Jump to content

Talk:Marathon world record progression/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Discussion

This page need work! It implies that before Paula Radcliffe the world record was over 3 hours for women... Kokiri 11:27, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Check this out: Marathonguide. Kokiri 11:30, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Was a work in progress, it should be complete now, thanks for the help, it was taking some time to complete. Please fix any errors, there are a few town's that I didn't know which country they were in, I took a guess and put question marks around them. Please correct or confirm if anyone knows. Tridy 04:45, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"South Korea" in 35/47

I understand the political sensitivities here, but we have the record holders from 1935 and 1947 as being from "South Korea", a state that did not exist at the time. Historical lists like these usually use contemporary place names (for instance, Sergey Popov is listed as being from the Soviet Union, rather than Russia). Can we just use "Korea" or some such term? Or "Japanese-occupied Korea" for the first? --Jfruh (talk) 19:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I changed the reference for Sohn Kee-chung to the "Empire of Japan", and the 1947 reference to "South Korea" seems to be perfectly correct. Conscious 08:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
South Korea wasn't formally constituted until 1948. There seems to have been some sort of provisional government under US occupation as early as 1945, though.. --Jfruh (talk) 13:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Chronology

Sequence of dates in 1909 looks funny: February, May, then February again. GregorB (talk) 21:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

The second February date was wrong: it was May 26, in fact. GregorB (talk) 21:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

World best?

Why is this world best and not world record? I was under the impression that a world best was for "unofficial" events yet the IAAF seem to list this at a world record[1]. What's going on here? Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 20:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I think inertia is what's going on here. From Marathon: "World records were not officially recognized by the IAAF until January 1, 2004; previously, the best times for the marathon were referred to as the 'world best'." As best as I can tell, this article predates 1/1/04 and just was never changed to "record" instead of "best". I'm unaware of any reason not to move it. -- Jonel (Speak to me) 20:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Inertia indeed! 2004 is an eon ago in Wikipedia terms. I've moved it to a title more in line with similar articles (e.g. World record progression 100 metres). Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 01:36, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I've having second thoughts. The whole "World record progression X" phrasing is odd: surely "X world record progression" is more natural? And the alternate can be the redirect? I'm going to the Olympics WikiProject to ask. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits) 01:38, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Adrienne Beames

Unless we can find a reliable source that contradicts the current reference at [2], I'm reluctant to change the table to add Adrienne Beames' 1971 time. I'm not sure why Beames isn't listed at the runtheplanet site, but note that the article [3] says that the course Beames ran was suspected of being short. — Myasuda (talk) 02:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've just started the article on Adrienne Beames. The previous article you mentioned states that that Beames time was posted "on a course suspected to be short"[4] and another states "[Beames'] time has been queried by some statisticians because of doubts over the length of the course."[5] I can find no primary references for who actually thought the course was short. I also found comments in a newsgroup that claimed that she may have been a Rosie Ruiz who fabricated her results.[6] On the other hand, many others believe that her time wasn't properly recognized due to the prejudices towards women's marathoning at the time. Nevertheless, there are plenty of quality references who cite that Beames were the first to go sub-3. I think the proper way to address the issue is as Benyo and Henderson have in their "Running Encyclopedia" - show both and make note of the controversy.[7] Location (talk) 17:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The basic problem here is there was no body sanctioning records until recently in this event. That should be probably a bit clearer in the article. So, many of the "records" - which in itself is somewhat misleading as no one was in a position to declare marks for most of the time as "records" - really were just the best times done over a more-or-less standard distance. Even the fabled Boston Marathon was run for a good number of years on a course when later officially measured was found to be short.

So, while I accept for simplicity's sake we should call this page a "world record progression" list, strictly speaking it isn't. Therefore some of these issues should be more clearly addressed. Derek Clayton's 1969 "world record" has long been questioned as to actual distance covered, for example.

What I did on the mile progression page was to simply list the various progressions claimed before the IAAF started to ratify the distance for men in 1912 and women in 1967. With the mile there was no real dispute over the distance measured, but there was a distinction made between amateur and professional racing. So, there are separate lists there, and separate progressions where other sources list them.

So, Beames certainly should be listed as some sources list her. I also am sure that other sources might have alternate record progressions. For one thing, since the distance wasn't standardized until, I think, 1928, there is no agreed-upon rationale for what a "record" should have been before that time. The fastest time run, no matter the actual distance? The fastest time in a race run at least over 42.195km? noting those clearly superior performances over greater distance as "records"? Or strictly performances over that precise distance (which often wasn't accurate measured)? And this doesn't even get into the other thorny issues of point-to-point vs loop courses, issues of terrain, and mixed-raced competitions for women. Canada Jack (talk) 18:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I like how the German wiki has it set-up http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marathonlauf#Frauen_3 Location (talk) 14:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I've updated the women's table with the information and layout from the German wiki. I hope to eventually do this with the men's table, too. Hopefully this layout will address some of Canada Jack's points. Location (talk) 23:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

References added, some clean-up

I've taken the liberty of adding in-line references to some of these marks. I aware that a lot of these times come from the Chicago marathon website, but it seems prudent to seek time confirmations from some of the recognized authorities here, in particular, the IOC, the IAAF and publications like Track and Field News. I don't think that the Chicago race site really qualifies as they aren't considered one of the authorities on ratification etc.

Some things to be addressed. A lot of times are shown here to the tenth of a second. But though some races were recorded at the level of time precision, the authorities, when showing record progressions, generally show times to the second reflecting the relative non-precision of the courses in question. The precise times, in other words, imply a level of precision as to the distance run which in many cases was not present.

Another problem with the page is its lack of clarity of the subject of the distance of the marathon. The standard distance comes from the 1908 Olympic marathon, as is noted, however, what is not noted is the distance the earlier marathon run was and what the distances of the races run until the standard was set. It might be a good idea to create a more comprehensive progression (if sources exist) which specify distance/times until the standard was set, as insisting on only the 42.195 distance is a post-facto approach. Might be an idea to have a set of generic "marathon" records and a separate progression of records over the precise 42.195 distance starting with the 1908 Olympic race. That may be what is here already (save for the 1896 record) but as it stands, it is ambiguous. It should be specified. Anyway, just a few ideas for discussion. Canada Jack (talk) 14:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I've updated the tables to mimic what was found in the marathon page of the German wiki. Times over the now official 42.195 are aligned to the left; times over other distances are aligned to the right. The next question I have is which results over the non-standardized distance should be listed? Per Wiki policy, must there be a source stating it is a world best or world record, or is it enough to find a faster time that works? For example, I found a New York Times article to verify that Robert Fowler ran 2:52:45 2-5 in Yonkers, NY on January 1, 2009, however, I found another NY Times articles stating that he ran 2:42:55 in Boston about one week later on January 9, 2009 over 26 miles, 386 yards (although the official Boston Marathon guide shows Henri Renaud winning in 1909). The second source states a time that would appear to be a world best by this table, but the source does not claim it is a world record. Location (talk) 20:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

This looks pretty good, but the columns should be clearer - it is not obvious that "records" are flush left, non-records, or non-standard distances etc are flush right. Again, the problem here is that there were no "records" per se until quite recently. So it is not surprising there will be alternate record progressions. Might simply spell this out in the intro. Not sure there is a need to note that point-to-point times were not recognized by TAC - for one, TAC was a national, not international body. For another, there was no "official" criteria for marathon records until recently.

The explanations take up too much room and make the table unwieldy, IMHO, might try to use footnotes instead. As for sources... this has always been the bane... The New York Times is a great source, but they aren't an "official" source for Track. On the 100 m page, someone saw fit to make the page worthy of "good article" status by putting in references to a progression list found in the New York Times. Problem there was a) they only listed athletes who surpassed the record, omitting the numerous ties (who were all record-holders) and b) saw fit to express records to the hundredth of a second even when records were ratified to 1/4, 1/5 and 1/10th of a second. IOW, we need to ensure we have references as close to the authorities as possible, such as the IAAF and IOC. We have that here in some cases, but a lot of times are reproduced from sites with no particular mantle of authority, even if what they say is accurate. Canada Jack (talk) 01:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I may not have a chance to address all of it right away. Regarding reliable sources and the need for "references to be as close to the authorities as possible", earlier today I found an online copy of a newspaper article written in 2001. The writer stated that Johnny Miles, who won the 1926 Boston Marathon winner in a time of 2:25:40, "destroyed [Albin] Stenroos' 1924 Olympic and world record of 2:41:22 by almost 16 minutes."[8] I would venture to guess that the writer simply compared the two times and declared that a world record was set without any regard to the course distance. Location (talk) 04:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your point regarding column alignment, the wording is a bit clumsy and may not fit every example but I've added the following: "The progression of times recognized as world bests or world records over the now official distance of 42.195 kilometers are in bold; those times reported over non-standard distances are in italics." Regarding TAC, the Boston times are included in some progressions and not others, and the German wiki pointed out (as you alluded to earlier) that they and others were point-to-point courses. Wanting to give the reader some explanation, the reference to the TAC was the only thing close to an appropriate cite that I could find in my brief search. I'll see what I can do regarding footnotes vs. smaller text/more concise wording in the explanation boxes. Location (talk) 05:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Might give a rundown of the various disputes on what was a "standard" marathon given the above. I know that for years many statisticians would not consider a point-to-point course (like Boston) as a candidate for a record. If memory serves, the start needed to be within 2km of the start. Further, there were "standards" for elevation changes per mile (again, this disqualified Boston as it has a net drop of something like 500 m). I am not sure what the criteria is now. Canada Jack (talk) 14:34, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Another point, and this is something which can be addressed once we can find unimpeachable sources to replace some of the "unofficial" websites, and that is we really shouldn't be relying on contemporary descriptions of races as an indication of record status. Contemporary accounts are, of course, of great interest, but as an indication of a record, I'd hesitate to use them instead of "official" compilations which have, presumably, vetted various record claims. After all, it is not The Times who made any "official" declaration of a record, it is the various track authorities, such as they were. Canada Jack (talk) 14:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Format

I currently have two authorities on what is a world best or world record:

1) The IAAF's list here: http://www.iaaf.org/mm/document/competitions/competition/05/15/63/20090706014834_httppostedfile_p345-688_11303.pdf (pages 565 and 653)
2) The Association of Road Racing Statisticians' list here: http://www.arrs.net/RecProg/RP_wwR.htm

The strange thing about the IAAF's "pre-official" list is that they note Grete Waitz's "records" on the short course at NYC, however, they do not note Alberto Salazar's "record" on the same course. And, of course, they have included Coleman's performance on the short course. The ARRS list is more consistent in ruling out short courses.

I've got the IAAF "pre-official" performances in light blue and the ratified performances in a darker blue - all are aligned to the left. All others, including the discrepancies on the ARRS list, are aligned to the left. Any comments on how to align, bold, or italicize to make note of the IAAF's "errors"? Location (talk) 19:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Omigod.... You have found what I have been hoping for for several years - a definitive list FROM THE IAAF - of world record progressions!!!!!! As for the "short course" discrepancy, I thought Salazar ran in '81, Waitz in '80. So that New Zealand record-setter on the woman's side in '81 (I forget her name) is not on the IAAF list.
There is a small explanation of what criteria the IAAF are using for the marks - check out the start of the road-running progressive lists. Here's a suggestion on how to proceed - make a note of the IAAF progression list and at the top state their criteria. Then, for marks that are a) not on the list but are elsewhere, indicate those marks aren't noted by the IAAF, and also note that b) some marks are not accepted by other running authorities. Normally, we'd ignore those "other authorities," as there is ONE authority, the IAAF, since 1912. But in the case of this event, they weren't ratifying marks until quite recently.
Just gotta say it's absolutely fabulous you've posted this IAAF link! Because now we can with authority cite marks on the various progression pages. Do me a favour - I sorta built the men's mile page and the men's 100 m page - let me update those, and you can start on this page and others if you so desire! Canada Jack (talk) 21:05, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
To give credit where credit is due, I used your 100 m format here. The aforementioned link appears to be the second part of a statistics handbook published for the upcoming World Championships. In case you are interested, here are both parts together: Part IPart II. You'll have to change the pages where necessary, but here is the footnote I created if it helps save you time... [1]
Regarding 1981 NYC, it appears that both Salazar and Roe both set what were initially thought to be world bests, then the course was remeasured as short. Understandably, the IAAF would not recognize those performances as world bests. The ARRS takes it one step further and says that because of that, the course was also suspect for the five races preceding that - the period in which Waitz set three bests. Either the IAAF did not pick-up on that or they did not agree because they recognize Waitz's performances.
Regarding "for marks that are a) not on the list but are elsewhere, indicate those marks aren't noted by the IAAF", would it be sufficient to leave them unshaded or should I use the same reddish shade you used on the 100 m progression? Location (talk) 21:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I can't take credit for the shadings and as for the actual table construction, I usually screw up when I try to change a table format. But some form of shading would be the likely solution here IMHO, the left-right justifying isn't instantly obvious as denoting whatever we are trying to denote. Thanks for the footnote... Canada Jack (talk) 22:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I've put in the reddish shading. In the notes section, I've tried to help explain the alternate progressions with some footnoted explanations but I'm not sure how accurate the term "disputed" really is in this context. Location (talk) 04:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
  1. ^ "12th IAAF World Championships In Athletics: IAAF Statistics Handbook. Berlin 2009" (pdf). Monte Carlo: IAAF Media & Public Relations Department. 2009. pp. Pages 546, 563, 565, 651, and 653. Retrieved July 29, 2009.

Polytechnic Marathon

The ARRS progression notes a number of world bests set at the Chiswick to Windsor Polytechnic Marathon (1926W, 1952M, and 1953M) yet it ignores a number of others (1954M, 1963M, 1964M, 1965M). Just like Boston, their records note Polytechnic as a point-to-point course, so I'm wondering why they would accept the first three performances as world bests but not the last four. There are also no notes about the course being short on any of those years: [9]. Does anyone have any ideas why this inconsistency exists? Location (talk) 04:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Names removed from list

I am removing Kenneth McArthur from the list. Although he was reported to have set an Olympic record in the marathon, I can find no source stating that he ever held a world best or world record in the marathon. This makes perfect sense as his 2:36:55 at the 1912 Summer Olympics was set on a course that was only 40.2 km: [10]. Location (talk) 04:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Albin Stenroos from the list. Although he was reported to have set an Olympic record in the marathon, I can find no authoritative source stating that he ever held a world best or world record in the marathon. Although his 2:41:22.6 at the 1924 Summer Olympics was set on a 42.195 km course, prior to that there were at least three other faster performances on courses the same distance.[11]. Location (talk) 05:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Boughera El Ouafi from the list. Although he probably set an Olympic record in the marathon (since Hannes Kolehmainen's 1920 performance was set on a course believed to be short), I can find no source stating that he ever held a world best or world record in the marathon. Location (talk) 19:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Juan Carlos Zabala from the list. Although he was reported to have set an Olympic record in the marathon[http://www.yebbo.com/sydneyolympic/MARATHON/Olympic_History/olympic_history.html, I can find no source stating that he ever held a world best or world record in the marathon. Location (talk) 19:48, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Ellison Brown from the list. I have no authoritative sources stating that he held a world best or record in the marathon; that includes the BAA who does not acknowledge that he set a world record on the Boston course. There are some interesting factoids about Brown's performance on pages 194 to 197 in Ellison "Tarzan" Brown: The Narragansett Indian Who Twice Won the Boston Marathon by Michael Ward: Google books. It appears that writers in major US newspapers declared Brown had set a world record while ignoring, dismissing, or being completely unaware of the faster Japanese/Korean performances. Ward's book does serve as another good reference for Albert Michelsen's performance. Location (talk) 21:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Gérard Côté from the list. I have no authoritative sources stating that he held a world best or record in the marathon; that includes the BAA who does not acknowledge that he set a world record on the Boston course. I do have a 1941 blurb from Time and Ward states on page 278 in Ellison "Tarzan" Brown: The Narragansett Indian Who Twice Won the Boston Marathon that Côté performance was a world record but this is only 80 pages after acknowledging that the three Japanese/Korean performances in 1935. Location (talk) 21:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Joe Smith from the list. I have no authoritative sources stating that he held a world best or record in the marathon; that includes the BAA who does not acknowledge that he set a world record on the Boston course. I do have a blurb from a Milano Senior Center in Melrose, Massachusetts that would serve as a good place to start an article on him. Location (talk) 21:51, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Jack Holden (athlete) from the list. I have no sources stating that he held a world best or a world record in the marathon and one from the ARRS stating the course was short.[12] Location (talk) 22:17, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Salomon Könönen and Veikko Karvonen from the list. I have no sources stating that either one held a world best in the marathon. Location (talk) 05:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I am removing Antti Viskari and Franjo Mihalic from the list. I have no sources stating that either one held a world best in the marathon. It should probably be noted someplace that Viskari was initially thought to have set a world best at Boston, then the course was remeasured 1,100 yards short. Location (talk) 05:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Stamata Revithi

Stamata Revithi ran the marathon course the day after Louis' victory in 1896 as a protest at women not being allowed enter. She finished in about 5:30:00 - should she be added to the top of the women's list? EamonnPKeane (talk) 18:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Good find. I have not seen her name listed in the progressions of any road racing authorities, however, I think it would be appropriate to briefly mention her story in the article. On the men's side, I think the same should go for Spiridon Louis - he should be mentioned in the preceding article, but not actually in the list. Location (talk) 19:02, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

About Fusashige Suzuki's record (another IAAF error)

I live in Japan,and I have watched Japanese newspaper and books.Then,I noticed the following fact.

1. In Tokyo,no marathon race was held on March 31,1935.
2. 10 days before,a marathon race was held.In this race Suzuki ran 2:27:49.But this course was unofficial.And in this race,Sohn Kee-chung won 2:26:14,Suzuki was 2nd.（Reference;Japanese newspaperYomiuri shimbun,March 22,1935)

I don't know why Suzuki's record was considered "official world record",but I think that it should be corrected based on the fact.125.195.235.191 (talk) 14:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

As discussed previously, their have been no "official world records" until recently. Suzuki's mark is noted because it is listed by an authoritative road racing source: the IAAF (see page 565 here). The Wiki article notes that the IAAF list is indicated in blue with alternative progressions noted by other road racing authorities or sources in pink. If you have a source that indicates contradictory information, please note it so it can be worked into the footnotes. (I have done this with Henry Barrett's May 8, 1909 performance - the IAAF indicates that the date of his race was May 26, 2009, however, a newspaper clipping indicates from May 9, 1909 indicates that the race was the previous day. I'm inclined to believe that primary source.) Location (talk) 15:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
By the way, I've seen a source or two refer to the Sohn Kee-chung/Son Kitei 2:26:42 performance as occurring on 03/11/1935 (March 11, 1935 in US date notation) where most seem to indicate 11/03/1935 (November 3, 1935 in US date notation). That would surely influence the "true" progression. Location (talk) 15:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Confirming what the previous editor has asserted, the Association of Road Racing Statisticians indicates that Sohn Kee-chung/Son Kitei ran a 2:26:14 (1st) and Fusashige Suzuki ran a 2:27:49 (2nd) on March 21, 1935... not March 31, 1935. It appears that the IAAF has another error in their progression; this time they've credited a second place finisher (on what some have suggested is a short course) with a world best! Location (talk) 00:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Pietri in 1910 in Buenos Aires

In Dorando Pietri's article, in an on-line biography, and on a site about the history of the marathon in Buenos Aires, Pietri is said to have won a marathon in Buenos Aires on May 24, 1910, in a time of 2:38:49 (or 2:38:48.2). This would have been a world's best until May 1913. The race may have been short. Perhaps someone can find the specifics and add them here, as well as explain it in the Pietri article. The articles now contradict each other. Afasmit (talk) 04:16, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Sohn Kee-Chung

For an encore, according to his article, Sohn Kee-Chung had a personal best of 2:25:14, presumably run in the 1930s, which would have been a world best until 1952. Unfortunately, according to our wikpedia article, the course was 500 m too long. Now I can understand a record not counting on a short course, but the other way around seems cruelly unfair. The text in the Sohn Kee-Chung article is unsourced, and I can't find an independent reference to it, so it may be made up. Perhaps someone in the know can figure this one out as well. Afasmit (talk) 05:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I had tagged that statement with {{Citation needed|date=July 2009}}, however, an IP removed the tag last week: [13]. The course was short per the Association of Road Racing Statisticians, so I will update his article. Location (talk) 16:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Marathon world record progression

For the Wikipedia regulars, this artice and Marathon will need to be watched due to Mutai's mark at Boston which was set on a non-record eligible course. Location (talk) 16:13, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, an astounding time, but many sources are already erroneously calling this a "world record" even though the Boston Athletic Association (who run the Boston Marathon) are clear that World Records can't be set here owing to the course's non-standard layout. The New York Times originally had a report calling the Mutai time a "World Record," but have now correctly noted "Mutai’s time... is not an officially recognized world record because the Boston course is not a so-called flat course." Not 100 per cent correct, but close enough... Canada Jack (talk) 18:33, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
I wonder if it would be wise in Marathon to somehow combine the "world record" section with the section explaining how certain courses are "record eligible". Location (talk) 20:51, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Paula Radcliffe

It has been widely reported that Paula Radcliffe's 2:15:25 will be stricken by the IAAF's new criterion that only performances is in women only races will be record eligible. The IAAF appears not to have released any statements on this and their website still lists the mark. Given that what the IAAF plans to do and what they have done are different things, thus far, how should the article and list report all of this? Location (talk) 22:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

My opinion: Just as I think we should list both the existing marks and the pending marks, I think we should list the mark as ratified until it officially is no longer ratified. To cite a WP policy WP:CRYSTAL. We shouldn't be predicting the future, especially when there is controversy involved. As crazy as some decisions from IAAF have been, lets report the facts of the new policy, but not act until they act. Trackinfo (talk) 22:50, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I found an article that appears to clarify the situation and cited it in the article. The faster time appears to stand as an IAAF WR until January 2012. Location (talk) 03:52, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Here is what the IAAF says:

RULE 261 To safeguard fair play and avoid the recognition of performances set by female athletes who are paced by men in mixed road races, the Congress, upon the recommendation of the Council, voted in favour of the adding the following “Note” to Rule 261 (Events for which World Records are Recognised): Road Races

“Note: World Records for women to be recognised in women only races. The IAAF shall keep a separate list of “World Best Performances” achieved in mixed Road Races.” This Note shall be in force as from 1st November 2011 and the new records, as well as the World Best Performances list shall established as part of the List of World Records which shall be published by the IAAF on 1st January 2012.

This comes from the IAAF news - newsletter , #126 September 28 2011 http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/06/26/45/62645_PDF_English.pdf

Canada Jack (talk) 17:57, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Good find. What does "This Note shall be in force as from 1st November 2011" mean? "Hey, Paula. Your 2:15:25 stands as a world record for another month, then we're going to demote it to a world best." Location (talk) 21:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Albert Raines, Henry Barrett, and May 8, 1909 (an IAAF error)

I would love a primary or secondary source of information regarding Albert Raines 2:46 performance on May 8, 1909 in New York City. The former race director of the Polytechnic Marathon states that Henry Barrett's 2:42 performance occurred on May 8, 1909, too.[14] If all of that is true, I imagine that Barrett in London finished his marathon first, so his name should precede Raines'. Location (talk) 05:38, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I have confirmed from newspaper clippings that Henry Barrett ran the Polytechnic Marathon on May 8, 1909[15] and Albert Raines ran the Bronx Marathon on May 8, 1909[16]. Consequently, the IAAF progression stating that Albert Raines held the world best mark from May 8, 1909 to May 26, 1909 is obviously incorrect. Without information indicating what times the various races started or finished, there is a remote chance that Raines in New York completed his race before Barrett in London and held the world best mark for a few hours. The more likely scenario is that Barrett in London completed his race before Raines in New York completed his - meaning that Raines never held the record. Being cautious of WP:OR, how should Wikipedia address this? Location (talk) 18:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep the progression as the IAAF states it, but include a note that states the information seems to be at odds with other published sources, otherwise this is OR. But I would also contact the IAAF as it seems you have identified an error using (close to) primary sources. Hopefully, they will eventually correct the error but we can say "You saw it at wikipedia first!" Canada Jack (talk) 18:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. See: Butler, Mark, ed. (2011). 13th IAAF World Championships In Athletics: IAAF Statistics Handbook. Daegu 2011 (pdf). Monaco: IAAF Media & Public Relations Department. p. 614. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters: |laydate=, |separator=, |trans_chapter=, |laysummary=, |chapterurl=, |month=, and |lastauthoramp= (help). Location (talk) 03:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Cool! Canada Jack (talk) 14:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Just four minutes to go?

The article could contain some discussion whether a sub-2hour marathon run is humanly possible with or without using banned boosting substances. 91.83.16.115 21:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree, especially in the light of the new 2:03:59 world record. Fig (talk) 22:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Discussion on that subject was removed by User:Montell 74 (See http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Marathon_world_record_progression&oldid=485897132. I don't see any discussion on the talk page as to why it was removed, nor was any information provided in the edit remarks. (S)he simply noted, "Reverted edits by 144.9.40.131 (talk) to last version by Hertz1888." I think it would benefit the community to get some feedback here. 144.9.56.131 (talk) 21:22, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
It appears as though the edit did not include a citation, plus speculation likely fails WP:CRYSTAL. Location (talk) 00:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
@User:Location, I'll buy lack of citation, but speculation is a specious argument at best. WP:CRYSTAL states, in part, "Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, though editors should be aware of creating undue bias to any specific point-of-view." (Emphasis mine.) On this basis, I'd argue that a properly cited reference (As guided by WP:V) to the two hour prediction is appropriate as I doubt that proposing/recording/reporting such a theory would create bias. Thoughts? 144.9.56.131 (talk) 20:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Records are made to be broken. Just as in the 4 minute mile prediction of what was humanly possible was proven to be out of line, whatever anybody says on the subject now ultimately will only have one proof. The only question is whether any of us will still be be here to see it when that happens. Trackinfo (talk) 04:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Marathon world record progression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:40, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Suggest deletion or further modification of race of 18 April 2011.

As an inexperienced editor I have modified the sentence shown in in its new form below. This sentence appears in the History section of the article.

"On April 18, 2011, Geoffrey Mutai of Kenya ran the second fastest marathon ever in a time of 2:03:02, albeit on the Boston course, which does not meet the criteria for record attempts.[38] Countryman Moses Mosop ran the third fastest time ever (2:03:06) on the same course and day as Mutai."

I have modified it only by changing Mutai to second fastest (from fastest) and Mosop to third fastest (from second fastest) in light of Kimetto's new world record of 28 September 2014. I would suggest that this sentence is no longer of such prominence since it no longer records the two fastest marathons ever. Whether it should be deleted entirely, or perhaps modified to more eloquently record this point in marathon history, I leave to those more experienced on this topic (and Wikipedia in general). User:Cicero UK

The material is important in that Mutai's mark was the world's fastest marathon but not a world record, the first time that had happened since the IAAF began recognizing world records in the marathon. Rather than rank them in accordance with today's mark, the sentences should probably be reworded to state that Mutai's and Mosop's marks were the two fastest at that time. -Location (talk) 17:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I take your point regarding the importance of the event. I have rewritten the paragraph accordingly today Cicero UK (talk) 12:31, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marathon world record progression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Marathon world record progression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:24, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Men's 'mixed gender' world record

Who currently holds the Men's 'Mixed Gender' World Record and what is it currently? Also, has the Men's 'Mixed Gender' World Record been slower or faster than the 'Men Only' World Record over time? Synesthetic (talk) 21:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

The distinction is for races where a person of the other gender potentially paces a runner to a record, not for a race which is of mixed gender. There are no instances of a woman pacing a man to a world record/best time, so there is no separate record. On the women's side this was often the case, so the distinction has been made. Canada Jack (talk) 20:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Interesting, so if a woman paced a man for part of the race to a World Record they would need to create a Men's 'Mixed Gender' World Record. In long-distance swimming competitions, the fastest competitors are female. I wonder if they have a Men's 'Mixed Gender' World Record for their sport. Synesthetic (talk) 21:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
It seems it is more from the fact that there are pacers who are possibly not in the race. For example, what would happen if a woman from the tail end of a previous race paced a woman to a world record? Would it be considered the 'Women Only' World Record or 'Mixed Gender' World Record or another category? Perhaps the fastest time run by a woman should be the World Record and the fastest time without any kind of pacers could be a separate World Record without Pacers - like the World Record without Shoes and Socks. Synesthetic (talk) 21:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
This article reflects what the IAAF has to say on this, so you'll have to bring it up with them. I don't get the example you are offering because I've never seen a woman jump in and pace another woman to a world record... and it wouldn't be allowed anyway. Similarly, the half marathon record for a woman is a shade under 1:05 and I imagine in April of 2017 there are now hundreds of men who have hit that time in their marathon splits. Women aren't pacing elite men to records. If any of this were based in reality - rather than hypotheticals - the IAAF would have it covered.-Location (talk) 21:56, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
The woman would be from an earlier race on the same course. Women could pace men if they were in the earlier race and the men caught up to them. If there was a robot pacer in the Men's race when the fastest time was run, would it be a 'Men-Robot' World Record? What if it's some dude driving a motorcycle who is 'pacing' the runner. Can't the runner figure out how fast they go by seeing where they are and checking their watch? Maybe there should be a separate No Watch World Record. It seems unfair to only divide the women's record into two - one with pacers and one without pacers. The men use pacers too - either male, female or simply watch, brain and eye. Synesthetic (talk) 22:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
I will review the IAAF rules for robot pacers then get back to you. -Location (talk) 22:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Yeah you do that. Synesthetic (talk) 23:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
You might as well make the world record a World Record with Fans Encouraging Runners On. What is the true World Record with no fans alongside the course talking to the runners? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synesthetic (talk • contribs) 23:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
You might want to articulate your point better because you lost me at robots. -Location (talk) 23:28, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Why am I not surprised? Synesthetic (talk) 00:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

2:00:25

Two thoughts: 1) Amazing! I didn't think they would get that close. 2) Should this be mentioned in the "History" section after Mutai's Boston mark? Although this mark was not set in competition, the article does refer to a number of other time trials. Using my crystal ball, what was learned from this performance might affect how truly competitive races are run. ATTN: Hertz1888, Canada Jack, et al. -Location (talk) 13:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I think we can refer to it in the lede as the fastest time over the distance but not eligible for record consideration (see History). This mark can't be ignored - it's incredible, no matter the circumstances. Maybe in 2030 - not now! Wow. Canada Jack (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Not much I can add. I agree with Location and Canada Jack on all the above as to how this can be handled editorially. What a superb machine (in the best sense) the athlete must be to achieve such a time, even with pacing and a totally flat "course"! Hertz1888 (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Needs an update. Record just broken. Almost broke the 2 hour barrier: http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2017/05/06/kipchoge-runs-fastest-marathon-ever?via=desktop&source=copyurl — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.239.214.11 (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

A great performance but not record-eligible. Hertz1888 (talk) 19:49, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Marathon world record progression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Marathon world record progression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:47, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

12th October 2019

Tthe 12th October 2019 Eliud Kipchoge's sub-2-hour marathon distance run is NOT eligible for an IAAF world record. It was ran under special conditions, with a crew of rotating pacemakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1028:83AE:FB2:C016:A571:5A3B:A547 (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Sections are displaying in the wrong order

In the History section, I see the men's record progression table incorrectly shown under the "Women" heading. However, when I click Edit to go and fix this, the sections are in the correct order in the source. Does anyone else see this? I can't figure out what is going on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:4B91:AB00:7189:5B69:C75:1CF9 (talk) 19:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Fixed by adding a missing table end.[17] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

First section

The article states "Road racing events like the marathon were specifically excepted from IAAF rule 260 18(d) that rejected from consideration those track and field performances set in mixed competition"

Is the word excepted here meant to be accepted or exempted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.214.167 (talk) 20:07, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

The word excepted here meant to be exempted-preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.214.167 (talk) 20:07,22 April 2018Evangcherry (talk) 13:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)Evangcherry (talk) 13:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Should list shoe models?

For the last couple of years the choice of shoes has become quite significant. I think we should consider tracking the model of shoe used in a record. 2001:9E8:148E:2800:FE:D627:610B:D173 (talk) 12:40, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Women's records?

As an unfamiliar reader, I can't tell if Tigst Assefa now holds both records? The follow paragraph seems to state that World Athletics recognizes the other two records, but not Assefa's?

World Athletics recognizes two world records for women, a time of 2:14:04 set by Brigid Kosgei on October 13, 2019, during the Chicago Marathon, which was contested by men and women together, and a "Women Only" record of 2:17:01, set by Mary Keitany, on April 23, 2017, at the London Marathon for women only. On September 24, 2023, Tigst Assefa broke both those records by finishing the 2023 Berlin Marathon with a time of 2:11:53.

Chris vLS (talk) 22:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Your confusion is warranted - Berlin was a mixed race, men and women, so that statement is simply wrong. Assefa broke the mixed-race record, but didn't break the women's only record. Canada Jack (talk) 22:47, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marathon_world_record_progression/Archive_1&oldid=1216518432"