The Armstrong fallout: Thoughts and theories

The Lance Armstrong fallout - questions, denials and doping reactions

Friday last week saw Lance Armstrong release a statement that effectively ended his fight against the USADA doping charges, and accept the stripping of his seven Tour de France titles.  It was a significant day for the sport, if only because it forces a look back to the era of cycling that was so tainted by drugs that between 1996 and 2006, the sport has not had a single champion untainted by doping.  The timeline reads: Riis, Ullrich, Pantani, Armstrong, Landis, and here we sit, seven years later with a big asterisk next to the Tour!

The reaction to the USADA case, and Armstrong's statement, has however produced huge debate.  I've refrained from comment here, but have been discussing it at length over on Facebook and Twitter for those interested in the day-to-day thoughts that come up.

But it's time to address a few of the common questions and positions, hence this post.

Read more. . .

London 2012: Live Men's marathon analysis

London 2012: Men's marathon live analysis and splits

Gold for Uganda, as Kiprotich steals the show

Stephen Kiprotich of Uganda is your 2012 Olympic marathon champion.  In a stunning result, the unheralded 23-year old from Uganda surprised the fancied Kenyans to win the Olympic track and field programme's final medal.

His reward is a gold medal, to be handed out at the closing ceremony.  You'd be forgiven for not knowing much about the new Olympic champion, because his credentials coming in said nothing of what he was about to do.


Kiprotich, at only 23, is relatively new to the marathon, but his last three performances told little of his potential.  He has a 2:07:20 PB in the marathon, run in Enschede in 2011.  He ran a 2:07:50 in Tokyo this year, and was 13th in the IAAF World Championships marathon last year (2:12:57).

His track credentials are nothing special (27:58), but that is likely because he's never run seriously for track times.  His half marathon PB is "only" 62:52, also nothing to scare the sub-60 min Kenyans into thinking he would be the man to beat them today.

That he was, however, and he pulled off a huge surprise to win Uganda's first gold.


An intriguing race

The race was intriguing throughout, set up by early Kenyan aggression, but it became a race of attrition.

Consider for example that the halfway split was 1:03:15 for early leader Kipsang, with the chase group (including Kiprotich) 16 seconds back.  Their split was therefore 1:03:31, and the winning time was 2:08:01.  That means that Kiprotich ran a 1:04:30 second half, a minute slower than the first and he was closest to running an even pace of the early leaders (I'll check later to see if a strong finish was closer, but I doubt it.  Keflezighi, for example, was a very strong finisher, but he went through halfway in 1:04:30 and finished in 2:11:06 (1:06:36))

The rest collapsed under the pressure, and in the conditions. Abel Kirui, a proven championship runner, was second, 26 seconds behind, and Kipsang finished third, a full 1:36 down.  Other big favourites were totally blown away.  The Ethiopian challenge is perhaps best exemplified by Abshero, who was in the chase group until after halfway, but then got dropped and went backwards at an incredible rate.  Having gone through 25km in 1:15:05 with the chase group, he went through 35km in 1:49:22, which included a 5km segment of 19:03, before he stepped off the road.  The other Ethiopians also didn't not finish, with Sifar actually losing contact as early as 10km before he stopped.

A terrible day for Ethiopia, then, and a disappointing day for Kenya, despite getting two men onto the podium.  After what has been a disappointing Games for them, they'd have been hoping that their most dominant event, the Marathon, would at least provide some desired gold, to defend the title the late Sammy Wanjiru won in Beijing.

It was not to be, though they raced much more aggressively than we've seen so far in the distance races in Beijing.

The race as it unfolded

There were echoes of Wanjiru in the race today, because Kipsang took the race lead as early as 10km, with an aggressive 14;12 split from 10km to 15km, and opened a lead that got up to 16 seconds.

The chasers eventually reeled him in, but not before huge damage had been done to most of the field. By the time the race re-formed at the front, around the 27km, there were only three men left - Kipsang, Kirui and Kiprotich. The Ethiopian challenge had been seen off, as first Sifer, then Fekele and then Abshero were blown away.

The three were left to sort out the medals, and there was a moment, around 35k, where it seemed that the Kenyans had broken the resistance of their East African neighbour.  Kiprotich dropped off, not substantially, just by about 10m, but it seemed that it was the first sign of his impending slow down, because it co-incided with the slowest interval of the race (15:48).  However, he was well in control, caught up at 37km, and then went straight past.

At that moment, the Kenyan response simply did not come.  The pre-race favorites, having dealt with the Ethiopian threat, now found themselves trailing a man who they must surely have discounted as a serious challenger.

But Kiprotich was the man on the day, and his final 5km were unchallenged.  He is not the first man from Uganda to win Olympic Gold, but this is surely their greatest triumph.

The entire race, as it unfolded, is in the post below, where I made real-time comments.  Feel free to relive the final event of the London Games' athletic programme

Live splits

Welcome to the London Olympic marathon.  The race is underway, and over the next two hours, I'll post the 5km interval times and some thoughts on the race as it unfolds.

5km - 15:23, projecting 2:09:49
10km - 30:46, so another 15:23 split for the last 5km
15km - 44:58, the last 5km in 14:12. The chase pack is 13 secs back (45:11)
20km - 59:57. Last 5km in 14:59.  Chase pack is 14 seconds behind
Halfway - 1:03:15, with 16 seconds to the chase (1:03:31)
25km - 1:14:58, a 15:01 for the last 5km, and the gap is now 7 seconds
30km - 1:30:15, all together. Kipsang did 15:17, the rest 15:10 for last 5km
35km - 1:46:03. Last 5km in 15:48, the slowest of the race.
40km - 2:01:12. Last 5km in 15:09, and Kiprotich makes the gold-winning move
Finish - 2:08:01.  Last 2.2km in 6:49 (3:06/km)

Finish

Uganda have gold in the men's marathon, courtesy 23-year old Stephen Kiprotich.  The Ugandan made the race's decisive move at 37km, and ran the final 5km on his own, with the favored Kenyans in his wake.  His winning time was 2:08:01, quite a lot slower than the halfway split suggested, but it was a race of attrition and Kiprotich was its best survivor!

His final 2.2km were not spectacular (6:49, 3:06/km), but they didn't need to be - he had a substantial lead and managed to increase it to 26 seconds on the line.

Second went to Abel Kirui, proven championship runner, in 2:08:27, with bronze to early aggressor Kipsang in 2:09:37.

Incredible result, huge surprise, and Kenya finish the Games with only two golds, having expected so many more.

40km

Stephen Kiprotich is now 19 seconds ahead of Kirui, with Kipsang a further 32 seconds back.  With only 2km to go, that's the gold medal for Uganda, barring an absolute disaster.

His last 5km were run in 15:09, a significant jump in pace from the preceding interval, run in 15:48.  Kiprotich looks good enough to extend that lead, let alone defend it, and Uganda are on their way to their most celebrated Olympic medal ever.

38km

Stephen Kiprotich now was a lead that looks to be decisive, it's around 100m, and he shows no signs of coming back.  Amazing story.  Here's some information on the Ugandan:

He has a 2:07:20 PB in the marathon, run in Enschede in 2011.  He ran a 2:07:50 in Tokyo this year, and was 13th in the IAAF World Championships marathon last year (2:12:57).

His track credentials are nothing special (27:58), but that is likely because he's never run seriously for track times.  His half marathon PB is "only" 62:52, also nothing to scare the sub-60 min Kenyans into thinking he would be the man to beat them today.

He is only 23 years old, so new to the marathon, but this is just a remarkable run, one which has certainly taken me by surprise.  This will be one of the big surprises of the Games, if not Olympic marathon in recent memory, though this is a race that does tend to produce surprises.

37km

Kiprotich has come back.  Incredible!  Having dropped off by 10 m at 35km, he has come back and made all those early projections look foolish.  He moved past the Kenyans at the 37km mark and soon opened a big, big lead.

Kirui is trying to give chase, but the response is slow.  If Kiprotich can hold this, he'll win gold for Uganda, and what an amazing story that will be.  Did anyone pick this?

36km

As I typed that, it was Kipsang who moved clear again.  It's not a surge as much as a subtle increase in pace, but it was enough to gap Kirui, who is now running 5m back.  The elastic has not broken, but was certainly stretched.  They've now come back together.

35km

The last five kilometers have been covered in 15:48, the slowest of the race by a considerable amount.  Yet despite that, the pace seems to have dropped Kiprotich of Uganda, and so Kirui and Kipsang, who have been talking to one another for most of the last five kilometers, seem to have sorted out gold and silver for Kenya.

Unless Kiprotich can claw his way back, that's how the final 7km will play out.  The pace is not likely to stay at that 15:48 level, it should get faster, so it will be a difficult ask.  Kipsang looks very fluid and may be the favourite now.

30km

The "catch" came at about 27km, and Kipsang's "lonely vigil" suddenly became a threesome, as he was joined by Stephen Kiprotich and Abel Kirui.  The pace then held firm, which is not a surprise.  It's not as though Kipsang was cracking to allow the chase to catch him - his pace has held constant since the 15km mark, and they continue to run around 15km per 5km.

The medals will certainly come from these three, Abshero has continued to drop back, and is 46 seconds behind.  dos Santos of Brazil is another five seconds back and will probably take fourth place soon.  If anything happens to the front three, he's the likeliest other medal winner, but the three in front seem to have this race controlled and will probably fight out gold, silver and bronze.

If people think Kipsang has made his move in this race, they're wrong - he'll be a factor in the final 5km, I'm sure of it, because what he did is not much different to anyone else, and so he's in a good position right now.

Kirui looked spectacular in London when he surged, and then he exploded and finished terribly.  His turn of speed is perhaps the big danger for gold now.  I'd make him the favorite of the three.

The last 5km, from 25km to 30km, were run in 15:17 (for Kipsang, the chase is a little faster - 15:10).

The projected time, meanwhile, is 2:06:56, which means the Olympic record may still be on, but is slipping away right now.  If there are surges, they'll go quicker.

26km

Abshero is gone!  So Ethiopia has lost its final medal contender before the 30km mark, and that is a surprise.  The chase is now Kirui and Kiprotich, with Kipsang ahead.  As expected, it's East Africa to the fore, but possibly, without Ethiopia.

Abshero's chance here relies on the pace dropping once Kipsang is caught, which looks like within the next few minutes.  A lull in the pace may allow him back, as we saw in the women's race where Arkhipova looked off the back a few times, but came back and fought for bronze.

25km

Kipsang is still holding the lead, but the urgency in the chase group has begun to erode it.  It's now 7 seconds, and the last 5km were run in 15:01 by Kipsang, which means the chase group have run a 14:54.

What the chase has done is fragment, and it's now down to only three.  They are led by Stephen Kiprotich, who has been largely responsible for the increase in pace from behind.  The others are Abshero, the lone Ethiopian, and Abel Kirui.

23km

The chase group is now starting to split too.  Stephen Kiprotich took the group through Leadenhall market very aggressively, and the compact group was suddenly stretched.  This is the pressure of Kipsang now filtering its way back to the chase, who have presumably recognized that they need to respond to bring that gap of 16 seconds down.

If anything, the gap is growing.  Perhaps Kipsang has done what he did in London earlier this year, surging at the half marathon mark.  The next split will be interesting.

Halfway

Halfway has been reached in 1:03:15, with the chase group at 16 seconds down.  It's now a chase group of six, as Eritrea's Asmerom has also fallen off the pace.

The chase is now made of Feleke and Abshero of Ethiopia, Kirui of Kenya, Kiprotich of Uganda, dos Santos of Brazil and Mokoka of South Africa.  Although as I write that, dos Santos has begun to drop off the group and so it's down to five.

At the front, Kipsang stops to go back for his energy drink, which means he lost a second or two at the 22km water point.

20km

Kipsang has relented only slightly, running the last five kilometers in 14:59.

That has helped him defend his lead, which now stands at 14 seconds.  That chase group is now down to seven, with Emmanuel Mutai dropping off the back.  He was the reserve added to the team after the withdrawal of Moses Mosop.  Many felt that Geoffrey Mutai would have been a better pick. Hindsight is easy of course, but I suspect those calls now seem a little insightful.

Meanwhile, the stretch from 17 to 18km claimed two of the three Americans in the race.  First Ryan Hall stopped, holding his right hamstring, it seemed.  Then Abdirahman stopped, so only Keflezighi is left now.

15km

Wilson Kipsang, winner of the 2012 London marathon, has opened a lead of 13 seconds over a chase group of 8.  All the main protagonists are there with the exception of Dino Sefir, who fell out of the group at about 10km.  The chase thus comprises two Ethiopians (Abshero & Feleke), two Kenyans (Mutai and Kirui), an Eritrean (Asmerom), a South African (Mokoka), a Ugandan (Kiprotich) and a Brazilian (dos Santos).

The last 5km were run in 14:12, which explains that huge explosion in the race from 10km onwards.  The time now projects a 2:06:29, but don't expect the next 10km to be run at the same pace, of course.  The Olympic record of Wanjiru is probably still on, however.

Fascinating battle here, because the pressure has been applied by the race favourite.

The pressure has put paid to everyone else - Ryan Hall and Keflezighi are off the back, and they'll hope to run their own race for something in the range of 2:08, and hope that the early pace claims some victims.

12km

Kipsang has actually created a small gap, and we are only at 12km.  Amazing early aggression.  It was expected that Kenya would try to assert control on the race, but to do it this early is very surprising.  They took the lead shortly after 10km, once De Almeida had been caught, and the field split almost instantly.  Sefir and Ryan Hall were the first casualties, but now many have been dropped.

The front of the race has been trimmed to just over a handful, but Kipsang has pulled Abshero clear and there are gaps.  Kipsang is 10m clear of Abshero who is 5m clear of the chase group of maybe six.

Abshero has now fallen back into the pack, and there are now 7 men chasing the leader Kipsang, whose lead has grown to perhaps 7 or 8 seconds.

11km

In the battle of Ethiopia and Kenya, it's first blood Kenya, and that's because Ethiopia's Dino Sefir is off the back of the group.  And so is Ryan Hall.  That's very surprising, because we're only at 11km, and the pace is "only" 2:09:49, yet two of the pre-race favourites are already off the back.

At the front, Kenya have again assumed the lead, with Kipsang pressing the pace.  It certainly seems to have gotten faster, because the front group has been cut to about 12 men already.

10km

There is a breakaway leader, about 50m off the front of the main field.  It's Brazil's De Almeida, but the time for the main group is 30: . That's a 15:23 for the last 5km, identical to the first 5km.  So even paced as can be.

Remember back to the women's race - the pace was very steady for the first half, and then when it picked up, it didn't reach the same kinds of speeds we are used to seeing in the city marathons.  That's a function of the tight turns on the course, and the change in surfaces, which let some of the athletes to call it the hardest race they'd ever run.  That will be a significant factor in the second half of this race.

Right now, it's all rather sedate.

5km

The 5km mark is reached in 15:23, and the Africans are already showing at the front.  Maybe the Kenyans are borrowing from Beijing, where Wanjiru's aggression perhaps changed the way marathons are run.  They're at the front, but the group is big, because the pace is respectable, but not super fast.  Right now, it's projecting a 2:09:49.

Start and preview

The race has been billed as a clash between Kenya and Ethiopia.  2011 was of course Kenya's year - all  20 of the top times were run by Kenyans in an unparalleled show of dominance by one nation.  That included the winners of every single major city marathon, and the world record.

2012 has been more evenly matched - Ethiopia stole the Dubai marathon with a host of fast times, and then also won Rotterdam, and set this race up beautifully.  More on the protagonists as the race unfolds, but it seems that most are forecasting this as a Kenya vs Ethiopia showdown, with Abshero and Kipsang their likeliest champions.  The Americans, in the form of Hall and Keflezighi in particular, may disrupt the battle in the same what that Arkhiopova did in the women's race.

My initial thought is that Ethiopia should be favoured, because their athletes last raced in late January in Dubai, compared to the Kenyans who raced in April in London's city marathon.

For example, Ayele Absehero and Dino Sefer of Ethiopia have had 198 days since their last marathon, whereas Wilson Kipsang has had 112 days.  Those 86 days matter in a race this competitive.  (Thanks, by the way, to Wayne Do Rego for the numbers - I'll do a proper post with his analysis after the race!)

This, plus the fact that it has been a very poor Games for Kenya lead me to think that Ethiopia hold the cards here.  Kenya's athletes have, to me, seemed over-done and tactically poor.  They've been run out of medals in the women's 800m and men's 1500m and 10,000m races, and have seen their big favourites settle for minor medals.  Turning that around will be difficult.

We are coming up to five kilometers, however, in a big group, so let's get the projections going!

Ross

Women's 800m: Analysing Semenya & other insights

London 2012: Women's 800m perplexity, analyzing Semenya's race 

On Thursday night, David Rudisha led home the greatest 800m race we've ever seen - he pulled the field to a world record for every single finishing position, 7 personal bests and three national records.

Tonight, Mariya Savinova led home the women's 800m final, but it leaned more towards the curious and peculiar than the spectacular.  That is primarily because of the manner with which Caster Semenya, South Africa's flag bearer, ran to win the silver medal.  Savinova was, as usually, tactically superb, fast and timed her effort perfectly.  She won in 1:56.19 to add to last year's World title.  The real story, at least for me and all those discussing it on Twitter, was Semenya, and so let's talk about that a little.

If you saw the race, you'll know what I'm referring to - she dropped into 8th place by 300m, and stayed there for the next 300m.  At the bell, she was 1.38s behind the leader.  Down the back straight with 280m to go, when Pamela Jelimo made the race's first move, Semenya was perhaps 12m back, in last place, and not even close to responding, as you can see in the screenshot below.

With 200m to run, Semenya had moved into 7th, picking up a tiring Niyonsaba, but was still well off Jelimo, a pre-race favourite.  Meanwhile, Savinova had by now begun to make her move too.  This was the move that Semenya must have known would determine gold and silver, and in her semi-final, she'd shown the ability to respond to those tactics.  Tonight, in the final, she was distant from the action.

With 140m to go, Savinova was making the race's decisive move, but still Semenya had not responded - she was by now up to 6th place, however, picking off the fading Jepkosgei.  I kept waiting for a move, because she'd shown in her semi that she was not tactically unaware, but it just never came.

Savinova would go on to open a commanding lead, and with 50m to go, the race was over.  Only Poistogova and Jelimo went with her coming off the final bend, while Semenya was still in 6th.

Jelimo's legs imploded around 60m from the line and she went backwards.  By now, finally going forward was Semenya who would move incredibly rapidly through the field and close down everyone in front of her with the exception of Savinova.  Semenya ended with a season's best of 1:57.23, marginally faster than the 1:57.67 she ran to win her semi-final, but it was a race run in a totally different manner.

This led Sports Illustrated's Tim Layden to tweet the following immediately after the race - Semenya was "disengaged".  He's not accusing her of anything, but it's not difficult to see where the next step lies, and that's exactly what has happened since the race.

History repeating itself with Semenya - a common allegation

Unfortunately, this kind of speculation is becoming all too familiar for Caster Semenya.  Last year in Daegu, the race strategy was different, but the result was identical (Savinova-Semenya), and the speculation after the race was the same.  There, Semenya was attentive and ran near the front, before moving into the lead with 180m to go.  Savinova followed, but Semenya looked strong enough to win until the final 30m, where she suddenly slowed and Savinova swept by to win.  The forums were soon buzzing with allegations that Semenya had lost on purpose.

This year, the same has happened basically every single time Semenya has run in the European meetings.  At Diamond League meets, she was often seen languishing at the back, looking "disinterested" but running solid 1:59 to 2:00 times while her major rivals - Jelimo and Fantu Magiso in particular - were running 1:56 to 1:57.  People were accusing Semenya of running slowly on purpose, so that she avoids too much scrutiny, that she is 'scared' to win because of the intense allegation it may bring.

Semenya - evaluated differently because of her past

You see, Semenya is not "judged normally" in athletic circles, and that has everything to do with the sex verification controversy involving her after she exploded onto the world scene in Berlin.  Since being questioned, she spent nine months away from the track, before returning amid much secrecy and with slower times than before.  The speculation bandwagon kicked off, and when she was winning, she was accused of cheating, when she was losing, she was accused of not trying.

She was, and remains, in an impossible situation, because every result and every move is looked at through a filter.  It is a filter that colors her performances according to male vs female, cheating vs throwing it on purpose, and when she produces racing performances like tonight, that filter is rather vivid.

The prevailing "allegation", ever since her return in 2010, is that she is running slowly to stay under the radar, avoiding winning and the questions this would undoubtedly bring.  If that's the plan, then it sure isn't working, because what we saw today (and in Daegu) draws more allegation than a "typical race", in my opinion.  But more on that shortly.

Possibility # 1: Semenya may simply not have the speed

The current speculation (and before accusing people of ignorance and stoking the fires of controversy, just have a look at the forums and Twitter to see the reaction to Semenya's race) is thus fueled by Semenya's history.  Within the ten minutes of the race finishing, I got 34 tweets asking whether she'd "thrown it", or "tried to avoid winning gold".  One person demanded a full investigation into why she was jogging. Another said that he'd never seen someone look so "aerobic" at the finish of an 800m race.

Of course, this may all be a totally misplaced accusation.  Maybe Semenya just didn't have the physiological capacity to run the race tactics people are accustomed to seeing.  Maybe she was just not good enough to go with that early pace, and to respond to those surgest.  Perhaps there is nothing to her performance other than that she runs a more even pace than her rivals.

A comparison between her semi-final and this race is interesting in this regard.  In that semi, she went through 400m in just over 58 seconds, 600m in about 1:28 and then closed the final 200m in 29.5s, looking like she had something in reserve.

Tonight, she went through 400m in 57.69s, then through 600m in about 1:27.1, and then closed in a touch over 30 seconds.  My point is, her performance in the final was slightly faster at every stage than the semi, until she closed slower over the final 200m.  To finish SLOWER than she did in the semi implies that she has little reserve and that she is closer to the limit than she looks.  She wasn't actually that fast over the final 200m, it's just that everyone else was very slow!

It's possible that she doesn't have the speed (or psychological capacity and confidence) to be able to run a 56-second first lap, or a 28 second 200m split, regardless of when in the race it happens.  If you look at Semenya, her running style is very laboured - the commentator described her as "lumbering" and that's about right.  She lacks a knee lift, and her heel-flick is also very limited, so it is possible that she lacks the ability to change pace much, and so I have to put forward the possibility that she may not actually have the capacity to respond to surges, and maybe a 28-29-29-30 race breakdown is as fast as Semenya can go.

The rest of the race, incidentally, went 27s to 200m, then 29s to 400 (56.3 at the bell), and then 29.2s for the next 200m, and closed, for the most part, in 32s.  So, you have Semenya with a 28-29-29-30 (57.69s & 59.54s), running against everyone else with a 27-29-29-32 (Jelimo, for example, was 56.66s & 60.93s).  In this regard, Semenya actually didn't finish the race fast, as much as everyone else finished it really slowly.  The one exception of course was Savinova, who closed the final 200m in just under 30 seconds (57.29s and 58.90s halves).

The rest, Jelimo in particular, were terribly slow over the final 200m.

Not that I'm trying to say that Semenya ran a good race - you simply cannot allow the moves of your two main rivals to go completely unnoticed, but I am saying that it's possible that Semenya does not have the ability to run the race any other way - she may well be at her limit and unable to run those 28s 200m splits mid-race.  The fact that she looks so easy doing it is neither here nor there.  Go on YouTube and look up her race at the World Junior Championships in Poland in 2008.  She finished second last in her semi-final, and looked the same as she did today.  That was long before any controversy, or any need to avoid scrutiny.  Semenya is just a very 'casual', disengaged runner.

The other speculation - let the guesswork begin

That said, there is still much to be debated about the case.  Once you have dealt with that possibility that her apparent "throwing it" and "sandbagging" tactic may just be that she can't match the speed of the first 600m in the race, then you get on to dealing with the other speculation.

I'm going to simplify my answer as much as I can, and then try to go into detail to explain some thoughts and insights.  The simple answer is "I don't know what happened.  Your guess is as good as mine.  And I understand the questions, but there are no answers, we just do not know".

Right, now, having dealt with that, let's discuss the current discussion!  For this, a brief history lesson on her case, which most of you will know, so jump ahead a section.  If you're new, read on.

The history and secrecy fuels speculation

Since day one, Caster Semenya has presented an insoluble problem for the sport.  The biggest problem, aside from the resolving the obvious debate about her performance, is the secrecy which has surrounded her story since the case first broke.  I suspect there is no satisfactory answer to this story, at any level.  Even going back to 2009, when debate first began, it was impossible to say what should be done.  Did she have an intersex condition?  That part would be easy to find out - the science and biology is not that complicated.  In 2010, I wrote a scientific review paper on the subject with geneticist Prof Malcolm Collins, summarizing the history, the physiology and performance implications of sex verification in sport, for those interested.

But, does the condition provide an advantage?  And if it does, should that be the basis for excluding her from competition - it's a natural advantage, after all?  That's a whole lot trickier, and it's an ethical, moral and social debate for which I think there is no consensus.  Each will have their own opinion.

However, the debate still exists, and rather than allowing radical speculation, I hope it is helpful to consider the story in a thoughtful manner, hence my thoughts below.  

A point on context - being in South Africa, I'm exposed to more news and speculation about Semenya than perhaps most, and so my views are kind of informed by years of conversation with people, reports, information from people connected to the case etc.  But I want to stress upfront that just like the rest of the world, with maybe a few exceptions, we are all guessing here.

If you were to right the summary version of this history, it would go as follows:  Q:  "What happened to Semenya in 2009/2010 to allow her to compete?"   A: "We don't know".  Next question: "How do we explain the huge variability in Semenya's performances in 2011 and 2012, where she goes from the back of the field in a Diamond league event and struggling to break 1:59 to being utterly dominant in the major championships?"  Answer: "We don't know.

The short version is that we just don't know anything about anything, and so we speculate as much as possible, maybe in an informed way, weighing the possibilities, but very few people know the truth, and they are not talking.  Should we speculate at all?  Probably not.  We should, in theory, "trust" the IAAF, who were involved in the process from Day 1, and say that if they have cleared her to run, then we should just accept that.  And officially, that would be the correct position to take.

Significant improvements in a short time ask the questions

However, the reality is that just as we SHOULD question performances that we regard as suspect, I think it's naive and 'deliberately ignorant' to ignore the questions that arise from Semenya's case.  Here, it is her performance that asks the questions, not the history of her case.  That history tells us that the IAAF worked with Semenya, cleared her, and she should be treated as any other athlete.  The case is closed, it was resolved and is in the past.  The problem is that the performances re-open that door, and because nothing is known, it leads to speculation and accusation.  The root cause is the secrecy around the case.

The first problem arises out of the sudden improvements Semenya makes at championships.  Or put differently, it's how well off the pace she is in European races, before she arrives to championships looking close to unbeatable (by all but Savinova, it turns out).  This year, Semenya had been "stuck" in the 1:59 to 2:01 range since April, and had run half a dozen races where she was unable to get faster.  Then suddenly, she runs 1:57 looking rather easy, and it is going to cause questions.  

Remember, this is exactly the same thing that was done for Ye Shiwen of China and for Makhloufi of Algeria - they improved significantly in a short time, it was deemed "peculiar" and the speculation of doping began.  Semenya's improvement is similar, if not larger in magnitude over a shorter period, and so the same logic leads to questions.  The difference is that once asked for Semenya, the question will not have us zoning in on doping as has happened for Ye Shiwen or Makhloufi, it will return to the gender controversy, and we will unfairly make accusations about gender, all over again.  Is it right?  No.  It is understandable?  Yes.

The secrecy - the root cause of speculation

And the reason it's going to happen is because of the failure in management of the message, not only by the IAAF, but by Semenya's camp.  To explain, the two key points, which I think are more important than the performance:

1)  The case should never have been leaked in the first place.  Obviously.  That was a mistake for which Semenya will "pay" for the rest of her career, and it has exposed her to the most invasive scrutiny I think anyone can imagine.  I think it is remarkable that she has continued to compete, and how she has stood up under that kind of pressure.  Most would not cope at all, let alone resume their athletic careers.  She's done that, and she was rightly given the honor of being our flag bearer, and the courage and character she shows to run at all is amazing.

2)  Having said this, once the story broke, and the athletics world knew there was a question, then in my opinion, it had to be followed through to its conclusion and made known what the outcome was.  And simply clearing her to compete many months later is not the same as saying that the matter was concluded.  People are notoriously mistrusting of sports governing bodies, and they're even more mistrusting of athletes.  There are too many dishonest athletes to believe what we see with no small dose of skepticism.  So, when Semenya resumed her career in 2010, I felt that it would be important for her to make some kind of announcement to say that the matter had been resolved, and how.  Perhaps this should have been done by the authorities.  But it should have been done by someone, to at least control the message.

But what happened instead was that a veil of secrecy fell over the story, and all of a sudden, nobody was saying anything.  The secrecy grew and grew, until she began running again.  But she was not dominating - having destroyed the best in the world in 2009, she was now 4 to 5 seconds slower, looking sluggish and losing races.  Her subsequent performances was gone up and down wildly and it has been absolutely impossible to predict what is coming next.

Everyone can see this unusual situation, they know that they are seeing 'abnormal' variations in performance, but nobody can say why.  And so they speculate.  The problem is that when you fail to tell people the truth, they tend to make up the truth.  And the made up truth is almost always worse than the reality.  And so now, we sit in a situation where people will either allege that:

1. Nothing happened in the first case, and she is still a man (this is ignorant, because that clearly was never true to begin with - the biology of sex is far more complex than this), or 
2. She got treated but it's not working, or
3. She got treatment but is able to manipulate it to optimize her performance whenever she wants to - it slows her down in a predictable way, so she can use treatment as she pleases to find those improvements, or
4. She is deliberately losing races to avoid suspicion, as is happening after the Olympic Games

To repeat, we simply do not know what transpired, and therefore we cannot know whether any of the above options is true.  If I were forced to give my thoughts, I'd say that option 1) is impossible - we know something happened.  Reading between the lines, based on the time it took, I'd fairly confidently speculate that she received medical treatment, and probably still is.  Thus, the next three options are possible.  I don't know what treatment might involve, or whether she can manipulate it.  I suspect that it would be possible, just as any doping is possible.  But I'd be surprised if it was this simple.  

I simply cannot see option 4) being true - why would you try to avoid detection by going from last to first?  The contrast in performance is just so enormous that people will notice it EVEN MORE!  If you are going to fly under the radar, then your approach would be to look as normal as possible.  Going from nowhere to dominating is not "normal", and so if they are deliberately slowing down to lose races, then it's a strategy that is not only bizarre, but also foolish.  I just can't see it as being possible.

Unfair, but understandable suspicion and speculation

There is also a fifth option, namely that nothing is wrong, and that she's just getting her training right when it matters, and that her "bizarre" race strategy is nothing more than typical even-paced running, as I explained above.  But people won't make that allegation.  Why?  Because they don't know anything, and they are driven by mistrust.  Therefore, they will settle on one of the four options that 'feeds' their mistrust.  

So they'll go with option 3 or 4 as most likely, and Semenya will face accusations that she is either cheating by manipulating her "advantage" through medical means, or she has been deceiving everyone for months leading up to the Games, and continues to NOT win on purpose. 

Both are unfair, and, I suspect, incorrect.  As I explained earlier, I think it's plausible that Semenya is running as fast as she can, and that 1:57.2 is the "limit" for her, in a more or less even race.  Maybe with a little more confidence, she'll be able to get her fast lap down into the low-57s range and break 1:57 for the race this year, but it's not impossible that a 57.69s and 59.94s is Semenya at her limit.  The sudden improvement in performance is more difficult to explain, but like any other debate based on performance, we must recognize that performance alone is not sufficient to reach a verdict!

It's also not difficult to see why people think differently - they don't know any better.  And that's because of the secrecy around the whole thing, and it forces people to speculate.  We shouldn't.  We should accept the control of the IAAF and trust that they have identified and managed a potential problem. In an ideal world, that would happen.  But I think it's naive to expect that of people.  Until people know, they'll make it up and everyone loses in that equation.  

If Semenya is to win people over, as she should - look at her interview after winning silver in Daegu, and tell me that this is not an athlete who is warm and genuine and worthy of positive sentiment - then the secrecy must be lifted.  Easier said than done, of course.  But what the future holds with these wild variations in performance, given the history of Semenya in the sport, is just not something to look forward to.

The marathon to close it down

The marathon tomorrow - join me at 11am London time for live splits and comments as it unfolds.  It's Kenya's last chance to rescue what has been a miserable Games, highlighted (in a big way, of course) by Rudisha's golden world record and Kemboi's gold.  They'll want gold in the marathon, but Ethiopia will be a stern test.

My money is on the Ethiopians - I think the Kenyans, who raced more recently, will struggle on the twisty course, and Kenya will regret not picking Geoffrey Mutai.

But join me tomorrow to see what transpires!

Ross

London 2012: Spectacular 800m

Rudisha lights up London with a world record. And more 800m thoughts

The London Olympics saw its first World Record on the track tonight, and not surprisingly, it came from David Rudisha, who ran from the front, gun to tape, to become the first man in history to break 1:41.  His time was 1:40.91, and he pulled the other seven men to the fastest, most spectacular 800m race that we have ever seen.  More on that below, along with some other thoughts on his race.

1)  Rudisha's race strategy

The question ahead of the race, for many, was not whether Rudisha would win, but what the margin of victory would be.  There has been no greater favorite in an athletic event at these Games than Rudisha. His form this year has been spectacular, he has won paced and unpaced races, he has run from the front and looked peerless.

The biggest question was perhaps around the tactics he would employ in the Olympic final.  Front-running is the logical choice to most, because when you're about two seconds faster than the next fastest guy, you would want the pace to be beyond them.  Why allow a final 200m sprint, where a different type of physiological attribute can determine success, when you have such dominance over the whole race?  The problem in a final 200m sprint is that when the spread of runners is relatively narrow, the first 600m does enough "damage" physiologically that the person who is running with the greatest "reserve" is not guaranteed to win.  The ability to close in say 25 seconds is not a function of that reserve, which means that a 1:44 man can beat a 1:41 if they both get to that position together.  In Rudisha's case, I suspect he is so superior that he'd win anyway, but it becomes a far more open race than it might otherwise be.

So front-running was the option, and Rudisha was wise enough that he actually started to do this in his European races leading up to London.  We have seen many times how athletes become so accustomed to paced races on the circuit that they seem all at sea during a tactical race - the Kenyans in the 1500m looked this way earlier this week.  But Rudisha seemed ready, he had familiarized himself with the front-running pattern in a few races, including the Kenyan trials, and so everyone expected this approach.  Once he led after the break at 100m, it was clear that he was going for it.  It is easier said than done, however, largely for psychological reasons - putting yourself out as a pace-maker is never easy in an Olympic final.

It takes confidence and conviction, and Rudisha was good enough to do it.  He led the field through the bell in 49.28s, and then began to open the gap with 300m to go.  That's not surprising, because everyone in the race was running above themselves just to reach the 500m mark at that pace.

At 600m, which was passed in 1:14:30 (25.02s for the 200m split). Rudisha was clear, and on course for the record.

He slowed in the final 200m, covering it in 26.61s, but it was enough to break 1:41, and claim Kenya's second gold.  The manner of the win, plus the bronze for Timothy Kitum, will be some consolation for the nation that expected more than they have won to date.

2) The race was spectacularly deep and fast

Rudisha was chased home by a host of sensational performances.  In fact, every single position in the race set a world-place position.  Second went to young Nijel Amos of Botswana (a surprise) in 1:41.73, fittingly equalling Seb Coe's old world record), and then a further three men went under 1:43.  They included the two Americans, Duane Solomon and Nick Symmonds, who would surely not have believed that they'd break 1:43 and not even win a medal.  Even in last place, Andrew Osagie ran 1:43.77.  Only Abubaker Kaki of Sudan, who eventually finished 7th, did not run a personal best.  Three national records were also set.

It was just a spectacularly fast and deep race, and while everyone who was in it might feel stunned at their times without medals, they were part of something truly remarkable.  I suspect many would be wondering if a step up to 1500m might not make more sense, however - Rudisha is only 24!

3) The pacing - a pattern in the 800m

One final point about the race, and it relates to a peculiar pacing pattern that you see when you look at the best ever performances in the 800m event.   Part of my PhD looked at the pacing strategies used in all the world records from 800m to 10,000m, and there's a pretty constant pattern in long-distance races.  The 800m race is different, however, and is paced differently from other middle- or long-distance races.

However, I'm going to hold back on this discussion, for now, because David Epstein of Sports Illustrated will probably introduce it in his piece on the race.  I'll provide you that link, as soon as it comes out, and then I'll add the detail once his article is up.

So that's for tomorrow, a discussion on pacing in the 800m event.

There is much more to be said about 800m running, but on the women's side.  The semi-finals took place tonight, and they introduced us to a controversy that is just waiting to erupt when the finals happen on Saturday.  Semenya is back, having battled all year for half a second here and there in the range of 1:59-2:00, she tonight won her semi, looking incredibly easy and in a time of 1:57.  That's a 2 to 3% improvement, after a long season of many reasons 'stuck' at 1:59.

Cue yet another debate on "unrealistic" performance improvements, like those we saw with Ye Shiwen and Makhloufi.  Except this time, it's not doping that will be discussed.

But that may be for another day, keep your eyes open for the debate.

Until tomorrow, which brings some relay finals, and the women's 5000m, the second part of a Tirunesh Dibaba double, perhaps?

Ross