Welcome to the Science of Sport, where we bring you the second, third, and fourth level of analysis you will not find anywhere else.

Be it doping in sport, hot topics like Caster Semenya or Oscar Pistorius, or the dehydration myth, we try to translate the science behind sports and sports performance.

Consider a donation if you like what you see here!


Did you know?
We published The Runner's Body in May 2009. With an average 4.4/5 stars on Amazon.com, it has been receiving positive reviews from runners and non-runners alike.

Available for the Kindle and also in the traditional paper back. It will make a great gift for the runners you know, and helps support our work here on The Science of Sport.



Sunday, November 02, 2008

New York Marathon 2008 men analysis

Analysis of the 2008 New York City Marathon

Welcome to our analysis of the men's and women's races in New York. You can find the men's analysis in this post, and the women's in a separate post, just below that (or just click here...). Enjoy!

Marilson dos Santos claims title number 2, as Goumri takes second (again)


It was a great finish in the men's 2008 New York City Marathon, as Marilson Gomes dos Santos took his second title on the streets of New York, winning in 2:08:43. Until the final kilometer, however, the race was Abderrahim Goumri's, as he opened up a nine second lead with 3km to go. But the elastic was stretched, but never broken, and the Brazilian dos Santos hung on and then closed Goumri down before moving ahead inside the final kilometer.

It was a dramatic turn-around, because at the 35km mark, Goumri had moved into the lead, and gradually opened up a lead, first to three seconds, and then to nine seconds. It looked for all the money in the world that Goumri was going to put an end to his run of second-place finishes in Major city marathons. I had almost written the headline to this post, proclaiming Goumri's first Major title!

But dos Santos clearly didn't get the memo! He held on, kept the lead at 9 seconds, and the reeled in the Moroccan inside the final mile. Truth be told, once dos Santos had bridged the gap, the race was over in a flash - having been held at about 7 to 9 seconds, dos Santos opened a big leap and eventually won by 24 seconds, Goumri's resistance well and truly broken. The size of the final victory margin was deceptive - it was far closer to that.

How the race unfolded

The table and graph below show our usual post-marathon analysis (check out our women's analysis here).


As for the women's race, the early pace was slow - 16:20 through 5km and projected 2:17:50 was never going to last! In the graph above, the grey line shows the splits from last year's race, and you can see how the first half was much slower. Halfway was reached in 1:06:06, and a large group with all the main contenders was still present.

That's where it got interesting - a progressive increase in pace, as seen in the graph, saw the pace drop below 3:00/km for the first time, and by a huge margin. Between 25 and 30km, the pace was incredibly fast - 14:24 (2:53/km), driven by attack and counter-attack, primarily by Goumri, Rono, Kirui and dos Santos. All the while, Paul Tergat, at 39, the elder statesman of the race, shadowed the move and the chances of a dream return after 18 months out were alive.

However, eventually the intensity of the surging told on the two Kenyans, Rono and Tergat. The 10km interval between 25km and 35km was run in 29:12, and that split the race wide open. Only Goumri and dos Santos remained. First it was dos Santos who pressed, and opened up a small lead of about 6 m on Goumri. But that was just sparring, the real move was to come, and it would be by Goumri, who surged just before 35km to open up his nine second lead.

That lead held, as mentioned, for the next 5 or so kilometers, until eventually, in Central Park, he faltered. The splits in the table are those of Dos Santos, but if you were to look at Goumri's, you would see that he covered the 5km from 35km to 40km FIVE SECOND FASTER than dos Santos (15:02 vs. 15:07). His final 2.2 km were run in 7:08, 32 seconds SLOWER than dos Santos, though once passed, he certainly threw in the towel.

So Goumri, then, edged again, and his run of second-place finishes continues. He must have thought (as did we), that with Martin Lel out and the race relatively open, this was his great chance to claim that first title. But it ended in heart-break, and perhaps he got carried away with 7km to run and pressed too soon? Given his much vaunted speed (a sub-13 minute 5000m PB), he might have backed his finish over the final kilometer. Then again, having been dusted twice by Lel in the final 400m, one can hardly blame him for wanting to finish alone! Still, he'll look back on NYC 2008 with fair regret.

Take nothing away from Dos Santos though, he ran a brilliant race - the first half was 1:06:06. His second half was 1:02:37, and that's brilliant running in New York. So he bags his second New York title, proving that the first was no fluke, and confirms him as a major marathon name, especially in competitive races (as opposed to paced time-trials like Berlin)

As for Tergat, he came in fourth, behind Daniel Rono in third, and probably doesn't quite have the speed he needs to challenge seriously in these big races. Then again, Petrova held Radcliffe for 35km, maybe he'll be back? I can't see it happening, however, and maybe New York is the curtain call on his magnificent career.

So that brings and end to the Marathon season for 2008. Your champions are Martin Lel and Irina Mikitenko. But in our opinion, the "real" world number ones are Sammy Wanjiru and Paula Radcliffe (see below).

2009 should be a great year - will we see another world record? And who will break it? Wanjiru? Lel, if he can return from malaria and a broken foot? And most importantly, how will Sammy Wanjiru fare wearing his Olympic crown?

Join us for all that analysis! Thanks for reading this year race analyses!

Ross

3 Comments:

Andrew said...

Great recaps! The tables and graphs you put in every article are very nice, too.

Speaking of which, in the pace plots both the men and women had local peaks in the middle for both 2007 and 2008, around 20km for the men and 25km for the women. Is that just a random coincidence or was there a reason for such pacing?

Jeff said...

Indeed, I really like the graphs. Maybe an elevation profile would be nice below the pace graph as a way to relate the two? Wind speed also played a role as well but the relevant data may be hard to come by.

Vick said...

Great site & great work! Would love it if you would also drop in pace per mile (in addition to pace in kilometers that you already show) in your tables. I am in the US and tend to think of pace in terms of miles. (Of course, I can do the calculation myself, but I think the data would have broader appeal if you included this additional column).
-Vick