Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

When Does The Fastest Time Not Win the Race??

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • gh
    replied
    How about a DQ for running 13M too far?

    http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/1279622.html

    Leave a comment:


  • Run DMC
    replied
    I wonder if there was prize money and if she was awarded equal money??

    I agree that a woman running 2:55 should not think of herself as "elite". This is equivalent to a man running 2:35-2:40. I think very few people with those sort of credentials would ask to be in the elite division.

    It is not as if she leaned at the tape an won by 3 seconds. It was 11 minutes, almost a 2 mile win. She beat them like a rented mule.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Re: Dipsea

    Originally posted by hanklaw
    In the Dipsea the fastest time of the day hasn't won in over 20 years.
    This is irrelevant, the rules allow it.

    Leave a comment:


  • hanklaw
    replied
    Dipsea

    What's the big deal? In the Dipsea the fastest time of the day hasn't won in over 20 years. Walk it off cry baby and run.

    hank

    Leave a comment:


  • Swensen
    replied
    I intend to weedle myself into the first tee time at my local golf tourney, beat the other three in my group and then declare myself the winner because I couldn't 'see' the performances that followed. One techno solution is to post a golfesque leader board in a few locations over the last miles which would post miles or meters per hours of top contenders. Otherwise do away with the elite crap and get back to start line basics.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by mcgato
    Here are the times and places (overall) of the women in the "elite" division:

    . . .

    In minor defense of the ladies, it must have been god awful boring out there until some of the men caught up to them.
    I thought the times might be slow in part because of SF's famous hills, but the course bypassed those for the most part.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcgato
    replied
    Here are the times and places (overall) of the women in the "elite" division:
    (place, bib, time)
    2 1012 3:06:18
    3 1014 3:08:59
    5 1015 3:12:35
    6 1010 3:13:07
    7 1020 3:13:44
    8 1007 3:13:48
    10 1013 3:14:34
    21 1003 3:22:00
    23 1008 3:22:24
    26 1018 3:23:29
    27 1006 3:23:52
    29 1001 3:25:22
    31 1002 3:25:38
    32 4540 3:26:06
    38 1005 3:27:27
    49 1004 3:30:49
    65 1011 3:33:52
    385 1009 3:57:56
    766 2765 4:23:09

    In minor defense of the ladies, it must have been god awful boring out there until some of the men caught up to them.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by KevinM
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Originally posted by Daisy
    I assume the runner in the pack had mens to chase?
    It was a women's only race.
    No it wasn't. The overall winner, Paul Smith ran 2:40:40.

    http://results.eternaltiming.com/event/NWM2008
    Never mind . . . .

    (Fooled by the name of the race: The Nike Women's Marathon!)

    Leave a comment:


  • KevinM
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Originally posted by Daisy
    I assume the runner in the pack had mens to chase?
    It was a women's only race.
    No it wasn't. The overall winner, Paul Smith ran 2:40:40.

    http://results.eternaltiming.com/event/NWM2008

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Originally posted by Daisy
    I assume the runner in the pack had mens to chase?
    It was a women's only race.
    Wow, how far ahead of the "non-elite" runners was she? It must have been like a time trial for her.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    I assume the runner in the pack had mens to chase?
    It was a women's only race.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    How are they supposed to divine where this "faster" person is and stay 20 minutes ahead of them?
    I agree this is only fair. The problem comes when they designate who is elite. In addition, I assume the runner in the pack had mens to chase?

    Having said that, to win from the pack is impressive and to not recognise that with some sort of ad hoc prize is pretty lame. Could have been great PR instead of bad PR.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    While meet management certainly handled the PR aspects of this poorly, I've got to say I see nothing wrong with the two-races-in-one-concept. Particularly if you feel the need to use differential starting times, which certainly isn't uncommon.

    I think that those in the front group should be racing with the comfort that if nobody passes them, then they win. For the front-group winner (or "winner" if you prefer) to discover that they lost to somebody who finished 9 minutes behind them makes no sense to me. How are they supposed to divine where this "faster" person is and stay 20 minutes ahead of them?

    Leave a comment:


  • malmo
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Nike apparently relents, sort of.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 13MAIT.DTL

    And since when did news of a recent marathon not rate Current Events status, and get dumped over to Things Not T&F??
    as soon as Malmo turned it into one of his USATF hate-fests.
    I see, anyone who isn't fawning over gross incompetence is a hater? Grow up. Are you threatened by the idea that the days of cronyism at USATF might be over?

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy
    Nike apparently relents, sort of.

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 13MAIT.DTL

    And since when did news of a recent marathon not rate Current Events status, and get dumped over to Things Not T&F??
    as soon as Malmo turned it into one of his USATF hate-fests.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X