Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Point to Point marathon courses and world records

  • 19-04-2011 2:51pm
    #1
    TheRoadRunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,983 ✭✭✭


    Quick question.

    Are all point to point marathon courses ineligible for marathon world records?

    Just looking at New York marathon and that looks like a point to point to me. I know elevation isn't downwards like Boston's but if a WR were ran in NYC would it count?


Comments

  • #2
    RoyMcC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭RoyMcC


    Until someone mentioned it on the other thread I'd not heard of tailwinds on a point-to-point being a factor for eligibility. Certainly there's a limit on the net drop - eg. Boston & Edinburgh.

    London and NY are both point-to-points and I'm sure qualify as WR courses.

    (PS the Jersey women's record was broken in London on Sunday and, as Statistician, I'm counting it as such :D)


  • #3
    TheRoadRunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,983 ✭✭✭TheRoadRunner


    RoyMcC wrote: »
    London and NY are both point-to-points and I'm sure qualify as WR courses.

    Good point, totally forgot London was point to point.


  • #4
    Peckham
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,559 ✭✭✭Peckham


    Yes it would as the finish is less than 13.1 miles from the start. Same applies to London.

    Explained by Runners World here
    IAAF and USATF record rules exclude courses with a net elevation loss of 1 meter per kilometer. In addition, IAAF mandates that courses begin and end within 50 percent of the race’s distance


  • #5
    RacoonQueen
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,366 Mod ✭✭✭✭RacoonQueen


    Paula Radcliffe ran her WR in London didn't she?


  • #6
    RoyMcC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭RoyMcC


    RacoonQueen wrote: »
    Paula Radcliffe ran her WR in London didn't she?

    Very true, after first setting it in Chicago.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Gringo78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭Gringo78


    I remember reading an article before which described The perfect course from a WR perspective as being V shaped with the finish line 42metres elevation below start line and a prevailing wind in the direction left to right across the V and finish line 13.1m from the start. Such a course will be legal, downhill and on the majority of days the race is held will have prevailing wind with a component always favourable to runner


  • #8
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,147 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Being point to point isn't the issue, it's how far apart the two points are.

    Someone posted a link to the races that count for 2012 qualification previously I think, but that did include Boston as being a valid course. Can't find the table now. Usually you'd not be able to go that fast on Boston though as it generally slower.


  • #9
    TFBubendorfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,340 ✭✭✭TFBubendorfer


    robinph wrote: »
    Being point to point isn't the issue, it's how far apart the two points are.

    Someone posted a link to the races that count for 2012 qualification previously I think, but that did include Boston as being a valid course. Can't find the table now. Usually you'd not be able to go that fast on Boston though as it generally slower.

    Being eligible for a world record and being eligible for 2012 qualification are two different things.


  • #10
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,147 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    TFBubendorfer wrote: »
    Being eligible for a world record and being eligible for 2012 qualification are two different things.

    Absolutely, it was strange to see a course such as Boston included in the list though. The qualification races being more chosen in a way such that people from around the world could get to run in one of them. The US list of races didn't really need to include something as awful as Boston though. Just happened that this year it was a very, very good day to run it. But every other year you'd be stupid to use that as your target race.


  • #11
    shels4ever
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,598 ✭✭✭shels4ever


    I think its the 2 points cant be any furhter then 50% of the race distance apart for records .


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    ClashCityRocker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 504 ✭✭✭ClashCityRocker


    shels4ever wrote: »
    I think its the 2 points cant be any furhter then 50% of the race distance apart for records .

    Excuse my ignorance, but why is this the case? It doesn't make that much of a difference surely?


  • #13
    RayCun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    ClashCityRocker wrote: »
    Excuse my ignorance, but why is this the case? It doesn't make that much of a difference surely?

    If the course is a loop then the wind will be in your face as much as it is behind you. In a point to point the wind could be behind you all the way.


  • #14
    Gringo78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭Gringo78


    Gringo78 wrote: »
    I remember reading an article before

    heres the article on the wind effect on various point to point courses. The author actually disputes the 50% criteria from the IAAF as the original USA criteria was 30% and the IAAF upped it.

    http://www.arrs.net/article_wind.php


  • #15
    ClashCityRocker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 504 ✭✭✭ClashCityRocker


    RayCun wrote: »
    If the course is a loop then the wind will be in your face as much as it is behind you. In a point to point the wind could be behind you all the way.

    Yep, of course :o


Advertisement