IAAF Decides To Keep Radcliffe's Record.

posted by stephaniemp, a Women Talk Sports blogger
Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 10:20am EST

About stephaniemp:

Activist for women's equality in sport and in life; free sample & Women Talk Sports lover; National Champion steepler; All-American xc runner; fun haver....more

Support women's sports and SHARE this story with your friends!

In September, the IAAF decided that female athletes could no longer set world records if they race, or are paced, by men. I shared my thoughts on this matter, suggesting that the ruling may "force" women to pace other women, ultimately creating a stronger community within women's distance running. Hey, why not take the decision that these men have made and turn it around on them? On the other hand, I could not find any benefit to the IAAF's decision to strip women of records they earned while racing with men prior to the ruling. Such athletes included Paula Radcliffe, the British marathon runner who ran 2:15:25 at the London Marathon in 2003, and Deena Kastor who set the American record (2:19:36) in London in 2006.

Nike created T-shirts that stated "History Stands," and posters that say "You can change the rules, but you can't change history," to show their support for Radcliffe. Facebook was all abuzz with support for these women and were clear that the ruling was unfair...and pretty ridiculous.

Well, it turns out that you can change rules...and then change them again. News broke yesterday (November 9th) that the IAAF has decided to keep Paula Radcliffe's marathon record. No word has been said about Kastor's record.

Although this is great news for all the female athletes who can officially reclaim their record, there has been not much talk about the other half of the ban. How will women runners hoping to set records from this point on deal with having to compete in women-only races? Will more women-only events pop up around the world? Will more women choose to become pacers? Will the women's distance running community grow closer or will this ruling truly hurt women's distance running? In the upcoming years we should see the results of these changes. I hope, the results are positive.

Support women's sports and SHARE this story with your friends!

This article was written by a WomenTalkSports.com contributor. Sign up here to start publishing your own women's sports content.

View stephaniemp's Full Profile

There are 4 comments on this post. Join the discussion!

BBrothers says:

Nike's T-shirts should have stated "Whining Works". It is on the record that women in mixed marathons paced by men average times about two minutes better than women in women's races with women's pacers or in races without pacers. That's a fact. The IAAF was trying to level the field because current and future women marathoners won't have the advantage of male pacers. It's a big deal in spite of Radcliffe claiming that she was so far into "the zone" that she would have performed the same without the male pacers. Frankly that isn't what an objective review of the facts and history indicate. So it would be cool if you would allow some reality into the discussion instead of focusing on the drama of it all.

In an era in which woman only start times are becoming more common how do you motivate world class women marathoners when anyone that understands the situation gets that this world record was assisted in a way that is no longer even allowed?

It would be cool if a female world class marathoner would weigh in on the issue. If I was a world class women's middle or long distance athlete and knew that I had a built in two minute disadvantage to get into world record territory I'd look for something other than the marathon to compete in.

Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 10:44am EST

stephaniemp says:

So in other words, you're saying that there is no way for a woman to run a world record time solo?

Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 10:53am EST

cels21 says:

Yeah for Radcliffe! Since the IAAF is splitting hairs, why aren't they concerned about the men running the NYC Marathon behind the women? They started well after the women,and won't catch them, but you know the men are thinking, "I wonder how much I can close the gap" Certainly that is pushing them harder as well..just sayin..

Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 11:09am EST

BBrothers says:

That's not what I said. I'm saying that it's going to be a hellava lot tougher for contemporary women marathoners if the are giving up two full minutes to times from the Radcliffe record era.

I imagine that eventually some woman will beat Radcliffe's time although current performances are well off her record.

I'm sure some guys get motivated by passing female runners although being professionally paced by another world class athlete is an entirely different scenario which is exactly why they don't allow the male pacers any more even though they let Radcliffe keep her record.

I think it's OK, just much ado about nothing. It did however give Nike a change to print up some shirts and posters and probably sell some more stuff.

Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 6:28pm EST

SIGNUP FOR A WOMEN TALK SPORTS ACCOUNT:

A Women Talk Sports account allows you to maintain a profile at www.womentalksports.com and login to comment on posts using your WTS identity.

Fields marked with a * are required.

Your First Name*:

Your Last Name*:

Your E-mail*:

Your Website:

Your Location:

Your Twitter Username:

Create a WTS Username*:

Create a Password*:

Confirm Password*:

Check here to receive bi-weekly emails from Women Talk Sports and partners highlighting discussions on our site and upcoming women's sporting events, as well as informing you of new products, services and special offers.

I accept the Terms & Conditions for joining Women Talk Sports

IAAF Decides To Keep Radcliffe's Record.

More from this author: