Wow, thanks for much for sharing the details. Was Radcliffe's 2:15 "women only" or were there men in the vicinity who she could pace off? (by the way, I think there is a typo in your post....you mention going through the halfway in 2:06. I believe you mean 1:06).

Yes, I corrected the typo in the OP.

Radcliffe's 2:15 was run with male pacers in a mass start race. The IAAF has since changed the rules for the women's marathon world record and now requires that there be an "all-women" race for times to count. Certainly, the male pacers helped a great deal, but Radcliffe's record is still on a whole other level. Until today, Radcliffe was the only woman to have ever run under 2:18, and she did it three times. Mary Keitany and Tirunesh Dibaba both broke 2:18 today, so now there are three women in history who have done it.

#JemimaSumgongwasclean

Do you believe Mary is clean? I hope she is

---

OlympicHopeful.com - Interviews with aspiring Olympians | Strava
Supported by: Skechers|Zwift|Squirt Lube|TYR|Rubber Ducky Sunscreen|Riplaces|MultiSport Canada|Joshus Bikes
“More often than not bad luck meant bad plans” -Joe Abercrombie

Was an amazing race to watch, started laughing though when Paula claims she didn't have male pacers for her 2:15. Didaba also deserves extreme recognition I believe, puking 10 times and still running 2:17 is amazing!
Breakthrough race for Wanjiru as well! A bit disappointed by Bekele

---

Terrible Tuesday’s Triathlon

Radcliffe's 2:17's also had men "escorts", which is apparently something a little bit different from a "pacer" for the IAAF to consider it an "unpaced" WR. Here's a race report of one of those 2:17's from one of her male "escorts". The big difference between pacer and escort seems to be that an escort runs next to the racer at the racer's chosen pace, rather than setting the pace himself and having the racer follow.

I'm not going to quibble about the rules that the IAAF had at the time about this gray area, but I will remark that it's rather disingenuous of Paula to suggest that her pacer/escort situation was the same as Keitany's. Even in Radcliffe's "unpaced" 2:17's, she spent the early miles in a pack of men "escorts" who were breaking a headwind, and had an escort all the way through mile 25.

In contrast, Keitany had a pacer through 13, and then ran the second half completely solo. And, as the OP pointed out, it wasn't exactly quality pacing, with a halfway split of ~67 min. Keitany's second half split of 70 min. gave her a 2:17. A more reasonable 68:00 first half split very well may have helped Keitany to a 2:15:xx. And this highlights the huge advantage of having a male pacer. It's not too hard to find a male pacer who can tempo 25 miles at a 2:15 pace. But it's really hard to find a woman who will run 13 in 68--which is basically a threshold pace for even elite women. Meaning, it's a lot easier to hold an exact pace when you're at tempo effort rather than threshold.

I didn't see the broadcast, but it doesn't surprise me to hear that Radcliffe fudged her recounting of the assistance she had from pacers/escorts. It's the same kind of misinformation she has issued to explain her anomalous blood values, and to rationalize her non-release of the rest of her testing results (even though she's very public about demanding transparency from everyone else).

I'm glad to see a more honorable athlete hold the WR. It will be exciting to see what Keitany can do with more experience and better pacing.

Thanks, you wrote mainly some of the thoughts in my head. I just did not have the accounting on all of that current to post these items. It is also why I am still floored by Joan Benoit's LA Olympic Marathon suicide mission. She just took off for a 26 mile ITT from the gun. I realize a 2:24 is not the same thing as yesterday's 2:17, but she did it in the heat, no pacers, women only, no men in the vicinity.

.

well done on her part. congrats for when they are due. ok, so i'm watching the LM on TV, and i have to say this on rabbits / pacers: knowing they are common-place, i still have to object to their presence. i'm of the opinion that there should not be runners out there, who are going to drop out intentionally) simply to provide a pace for the others.
these elite runners are professionals, and should be capable and responsible for setting their own paces, whether based on their immediate competition, or their GPS devices, etc. hey,, in triathlon, you're not going to find racers out there just to provide a pace for others. any other assistance in that regard is prohibited. why should professional runners get it ? pacing along with other racers, including men, is just flat out racing within the field. sorry, but this seems to water down the WR accomplishment. would she have set the mark on her own effort without the rabbit ?

Well heck, the next thing you know someone will be trying to break the 4 minute mile for the first time..........oh wait.
Pacers have been used extensively in running races since they began.

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

aren't you astute. if you read closely, you'll see that i acknowledged that. so what if it's commonplace ? i'm saying a professional ought to set a WR on his/her own ability without hired help.

Hey Hugh, I know that the 4 minute mile was done that way, but as a 'competitor' I feel the true first legit 4 min mile was when Bannister and Landy took each other on head to head in a drag race at the Empire Games (predecessor the commonwealth games) in 1954:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP_NzZP_LK0

Landy goes out in 58.6 but Bannister knowing what he can sustain hangs back "on pace". Landy slows down on lap 2 for a 1;58. Bannister still hangs back and does not try to close the gap to draft. 2;58.7 at 1200m and Bannister was then sitting on Landy's shoulder/drafting. No pacers, just the two best guys from the time, duking it out. Referring to what another poster said, I swear Landy had the "Prefontaine disease" before Pre was even racing. Based on everything I have read or watched, this guy should have been beating Bannister and probably should have broken the 4 min mile first. I am certain if Landy had the pacers the same day that Bannister broke the 4 min mile at Iffly road, Landy would have done it. But Bannister figured out the pacing before Landy and then set up a staged event.

I don't like how UCI runs MOST things, but I think they have it right with the world hour record. Self paced with no gadgets or clocks. It's pretty cool they do it that way. I would like to see race furnished pacers abolished

Paula ran 2:17:18 in Chicago with male pacers. Her 2:17:42 in London was done in a women-only race, and it was the race that counted as the previous women-only world record.

If Keitany could use male pacers, no question she breaks any record, including the highly dubious record from Radcliffe. Sorry, but Radcliffe's record is dubious due to many drug-related questions, and the fact that she clings to that record like her last blanket is a bit pathetic. She can't bring herself to compliment anyone else.

Thanks for the clarification.

 
Not sure if many people saw some of the other stories of the day.

a) Chrissie Wellington came back, 15 years after her first London Marathon to lay down a very respectable 2:49.
b) A GBR AG'er came from back in the pack to beat all the GBR elite males and be the first GBR athlete to finish in 2:14:49 (and it was his first ever marathon)
c) An elite club runner sacrifices his final push to the finish to help another club runner get across the line.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/39685573


It's a lot of these side stories that interest me a lot more than the pointy end. I was supporting on Sunday and the whole of London turns into a different place on Marathon day.

---

Blog: http://www.coopstriblog.wordpress.com
Latest blog: Setting Goals. With or Without Gin.
Date: 10/31/2017

Prince William gets squirted in the face



Kate says "There! Not so much fun, is it?”

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...W_comeback_P6197928/


Alistair and Jonny did it better ;-)

No, it was a good moment. That of course has been over played like mad by the media




I don't get this pov. The stir a year or so back, didn't really prove anything other than just veiled accusations with no evidence or actual likelihood of her guilt.

She wrote to WADA a while back and gave them complete authorisation to keep and re-test her samples in the future.

What else can she do?

It may be "a bit pathetic" to say shes proud of her record. But can't say I blame her

My opinion fwiw is that she was just a good athlete. Call me naïve. I have faith in her. I don't see her as the same mindset as Lance (or probably Wiggins) or many other dopers. I don't think shes that interesting

Any chance you are British?

Even if there did not seem to be some questions or back tracking with Paula and her claims regarding transparency, etc., and even if her ties to Coe didn't raise flags, it isn't rational to think that she is soooooo far ahead of an entire cohort of super talented runners who are also known dopers, but that she herself is clean. Not to mention how off the charts her record is in comparison to other events' world records.

She is the Usain Bolt, or lance armstrong of her sport. Hmmmm.

I am.

We see a lot of her on our TV over here, through her work with BBC. She comes across as a bit 1 dimensional to me. (Dare I say not the highest IQ going) That all she has is running. And whilst that might be seen as a need to crush the opposition by any means necessary. I don't get that "killer vibe" we've seen in other more known dopers.

To me, it's why the questions and back tracking were handled so badly (or fudged to use the Brit expression) An experienced doper would have a back story ready. They'd put thought into covering their tracks.

I can see why people think she must be up to something. As you say she beat known dopers. IMO those runners despite doping don't have the same athletic ability or even 100% focus to 1 goal in the way the greats of any sport apply themselves. So I'm not sure she was up against the best competition of the time, because they were making 8s into 9s with their substance assistance.

To sidetrack slightly, I know of someone that is into weightlifting. (non competitive, just for his ego) He's recently taken to steroids. But that's off the back of him NOT making the effort when he's in the gym. It's all posing and weighing his food, rather than spending time actually lifting heavy things up and down. He wants to cheat his way to his goals, rather than put the work in. As a personality he's self absorbed and fundamentally dishonest. (He's lost a long term relationship and also been fired from jobs for the trait!!) I simply don't see Radcliffe in the same mould.

Every sport has a person that dominates or produces close to "the perfect result" so it's plausible (with a healthy degree of scepticism of course) that she was better than the rest at that time.

Ultimately time will tell. But Id rather wait until if or when shes popped that just assuming. TBH if she was cheating, then allowing WADA to retest is either incredibly ballsy or stupid

RE: Coe. I have to admit, I don't know what you are getting to. He's always been vehemently and vocally anti doping. Calling for dopers to be given life bans when he was racing himself. If you are referring to his handling of the Russian doping scandal whilst president of the IAAF. Then I don't know the full details. So I can't comment either way.

it would be great if at the nike sub 2 attempt, they also would do a womens sub 2:15 attempt with her going for it.

Like!