|
Mar 2017
12:15pm, 8 Mar 2017
1,726 posts
|
larkim
Kipchoge was 59:17 wasn't he? If he was really at "60%" (!) for that, he's in a good shape. It does look like quite a genuine attempt - there's little there that would get purists arguing they are bending the rules so badly that it becomes a meaningless test.
|
|
Mar 2017
12:17pm, 8 Mar 2017
2,084 posts
|
K5 Gus
Sorry yes 59:17 for Kipchoge, and Tadesse was 59:41
|
|
Mar 2017
1:38pm, 8 Mar 2017
23,589 posts
|
SPR
Rumours the shoe is essentially Pistorius type blades for those that don't need them and therefore should be banned. Guess they'd be dissected by scientists if sold to check.
59 half isn't impressive unless he could have run 56 if he wanted to. The HM WR is 58:23 and given that is from 2010 it is probably due for revision if those that were capable targeted it (instead of using HMs for marathon prep).
|
|
Mar 2017
1:50pm, 8 Mar 2017
1,728 posts
|
larkim
Rightly cynical SPR. But 59:17 would be 34th on the all time list, I don't think its that easy to dismiss that sort of pace IF (as Kipchoge says) he was only firing at 60%.
Don't disagree that the WR here might be soft if one of the top marathoners targeted it, but a 7 year old record isn't that old either. And on a straightforward Reigel extrapolation 58:23 translates into sub 2:02, so there's a case for you talking yourself into a HM time which equates to a marathon time much closer to 2hrs.
|
|
Mar 2017
1:54pm, 8 Mar 2017
23,590 posts
|
SPR
Kipchoge is the best marathoner in the world, if he can't run a 59 min HM who would you expect to run one!
|
|
Mar 2017
1:56pm, 8 Mar 2017
23,591 posts
|
SPR
I agree if it was easy but is the time isn't impressive if it is equivalent to 1:01 on a standard course with normal shoes.
|
|
Mar 2017
2:07pm, 8 Mar 2017
23,592 posts
|
SPR
I have no issue with the course TBF. I do with the shoes potentially and the pacers in and out.
And I keep coming back to the time only being impressive if something doesn't make it easier.
|
|
Mar 2017
2:58pm, 8 Mar 2017
1,729 posts
|
larkim
But isn't that just the way it works? No-one (seriously) devalues Bolt's WRs just because they had a (legal) tailwind? Or that Berlin is a "fast course" that clearly makes it easier than, say, New York, to run a WR on? Or that Mondo tracks are superior to cinder tracks for the current WRs.
Pacing I'm in two minds about. Once you accept that pacing is allowed at mile 1 I think you have to allow for pacing at mile 26, and it doesn't matter to me whether that pacer is the same person that started the pacing or not. Or alternatively, the analogy is with men pacing women. IAAF maintains two records (a "mixed" race record and a women only race record). Arguably having pacers drop in and drop out is a close similarity with mixed race efforts for women. But equally, the record would need flagging as being of a different nature if pacers dropped in and dropped out. Having said that, I've struggled to find any "rules" about pacers (perhaps I've just missed it in the technical regs, it might be in something like the "honest effort" regulations).
Mobile water stations are also outside of the IAAF's technical rules as they do explicitly require these to be delivered from a table etc.
With the exception of knowing anything about the shoes, I'm reasonably reassured that if Nike run the effort in the same way that they did the test half marathon I'd have a good degree of confidence that I'd watched the first ever human run 26.2 miles in under 2 hours rather than some excessively compromised and stage managed publicity stunt.
|
|
Mar 2017
3:47pm, 8 Mar 2017
23,593 posts
|
SPR
A legitimate pacer is some that sacrifices their race to help other competitors. Given you can't outlaw drafting in running, like in Iromman triathlons, you have to allow this. Whether races should organise pacers is up for debate but is an organised form of the above.
Someone popping in at half way isn't a part of the race.
The women's thing is interesting and I lean towards women pacers only.
Re the tail wind, it's why we have things like Olympics and decide the best through competition rather than just time. Powell was the world record holder before Bolt but isn't a legend because he didn't win the big ones. Wanjiru vs Gebreselassie is another example of champs/ big wins trumping time
Re the first sub two, unless real races end up with sub 2 or near it like happened in the sub 4 era then it can't be 'real' and more importantly Kipchoge running sub 2 in this trial isn't better than than him running 2:02 to win London later on (assuming he's still the best at that point).
|
|
Mar 2017
4:03pm, 8 Mar 2017
1,731 posts
|
larkim
What about lapped runners? Or do they fall foul of the "bona fide" effort rule instead. I can see why the pacers should be excluded from the "race" results, but can't see why the leader of the race can't arrange to benefit from a third party's decision to breach the race's rules. I appreciate this might be dancing on the head of a pin, but equally it has been open to the IAAF to clearly define the rules of pacemaking, and they have chosen not to do so it seems.
|
European Championships 2022
Aug 2022