Pacemakers back in Zürich

[croflash]

Patrick Magyar, director of Weltklasse Zürich, welcomed the international media at a press conference on Thursday afternoon. He outlined numerous changes from last year, which were instituted as a "compromise between the desires of the public and of the athletes." Pace-making in the longer races has been reinstated after last year's edition, but it will be done in a way allowing more runners to be in position for a good performance at the end and not to favour only a few of the elite athletes. "We also worked with Swiss Television to find new camera positions," Magyar continued. "You will see some spectacular shots never before presented in Zürich."

http://www.weltklassezuerich.ch/en/news ... aking.html

Thoughts on the reinstatement of pacemakers ?

[Aiden]

Good. You'll never have another distance world record without them, no matter what the so-called "purists" say.

[Marlow]

Re: Pacemakers back in Zürich

Thoughts on the reinstatement of pacemakers ?

Some people here labor under the delusion that it's all about the competition, regardless of the quality of marks. I labor under no such delusion, so of course I say,
YAY !!!!!!!

[26mi235]

Good. You'll never have another distance world record without them, no matter what the so-called "purists" say.

Did you happen to see the women's 10,000 earlier this month? There are a number of marks that I would consider a WR despite some official mistakes; these include 10.60, 8:10, and 30:00 (now 29:50). The 1988 wind mistake, and the Chinese National Games of 93 and 97 are just not valid in my mind.

[Aiden]

10.60? You're kidding, right?

I'm sorry, maybe I'm just confused. Is Zurich reinstating pacers for the 100m? :roll:

[26mi235]

10.60? You're kidding, right?

I'm sorry, maybe I'm just confused. Is Zurich reinstating pacers for the 100m? :roll:

I am saying that if someone runs 10.60 I would view it as the WR - the 10.49 is a mistake, and I cannot remember exactly which of the 10.6x marks had wind, ok wind, (a)[that would be MJ's with additional issues], etc. I am not saying that I see someone running 10.60 but this last year has seen many more good marks and we may see another 10.6x in the next few years.

The statement was part of the string of women's WRs that I think are flawed and should not have been ratified and seem much more questionable than shuld be the case for WRs. The 100 is the simplest case, as it is rather widely believed that the wind reading was flawed (in the video FloJo's bib is being moved around by a pretty good breeze and yet the 'official' wind reading was 0.0. Analysis of the marks of the other competitors is consistent with a wind of a number of meters per second (4+mps??)