t-and-f: Naoko Takahashi interview after Berlin
Here is the excerpts from Naoko Takahashi's interview after she became the first woman to run under magical 2:20 barrier in the marathon in Berlin (from Asahi newspaper) Where did you thought you will set the record. Naoko: When I went through the half way, I thought sub 2:20 was possible. Was there any difficult moment during the race? Naoko: It was the great course. Because of the help I got from my pacers and guards it was easy to run. The rain also kept my body from overheating. However, head wind bothered me. Even as the course wind through the street of Berlin, the wind was always against me. We heard you trained extremely hard. How much distance did you run? Naoko: Even on the long training day, it was no more than 70-80Km a day. I knew that if I don't do this training, good results will not follow. Koide: Our goal was to run 2:18:32. However, because of the head wind during the first 5Km, I think she lost 20 seconds. Naoko: The final 2Km was very hard for me. Koide: If she train for the final 2Km, then she can cut another 1 minute from the record. Now, I would like to solicit opinions (which this list is never short on). What is the significance of first sub 2:20? Now that Takahashi became the first to break 2:20 in addition to being the reigning Olympic champion. What is her place in the all-time great list, say compared to Mota, Benoit, Waitz or Kristiansen. She is far ahead of her comtemporary, but what about compared to the best of the past? K. Ken Nakamura
Re: t-and-f: Naoko Takahashi interview after Berlin
I read the interview Ken kindly sent along. It I saw: "It was the great course. Because of the help I got from my pacers > and guards it was easy to run. " Then Ken asks, Now, I would like to solicit opinions (which this list is never short on). What is the significance of first sub 2:20? I think the list will comment on the use of pacers and guards. Is such use really racing? Or do we see the sub 2:20 as an interesting time trial and Takahashi's Olympic victory as a "real" race. Those are my unguarded remarks. Tom Derderian
Re: t-and-f: Naoko Takahashi interview after Berlin
> What is the significance of first sub 2:20? > > I think the list will comment on the use of pacers and guards. Is such use > really racing? Or do we see the sub 2:20 as an interesting time trial and > Takahashi's Olympic victory as a "real" race. > Those are my unguarded remarks. We view the sub-2:20 as what it is - the fastest time ever by a woman. A great accomplishment. Should we keep separate lists for mixed gender races, women's only races, and maybe even semi-women's only races like London? Sure, if people will read them. I'd look at them and move on to reading the results of competitions, where margins of victory, notable names, and race reports keep my interest a whole lot better. I'd be a lot more excited watching or hearing about a marathon with 5 lead changes in the last mile than I would about a woman running 2:19. They are both great "races" however. I certainly don't feel the need to place a value judgement on which is "better". But that's me - I've been called weird before. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: Naoko Takahashi interview after Berlin
Since there is no world record at stake, I don't think there is any issue with the result. What interested me more, was her training distances. There are a lot of mixed races, in which women can be paced by men and vice versa. We also see the Golden League and other Grand Prix events on the track, where there are more than one pacemaker, and we don't even blink an eye at the practice. The only worry I have with track pacemaking is that it's often unknown to the track spectators. If it's good enough for TV commentators to know that a pacemaker is in a race with certain instructions, then the paying spectators should also be told by ground announcers. FWIW *** > What is the significance of first sub 2:20? > > I think the list will comment on the use of pacers and guards. Is such use > really racing? Or do we see the sub 2:20 as an interesting time trial and > Takahashi's Olympic victory as a "real" race. > Those are my unguarded remarks. We view the sub-2:20 as what it is - the fastest time ever by a woman. A great accomplishment. Should we keep separate lists for mixed gender races, women's only races, and maybe even semi-women's only races like London? Sure, if people will read them. I'd look at them and move on to reading the results of competitions, where margins of victory, notable names, and race reports keep my interest a whole lot better. I'd be a lot more excited watching or hearing about a marathon with 5 lead changes in the last mile than I would about a woman running 2:19. They are both great "races" however. I certainly don't feel the need to place a value judgement on which is "better". But that's me - I've been called weird before. - Ed Parrot __ Doug Fry, Canberra, ACT Visit http://www.webathletics.com.au for ACT Cross Country Club, ACT Veterans Athletic Club, The Runners Shop, Lunch Time Running Visit http://www.coolrunning.com.au and:- http://www.coolrunning.co.nz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (02)6288 6439(h) (02)6283 2130(w) Mobile 0408 02 1939
