I brought attention to this travesty on my Facebook page, and the outcries of “bullshit!” were so paramount, I thought it needed a bigger discussion forum.
Did you see this NY Times article on Wednesday?
For Women’s Road Records, No Men Allowed
In short, the powers that be (the IAAF) have made a decision that “records in women’s road racing will count only if they are set in women’s-only events, to nullify the benefits of pacesetting by faster male runners.“
Yeah, you read that right. So Paula Radcliffe’s 2:15:25 world record in London 2003 is now null and void because it was a mixed race. It will now be called a “world best” not a “world record.” I guess as long as the elite women start at enough of a different time as the men, then it’s okay. But, if they are all running together, apparently women get an unfair advantage from faster pacers who have penises.
I never understood the outcry that a race time was unfair just because someone was paced by someone else. It’s not like they were picked up and carried, or pulled by their hair or put on horseback by someone else. They still ran the damn race on their own two feet, the required distance. If someone who is running near them provided inspiration and set a pace that prompted faster speed, so be it.
Plus, if this so-called pacing is such an advantage, one could argue that all women in that race have the same conditions: they all have faster men to pace off of, so it should be an equal playing field.
However, when it comes to world records, the IAAF thinks that the extra bonus provided by male pacers muddies the race results and makes them non-legit.
What do you think of the new rules? Reasonable or outrageous?
Is it ethical to strip someone of their world record after the fact?
Is there anything about this that makes sense?