wind convert to in mps? 8.9408(20 miles x 1609.344 meters / 3600 seconds) . Nearly twice as much as Thompson's.

As we pointed out in our pre-race article, which we entitled "Once In A (Marathon) Lifetime Weather Conditions Forecast For Boston On Monday", that is worth a ton of time. How much? Some like JK might say 3-4 minutes.

If you don't want to believe me, do the following. Go to the wind/conversion site that exists for sprinting.

http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/wind/index.html

Input today's performances. Mutai's marathon time today comes out to him running 17.49496883 per 100 meters.

Input 8.9408 for the wind and input 70 meters for altitude (as the race roughly starts at 70m of altitude and finishes at 0) and you end up with an equivalent time of 17.83 seconds per 100 meters if run with zero wind at sea level.

Multiply that by 421.94988 (there are 421.95 100 meter segments in a marathon)to get the total time for the marathon of 7523.36636 seconds or 2:05:24.

Now that's not 3-4 minutes but you get my point. It's worth a lot. When JK actually wakes up from his nap (I think he's been asleep all day), I'll ask him about that sprint/conversion chart. But he was clearly proven to yet again be a genius today.

It sort of reminds me of when I used to run road races. I would only run road races that were certified as I couldn't stand it when there would be clearly a short course and hear people counting it as their PR. If you run 5 road certified road races at 15:10 and then one day run 14:30 on a non-certified course, you shouldn't say your PR is 14:30 as it was likely short.

TheRoadRunner

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

It's a point to point course as you know so a wind behind the runners could definitely help. This time is amazing. Even though the net profile of the course is downhill it's not an easy course and is worth a 2.02 on a flat course like Berlin IMO

My initial enthusiasm has been dampened slightly. I didn't realise how strong the tailwind was! When comparing Boston elite times to other majors I generally deduct 3 minutes to account for course and lack of pacers (my own little normailsation procedure based on my own observations). I guess the strong tailwind more than compensated for these!

Micilin Muc

Garmin posted the link to his Garmin Connect track.

An average of at least 4:47min/mile. I can't even sprint that fast.

Mr Slow

Kenya's Geoffrey Mutai ran the fastest marathon ever on Monday, finishing the Boston Marathon in 2 hours, 3 minutes, 2 seconds. Despite the blistering time, Mutai's mark isn't being recognized as a world record because it was run in Boston which has a net downhill. To my mind this isn't fair as a lot of marathon races are marketed on the basis of being fast courses. Should there be a control race for the record, where the course and conditions are as close to exactly the same for each attempt.

Full Article Here

DustyBin

mrslow wrote: »

Should there be a control race for the record, where the course and conditions are as close to exactly the same for each attempt.

No, that would be daft

menoscemo

mrslow wrote: »

Kenya's Geoffrey Mutai ran the fastest marathon ever on Monday, finishing the Boston Marathon in 2 hours, 3 minutes, 2 seconds. Despite the blistering time, Mutai's mark isn't being recognized as a world record because it was run in Boston which has a net downhill. To my mind this isn't fair as a lot of marathon races are marketed on the basis of being fast courses. Should there be a control race for the record, where the course and conditions are as close to exactly the same for each attempt.

Full Article Here

And that's why they call him Mr Slow

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056242806

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056243264

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056244278

donothoponpop

Loads of threads about this already, best to keep them together, merged. <mod>

Mr Slow

DustyBin wrote: »

No, that would be daft

It was tongue in cheek

menoscemo wrote: »

And that's why they call him Mr Slow

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056242806

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056243264

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056244278

I'm sure you can guess what my response might be!

Pisco Sour

Of course the time should not count as a WR. He had a bleedin gale force wind at his back most of the way. Ryan Hall ran sub 2:05, and there is no way under normal conditions he is a a 2:04:xx runner.

The rules say that the start and finish have to be within a certain distance from each other (21.1km I think). This is not the case in Boston, AND it has a net downhill over the allowed amount, therefore the record cannot be validated and so it is not an issue. I cant believe people are trying to debate this. Should we count 100m records run in +5.0 m/s tailwinds so? I might have a craic at it the next day theres gale force winds if so! :rolleyes:

Pisco Sour

mrslow wrote: »

It was tongue in cheek

Ah fair enough so

Mr Slow

04072511 wrote: »

Of course the time should not count as a WR. He had a bleedin gale force wind at his back most of the way. Ryan Hall ran sub 2:05, and there is no way under normal conditions he is a a 2:04:xx runner.

The rules say that the start and finish have to be within a certain distance from each other (21.1km I think). This is not the case in Boston, AND it has a net downhill over the allowed amount, therefore the record cannot be validated and so it is not an issue. I cant believe people are trying to debate this. Should we count 100m records run in +5.0 m/s tailwinds so? I might have a craic at it the next day theres gale force winds if so! :rolleyes:

I agree it doesn't meet the course criteria for the record but the wind shouldn't be a consideration, if he ran Boston in 2 hours into a gale, it still wouldn't be recognised.

Pisco Sour

mrslow wrote: »

I agree it doesn't meet the course criteria for the record but the wind shouldn't be a consideration, .

Its not directly the wind thats a factor but that its a point to point course (over the allowed amount) that increases the chances of wind being an issue.

ecoli

Looks like they are going for it
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/more/04/19/boston.marathon.mutai.ap/index.html

Mr Slow

ecoli wrote: »

Looks like they are going for it
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/more/04/19/boston.marathon.mutai.ap/index.html

The only way the IAAF's hand will be forced is by the elites going on strike and I can't see that happening.

ElectraX

Micilin Muc wrote: »

Garmin posted the link to his Garmin Connect track.

An average of at least 4:47min/mile. I can't even sprint that fast.

Unreal! That's incredible running.:eek: