Radcliffe loses her world record

TheRoadRunner

well not really she is still the world record holder, her 2.15 is now a world best

Dan man

Yes I read this yesterday on BBC, I think it's very petty to change this now. It's good that she still keeps the record but that was an amazing run in 2003, mixed race or no mixed race.

Brianderunner

That's harsh, discredits her 2:15 totally.

Pisco Sour

Disgraceful decision. They shouldn't be allowed to go back and retrospectively change a world record. (unless an athlete was caught for doping of course).

nerraw1111

Two men paced her to the record so I can see why they want to change the rules.

Suppose the thinking is that Radcliffe would not have been able to post the times without the aid of the men, thereby creating an articifial result that could not be replicated in Worlds or the Olympics.

Seems harsh to apply it retrospectively but seems like the only option if they want to limit female records to female participants.

griffin100

So running with a pace group in a marathon diminishes your PB?

It's an interesting topic, does a marathon PB obtained by running with a pace group have less credit than one obtained by pacing yourself? There are points to to both sides - irrespective of how you got around a PB time is a PB time; then again one of the challenges of a long distance race is correct pacing and having someone else worry about doing that for you is a big help!

RacoonQueen

Does that mean that mens world records can only be attained in men only races or does this ruling only apply to women?

ThePiedPiper

It's a fairly ridiculous decision. Why not discount Haile's record?

TheRoadRunner

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Does that mean that mens world records can only be attained in men only races or does this ruling only apply to women?

Good point, only to women it seems.

shels4ever

Maybe I'm on my own here, but I agree with the rule.

But also I hate all the pacemakers in London etc for the men to

Condo131

Well, fwiw, my understanding always was that world records did not apply to road races anyway - these were always World Bests. Road courses are all so different that comparisons were difficult, if not impossible. After all, tracks are standard.

.......Must check out the new rules though.

nerraw1111

Presumably it doesn't apply to men because it wouldn't make a difference if it was a men only race. There's no advantage to be gained in a mixed race compared to men only race.

However, that's not the case for woman who would gain advantage from male pacers who can pace for longer at a faster pace.

Not a fan of pacemakers.

Pisco Sour

My opinion, if the rules were there at the time and it was celebrated as a world record at the time then it must stand.

Have FINA gone back and retrospectively got rid of all the world records set when the swimmers were wearing those swimsuits in Beijing that have since been banned? (genuine questions, I don't know).

Pherekydes

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Does that mean that mens world records can only be attained in men only races or does this ruling only apply to women?

Do men get towed along by women?

I presume Junior records will now have to be made in Junior-only competition; youth records in youth-only competition, etc.?

Dan man

04072511 wrote: »

My opinion, if the rules were there at the time and it was celebrated as a world record at the time then it must stand.

Have FINA gone back and retrospectively got rid of all the world records set when the swimmers were wearing those swimsuits in Beijing that have since been banned? (genuine questions, I don't know).

The answer to that is no they haven't got rid of those records.

BeepBeep67

Pherekydes wrote: »

Do men get towed along by women?

I presume Junior records will now have to be made in Junior-only competition; youth records in youth-only competition, etc.?

....and Masters, how does that now impact a Master getting paced to an NR or WR by a faster Senior/Younger athlete?

Pisco Sour

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

....and Masters, how does that now impact a Master getting paced to an NR or WR by a faster Senior/Younger athlete?

Yep very valid point. And the same with regards junior records. The IAAF need to be consistent if they are going to bring in rules like this.

Dan man

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

....and Masters, how does that now impact a Master getting paced to an NR or WR by a faster Senior/Younger athlete?

Very valid points raised here by yourself and Pherekydes. Many junior records are set in senior races where the pace is naturally quicker.

shels4ever

04072511 wrote: »

My opinion, if the rules were there at the time and it was celebrated as a world record at the time then it must stand.

Have FINA gone back and retrospectively got rid of all the world records set when the swimmers were wearing those swimsuits in Beijing that have since been banned? (genuine questions, I don't know).

Actually I think they did from an interview I heard a while ago, will try to find out. Also I think the Javelin world records had a similar thing done? As far as I know they scrapped all records sometime in the 80's and started over agian. (with a change in design).
edit
FINA did keep the world records actually.
http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/blog/fourth_place_medal/post/FINA-strikes-back-High-tech-suits-banned-from-s?urn=oly-178719

RacoonQueen

Pherekydes wrote: »

Do men get towed along by women?

Not at the top of the sport no. :pac:

But should any WR stand then if it's achieved using pacers to 'tow' you along, whether they're the same sex as you or not?

TFBubendorfer

griffin100 wrote: »

So running with a pace group in a marathon diminishes your PB?!

There was quite some discussion about that very topic before last year's Dublin marathon, and yes, several people did indeed state that a PB would be diminished that way.

TFBubendorfer

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

....and Masters, how does that now impact a Master getting paced to an NR or WR by a faster Senior/Younger athlete?

I think that's the best argument yet!

shels4ever

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Not at the top of the sport no. :pac:

But should any WR stand then if it's achieved using pacers to 'tow' you along, whether they're the same sex as you or not?

Well once the pacers are made finish the race then it would be ok with me, I hate to see lads pulling out after 5 laps of a 5k etc ,Then you have people running as a team to, is this ok ?

Watching london 2 years ago it looked a bit of a joke in my bookes with 8-10 runner(pacers) all in the same club colors.

Krusty_Clown

shels4ever wrote: »

Also I think the Javelin world records had a similar thing done?

Having one javelin fly in the slip-stream of another javelin? Those cunning fiends.
Still, that would take some skill.

jeffontour

Bit of a joke downgrading it. The conditions were the same for all women in the race. Radcliffe stayed the pace. The rest did not or did not try to.

shels4ever

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Having one javelin fly in the slip-stream of another javelin? Those cunning fiends.
Still, that would take some skill.

Well the javelin records were re-writen when the design of the javelin changed(1986)(1999).

tunguska

I can understand the logic of what they're trying to do but having said that its bad form to take away Radcliffe's 2:15 as being the world record. I mean has any woman even gotten close that time since?

TFBubendorfer

tunguska wrote: »

I can understand the logic of what they're trying to do but having said that its bad form to take away Radcliffe's 2:15 as being the world record. I mean has any woman even gotten close that time since?

The best one was run by one, er, Paula Radcliffe in London 2005, with a time of 2:17:2 in a women only race (well, they started well ahead of the male runners).

Which happens to be the new "official" world record, so the thread title is not just misspelt (now fixed :rolleyes:) but also wrong.

G-Money

I'm no expert but I think it's harsh. Yeah she might have had pace makers but it's hardly like she was on roller-skates and they were pulling her along with little or no effort from her.

If they want to change the rules I guess that's up to them, but retrospectively changing past results seems unfair. I think the only time that's acceptable is when an athlete has proven to have broken the rules (drugs etc).

I suppose the good thing is that she still has the world record regardless (2:17).

PaulieYifter

Whatever about the merit or demerit of applying the rule going forward I think its absurd to apply the rule retrospectively.

You can only operate to the rules that prevail at the time. Who knows what time she may have done that day if the new rules applied back then.

I can only imagine that the decision was made easier given she's still the official World Record holder.

Let's go back and change the results of all the GAA matches when a goal used to be worth 5 points. Or rugby matches when a try was worth 4 points - or even when a try was worth nothing and just gave you the chance to record points via a conversion.

TFBubendorfer

Btw, while this isn't entirely relevant, it might still interest people.

Here's the race report from one of the guys who was pacing her in a then-world-record performance in Chicago in 2002. Interesting, the organisers made it clear to him that he was an "escort" rather than a pacer and was not supposed to run in front of her, but the distinction may well be irrelevant.

http://www.letsrun.com/2003/escortingpaula.php

zico10

Because she ran the time, I feel she's entitled to keep her world record. No doubt it's a nice title to have, but I'm sure until it's actually broken, whoever holds the record will be reminded theirs is not the real world record.

That photo of Gebrselassie and his pacers is brilliant, by the way. Maybe not, but if paced by a bicycle could he go quicker again? Or is he already at his limit?

nerraw1111

That's a fascinating read TBF.

I'm still not sure how escorts were be of benefit to Radcliffe, other than when Radcliffe asked for a split?

robinph

nerraw1111 wrote: »

That's a fascinating read TBF.

I'm still not sure how escorts were be of benefit to Radcliffe, other than when Radcliffe asked for a split?

Always a motivation to have someone running infront, beside or even behind you when running at pace.

I'd have no problem getting paced by some women, would make for a very nice view whilst running along and a distraction from the pain. It's a lot easier for them to find male pace makers that can knock out a 62 minute half for Haile to follow than it is to find female pacers that can run a 67 minute half for Paula to follow.

shels4ever wrote: »

Well once the pacers are made finish the race then it would be ok with me, I hate to see lads pulling out after 5 laps of a 5k etc ,Then you have people running as a team to, is this ok ?

Watching london 2 years ago it looked a bit of a joke in my bookes with 8-10 runner(pacers) all in the same club colors.

That club for London pacers is the Shaftsbury Harriers kit I think, none of them are in that club but one of the organisers is. I seem to recall that when Banister broke the mile record the only way it was let stand was for Brasher and Chataway had to finish the distance as well, and one of them was deliberately a lap down anyway inorder that he could pace the third lap.

28064212

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

There was quite some discussion about that very topic before last year's Dublin marathon, and yes, several people did indeed state that a PB would be diminished that way.

Is it diminished if you run with a stopwatch and check your splits? What about mile markers? Crowd encouragement? Is a PB run with no outside info whatsoever the 'best' PB? Maybe records can only be set in "time-trial" conditions?

The argument against pacers/escorts/whatever is foolish. At the end of the day, the effort put in to getting a certain time is identical, no matter what external information is provided. It's not cycling, you can't draft.

YFlyer

How about Coghlans' over 40, indoor mile WR?

TFBubendorfer

28064212 wrote: »

Is it diminished if you run with a stopwatch and check your splits? What about mile markers? Crowd encouragement? Is a PB run with no outside info whatsoever the 'best' PB? Maybe records can only be set in "time-trial" conditions?

The argument against pacers/escorts/whatever is foolish. At the end of the day, the effort put in to getting a certain time is identical, no matter what external information is provided. It's not cycling, you can't draft.

Don't jump at my throat just because I pointed out that some people do indeed question the validity of times that are run with the help of pacers. FFS!

As someone who is about to run as a marathon pacer for the fourth time, I obviously do not share that opinion.

28064212

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Don't jump at my throat just because I pointed out that some people do indeed question the validity of times that are run with the help of pacers. FFS!

As someone who is about to run as a marathon pacer for the fourth time, I obviously do not share that opinion.

Apologies, I didn't mean for it to come off as directed at you, just against the general argument

TFBubendorfer

robinph wrote: »

I seem to recall that when Banister broke the mile record the only way it was let stand was for Brasher and Chataway had to finish the distance as well, and one of them was deliberately a lap down anyway inorder that he could pace the third lap.

Sorry, but that's not true. Brasher collapsed into infield after 2.5 laps of pacing (no idea if he got up to finish the mile), but Chataway was definitely NOT a lap down when he took over pacing duties.

robinph

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Sorry, but that's not true. Brasher collapsed into infield after 2.5 laps of pacing (no idea if he got up to finish the mile), but Chataway was definitely NOT a lap down when he took over pacing duties.

It was a long time ago and my memory isn't what it used to be.

Not sure what I got confused with then, unless it's Chariots of Fire or something.
I know that had some guy hurdling with wine glasses on the barriers. <shrugs>

ecoli

robinph wrote: »

It was a long time ago and my memory isn't what it used to be.

Not sure what I got confused with then, unless it's Chariots of Fire or something.
I know that had some guy hurdling with wine glasses on the barriers. <shrugs>

I think that was one of the early attempts at the record after which the AAA stated they would not accept a record run under them conditions (Can't remember the exact details atm but there was some attempt like that that was deemed invalid).

Anyone think they want to revise it to generate interest in Mary Keitany and possible WR attempts in her next marathon (can't remember whether she attempting a fall Marathon)?

robinph

ecoli wrote: »

robinph wrote: »

It was a long time ago and my memory isn't what it used to be.

Not sure what I got confused with then, unless it's Chariots of Fire or something.
I know that had some guy hurdling with wine glasses on the barriers. <shrugs>

I think that was one of the early attempts at the record after which the AAA stated they would not accept a record run under them conditions (Can't remember the exact details atm but there was some attempt like that that was deemed invalid).

Anyone think they want to revise it to generate interest in Mary Keitany and possible WR attempts in her next marathon (can't remember whether she attempting a fall Marathon)?

That would make sense for where I got that story from then as it would have been covered in some documentary about Banister and the 4 minute mile. Just got some wires crossed somewhere in the remembering of it all.

Pisco Sour

Anybody who may run under Radcliffe's WR from London 2005 in the coming years will know in their head that she is not the fastest woman of all time. It doesn't matter what the record books will say, she will know that she is only number 2.

The whole thing isn't right. And I honestly can see this decision being reversed.

rovers_runner

While I don't agree with pacers for other reasons such as the fact that it is an individual sport I think this is very unfair on Radcliffe.

At the end of the day she ran the time herself, on her own two feet. Nobody carried her on their back. If you aren't able to run that pace for 26.2, no amount of pacers would get you there.

shels4ever

rovers_runner wrote: »

While I don't agree with pacers for other reasons such as the fact that it is an individual sport I think this is very unfair on Radcliffe.

At the end of the day she ran the time herself, on her own two feet. Nobody carried her on their back. If you aren't able to run that pace for 26.2, no amount of pacers would get you there.

So what about the pacer that appeard out of nowhere today when she was stuck on her own....

TFBubendorfer

shels4ever wrote: »

So what about the pacer that appeard out of nowhere today when she was stuck on her own....

She was never on world record pace, so it does not matter.

That pacer did not appear out of nowhere, btw. He was always with her group, even before she let Kiplagat go.

shels4ever

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

She was never on world record pace, so it does not matter.

That pacer did not appear out of nowhere, btw. He was always with her group, even before she let Kiplagat go.

I was wondering that, the lads on bbc seemed to think he just showed up, but their coverage was as bad, They must have been going mad as Paula was the only reason they had it.

Was delighted to see her running well again.

robinph

shels4ever wrote: »

So what about the pacer that appeard out of nowhere today when she was stuck on her own....

Yet the pacer who was with the leader was then instructed to drop back to Haile after he stopped first time by the head guy on a bike and that is OK? Does the guy who came in second get an extra bonus for ensuring that the 2nd place guy got a decent enough time?

G-Money

Would it be fair to say that there aren't enough high quality female distance runners to offer the same choice of pace makers that the men have?

TFBubendorfer

G-Money wrote: »

Would it be fair to say that there aren't enough high quality female distance runners to offer the same choice of pace makers that the men have?

I think the main reason why they used male pacemakers is that a male guy being able to pace a 2:17 marathon (or whatever your target) for 30K is a lot easier to find and therefore cheaper than a female one.

I'm sure they will be able to find female pace makers if needed, but they will cost an awful lot more.

ecoli

Looks like its not over yet:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/8823417/London-2012-Olympics-Paula-Radcliffe-calls-for-her-marathon-world-record-to-be-reinstated.html