London Marathon 2008 - Will it be a close finish?

Tight races are part of marathon history

The weather looks to be cooperating for Sunday's racing, and we know from our previous post on London 2008 that the optimal range for fast times is 5-15 C. With the field that Dave Bedford and team have assembled year after year, a close race seems on the cards regardless of the weather, especially because it seems over the last several years that the racing has become extremely close as many of the big-city marathons come down the final sprint. Two or more runners sprinting (and diving, in one case!) for the line after 42.2 km of racing makes for incredible drama, but is this a new phenomena?

The famous duels

Perhaps the most notable and widely known close finish was the 1982 Boston Marathon in which Alberto Salazar beat Dick Beardsley by just two seconds while setting a new course record of 2:08:51. It became known as "The Duel in the Sun". The two American running icons raced stride for stride until the last stretch, and Salazar famously sat on Beardsley's heels until making a late move with 800 m to go. It appeared to be decisive, but Beardsley came charging back, only to to be apparently thwarted by a motorcycle cop down the twisty stretch. It makes for absolutely incredible viewing, enhanced by the music the YouTube poster added! (NB: this is a nine minute video, but well worth watching if you have never seen it).




But what of all the other big races over the years? Normally we think of the marathon as a race of attrition as pace setters do their job and one by one the pack thins until the winner is left to solo home over the last few kilometers. However an examination of just Berlin, Boston, NYC, and Chicago shows that close finishes occur quite frequently. As the archives are limited, we have examined only these races and only back 10 or so years for Chicago and London. Yet out of the approximately 100 races we have analyzed, 25% have been decided by 10 seconds or less, fully one quarter of the finishes!

So the close finishes are not a recent development with better training techniques or even more competitive fields. In fact just one year before the Duel in the Sun in 1982, Beardsley finished in a dead heat with Inge Simonsen at the inaugural London Marathon, and later in 1982 Salazar won New York by beating Rodolfo Gomez by just four seconds.

Let's then take a a look at exactly when and where the close finishes have occurred over the past 25+ years of racing. The races have been sorted according to the difference between first and second, and you can click on the graph for a larger view.

Admittedly, in marathon running 10 seconds is actually not that close, but we needed to set the cut-off somewhere, and figured that a winning (or losing!) margin of 10 s meant that at least the top two finishers were likely together until the final five minutes. Of course when you start talking about five seconds or less then it means that the top two were probably together until the last 400 m or less.

The big "winners" in this situation are actually the fans. This kind of racing cannot be more dramatic, and if you still have not clicked to watch the Salazar/Beardsley finish, if you do so now you will understand. To see two runners battling it out stride for stride after 40+ km of racing really makes for good television.

For those who missed the finish of Chicago last year it was equally as suspenseful as the "Duel in the Sun" between Salazar and Beardsley. In that race, Jaouad Gharib and Patrick Ivuti were together until perhaps one mile to go. Gharib put in what appeared to be a decisive move, but Ivuti refused to roll over. He came charging back, and was level with less than 400 m to go. Again, Gharib surges, and opens a 2-3 m gap on Ivuti. Surely that was the winning move? Watch below in case you did not see it:



The really interesting thing is that a few runners in this analysis have found themselves repeatedly in very tight races. Notable among them is Paul Tergat, who lost to Khannouchi by 11 s in London 2002 and lost to Ben Kimondiu by four seconds in Chicago 2001, and just barely beat his pace setter Sammy Korir in Berlin 2003 and Hendrik Ramaala in New York 2005---the latter a race that officially was decided by less than one second!

London 2008 - Another close finish?

We have said it now many times, but again, it is a legendary field lining up for the marathon on Sunday. Can we expect a photo finish? According to our analysis, London has twice been decided by less than one second (1981, Beardsley vs. Simonsen, and 2003, Abera vs. Baldini) and once by 11 s (Khannouchi vs. Tergat). Also, it should be noted that in the 2003 race Joseph Ngolepus was breathing down Baldini's neck, finishing only one second later, followed by Paul Tergat only two seconds later!

Given so much money on the line, London normally shapes up to be a tactical duel among the big dogs of the sport. In short, it is marathon racing at its best, and given the field for Sunday it should be no different. Here's hoping for a dramatic finish down the stretch.

Join us again tomorrow for the full preview and our predictions for the big day!

Boston Marathon Preview

Preview of Boston - the last of the big Spring Marathons: Cheruiyot to claim number four

Monday sees the 112th running of the famous Boston Marathon, which has brought us some epic duels and historical races, like the Duel in the Sun of 1982. Coming a week after the great London Marathon, this race promises to make history for Robert Cheruiyot of Kenya, who, if he wins, will join Bill Rodgers, Gerard Cote and the great Clarence de Mar as the only men to win the title four times (he has a long way to go to catch de Mar, who won seven times. Amazingly, his second win came 11 years after his first, and then he reeled off five more in the next eight years!)

Cheruiyot was the world's first Marathon Major champion, and has a valid claim to a position as one of the great marathon racers in the world. He is the defending champion, the current course record holder (in 2006, a time of 2:07:14), and won the Chicago Marathon (2006) in addition to some other high finishes in Chicago and New York. So he has, like Martin Lel from last week's preview, shown the ability to get it right on the day. Whether he is quite in the condition that Lel has been in for the last 30 months is debatable, but his name certainly stands out on the entry lists for the Boston Race.

That is particularly the case now that Patrick Ivuti is not starting on Monday. The Chicago champion in last year's magnificent finish, where he pipped Jaouad Gharib by a shoulder, has pulled out due to a bout of malaria. Not surprisingly, that damages his chances of getting into Beijing, though he did say that he is optimistic and expects to race once or twice in May. I'd be very surprised if he can do anything spectacular in those races, and given what we saw in London last week from Lel and Wanjiru, the Kenyan team is pretty much sown up, with the addition, perhaps, of the Boston winner, who I fully expect to be Cheruiyot.

How the race will unfold - some fun with predictions

Last week, my London predictions miraculously turned out to be pretty accurate, and so I figured I'd play around with Boston in the same way, and call the race strategy and outcomes. Of course, calling the marathon is a hazardous exercise, so I expect to be well off the mark, but it's worth looking at for the possible insight it might provide on race day.

So first question: Will we see a world record? Without a doubt, NO, because Boston is simply too unconducive a course, and the field is not strong enough. Even the great field that was assembled in London last week would not threaten the 2:04:26 mark on this course, which is famous for the the series of four hills that begin soon after the 16-mile mark (about 26km), and culminate in the famous "Heartbreak Hill" at about 20 miles (32km). Ironically, the overall course profile is downhill, which means the course is not valid for record purposes, but it's a moot point, because a sub-2:06 time is, for the moment, well out of reach.

Newton Hills & Heartbreak Hill - not definitive, but certainly crucial

The Newton hills provide all the drama, then, and in particular, Heartbreak hill, an 800m climb that actually rises only 30 or so vertical meters, would not ordinarily pose much of a challenge to runners, but it's enough to slow the elite down enough that a world record is never on the cards. The course record at Boston, a relatively pedestrian 2:07:14 by today's standards, testifies that Boston is not about sub 3:00/km for 2 hours, it's about the race.

And of course, the Newton Hills dictate the terms of the race. They come slightly too early to really be the decisive point in the race, because Heartbreak Hill is completed with still 9km left to run, and so don't expect this relatively short hill to be the one that blows the race open. Instead, it's the "groundwork", the point where the athletes will test one another, and the very weak will fall away, while those who are particularly strong will set their race up for the final 5km - the jabs before the attempted knockout punch, so to speak!

Last week in London, we saw a searing, almost suicidal pace from the start, and then some tactical racing over a very flat last 10km where the top four looked at each other, threw in tiny surges and generally tested each other out before a serious final kilometer race.

Don't expect the same in Boston. Of course, the pace will be variable, thanks to the hills, and we'll do our best to bring you the splits from the race within the 30 minutes of the race finish. But in Boston, the race will be more attritional - men will simply drop off a steady tempo, rather than a race for the line with the cut and thrust from London.

And Cheruiyot will be the last man standing. I expect the halfway mark to be reached in about 63:40, with a large group of perhaps 12 men together. But the pacemakers will drop soon after the Newton Hills begin at 26km, and then the lead group will be trimmed to about five.

That group will include Cheruiyot, James Kwambai (a training partner), and two or three other Kenyans - I'm not even goint to try to guess which of the dozen will be there! I'm sure that Ethiopia will also have a strong presence, as they have some very strong sub-2:10 men in the race - look out for Yirefu Birhanu to feature, he has a 2:09:01, and a slower pace will mean that he, and a number of other 2:10 runners are in the frame.

However, with 4 km to go, Cheruiyot and probably Kwambai will show their quality, as they are the standout athletes in the race, and the subtle increase in pace will see them move clear of the rest. Then it will be Cheruiyot who will have too much, moving away with 1km to race, and will win by perhaps 15 seconds. Winning time? While I'm calling it, I'll guess at a winning time of 2:07:53, and Kwambai in second 15 seconds back.

I'll stop there, because the rest of the race is really too open to call!

Women's race: Prokupcuka stands head and shoulders above the rest

On the women's side, two names stands out, those of Jelena Prokopcuka, of Latvia, and Lidiya Grigoryeva of Russia. Grigoryeva is the defending champion, winning last year's race by 40 seconds over Prokopcuka. However, I expect the tables to be turned this year, and the Latvian will come out on top. She is certainly the class of the field in terms of times and overall racing history and credentials, though Grigoryeva has the Boston 2007 title in her collection.

But on Monday, expect Prokopcuka to end her run of second place finishes in Boston. In 2006, she was edged by 10 seconds by Rita Jeptoo of Kenya in the closest finish in history of the women's race. Then last year, the weather and Grigoryeva proved too much. But this year, expect her to race smarter and win. Her tactics are usually not too difficult to figure out - she goes to the front, runs a 2:25-tempo and anyone who can, stays with her for as long as possible. I expect the same on Monday, and I don't see too much of a challenge coming.

Rita Jeptoo, the 2006 champ in that tight finish, is in the field again, and may pose a challenge, but if the pace is in the mid 2:20's, then the relatively weak women's field should be thinned out early, and it will become a race between perhaps two or three athletes. Again, it will be a case of last woman standing, and barring a bad day on the roads for Prokopcuka, I expect that to be her!

Winning time? Difficult to call, because the way she races is not really conducive to consistent performances, because a bad day can become a disaster day if the slightest weakness starts showing - at least in a closer, tactical race, one can hide and be somewhat "carried" to consistency. But I'm going to go out on a limb and say that after a few podium finishes without a win (including 2nd in Boston twice and 3rd in New York last year), Prokopcuka gets it right and wins in 2:25:48.

Wrap-up

That's it for a bit of a tongue-in-cheek preview, let's hope the weather does play along on Monday - it's supposed to be a coolish day, with peak temperatures rising to about 12 Celsius (50F), with a slight chance of rain, and so provided the wind stays down, that's ideal for the elites. So let's hope for some great racing at fast paces.

Join us on Monday, soon after the race finish for the wrap-up and split time analysis, as for London last week!

Ross

P.S. For those of you not in Boston and without the Versus Network in America, you can log on to the web and watch the race live on the World Championship Sports Network at WCSN.com. It is an excellent and very affordable way to watch the action live since it is being broadcast on television only in Boston.

Marathon survival: Courage and physiology

Marathon survivorship – physiology of some courageous marathon finishes

Last week, we featured the debut marathon of Kayoko Fukushi of Japan. As the fastest Japenese woman ever over the HALF MARATHON, much was expected of Fukushi’s debut marathon in Osaka, but in the end, she left the world with memories of a different kind – 15 minutes to cover the final 2km, three falls in the final 300m in the finishing stadium, and testament to the challenges posed by the marathon distance.

In the aftermath of the race (you can watch the final 400m, as well as our analysis of the race at our previous post), Fukushi’s final 400m was a hot topic on discussion boards and running websites. So in this follow up post, we thought we’d look back on other famous marathon finishers. We tip our hats, and our physiological paintbrush, at the following three famous “Marathon survivors”.

Gabrielle Andersen-Scheiss

In 1984, for the first time, women were allowed to run the marathon at the Olympic Games. The race was won by Joan Benoit, in a remarkable time of 2:24:52, beating off a stellar field including Weitz, Kristiansen, and Rosa Mota. The time was remarkable for a number of reasons. Not least of all, conditions in LA were hot and heavy – ahead of the Games, there was a great deal of anxiety over potential problems caused by the pollution – much as there are around the Beijing Olympic Games this year.

But in the end, the heat caused the problems, and the biggest problems of all were encountered by Gabriela Andersen-Scheiss, of Switzerland.

Andersen-Scheiss entered Olympic Games AND Physiology folklore thanks to her performance over the final 400m of the race. This video, shown below, is often shown at physiological conferences as a demonstration of what happens to the physiology when the body temperatures rises to reach a ‘critical threshold’.

What you will see in the video below (apologies for the poor quality – if anyone has a better version, let us know!), is that Andersen Scheiss enters the stadium clearly in distress, and over the next 400m, staggers around the track, taking an incredible 5 minutes to cover the final lap! The video edits out much of this last lap (again, let us know if you know where a better version exists), but you can get a good idea of just what is wrong – it seems as though the left side of her body is dragging the “paralysed” right hand side behind it. And this is typical of what happens when the core body temperature rises to above 40 degrees Celsius.

The role of the brain

We’ve brought this up before, but it bears repeating – until the mid to late-1980’s, the theory for exercise in the heat was that you fatigued because the body was unable to provide sufficient blood to the skin for cooling AND the muscles for exercise. In this theory, dehydration was a problem because it meant less blood, which only worsened the problem. But in 1979, Ethan Nadel found the first evidence that the blood flow was not the problem. This finding was repeated in numerous studies, where they found that the body was perfectly capable of getting enough blood to muscle and to skin.

However, the body temperature can still rise (this is a function of exercise intensity and the environment), and when it happens, the evidence began to suggest that the brain was involved. Why? Because scientists started to observe that when people in LABORATORIES hit a body temperature of 40 degrees, they started to display symptoms of neurological problems. Which is exactly what you see in Andersen-Scheiss – “paralysis” of one half of her body, inability to control the limbs, and so forth. This classic symptom was strongly suggestive of the neural contribution to fatigue.

It was later found that when the brain gets too hot, it actually recruits less muscle (Nybo and Nielsen, 2001). Of course, when you exercise in the heat, it’s not quite as simple as a brain the stops activating muscle when you get too hot – I (Ross) did a study in 2004 that found that the activation of muscle actually goes down BEFORE you get too hot. In other words, the brain slows you down by activating less muscle IN ADVANCE of hyperthermia, specifically so that you don’t reach this point of complete exhaustion and ‘paralysis’.

However, as the video above testifies, it happens, with dramatic consequences. Andersen-Scheiss, for her part, became something of an Olympic legend as a result of her courage. She ended up finishing in 37^th place, some 20 minutes after Benoit. She was treated and released within 2 hours, showing how even the most intense effort is probably still within the reserve capacity for the body.

Jim Peters – the Vancouver 1954 marathon

Jim Peters of England was the Paula Radcliffe of his generation - he had broken the world record four times and was the first man to run under the 2:20 barrier, taking the record down by an astonishing eight minutes to 2:17:39!

So when he lined up in the 1954 Vancouver Empire State Games (today called the Commonwealth Games), he was the overwhelming favourite. This was the same Games, incidentally, that Roger Bannister and John Landy raced in what would later be called “the mile of the century”, with Bannister outkicking Landy to win. That race actually happed while this marathon was being run, and so Bannister actually sat in the stadium waiting for the men to finish.

Anyway, the marathon that day was particularly hot, and Jim Peters staggered into the stadium in first place, but was looking like he'd had too much to drink. He was swaying from side to side, and it looked as though one half of his body had been paralysed – much in the same way as Andersen-Scheiss would look 30 years later.

The conditions in Vancouver were pretty warm with starting temperatures in the shade in the high 20's Celsius. Reports were that the sun was so warm that the tar melted during the race! The temperatures may not jump out as being exceptionally high for those in the hotter parts of the world right now, but given that most of the athletes were not adapted to the heat, it was a tough day in the marathon. The conditions were so severe that out of 16 starters, only 6 finished the race.

Jim Peters was not one of them. After entering the stadium, with only 385 yards to run, Peters fell SIX TIMES within the first 200 yards. He took 11 minutes to cover that distance (making Fukushi look like a greyhound in her race!), before eventually collapsing for the final time – 200 yards SHORT of the finish line! He was taken to hospital, where he spent 7 hours being treated intensively before being released.

Incidentally, the athlete who was in second position with about two miles to run, Stan Cox, had also collapsed and ended up in hospital. At the 25 mile mark, he was so disoriented that he ran into a lamp-post, collapsing again. Eventually, police helped him to an ambulance, and he was taken to the hospital, where he’d later be joined by Peters.

And then finally, the eventual winner was a Scot, Joe McGee, who had actually collapsed five times on the course as well! But he heard that the two men who had been in front of him failed to finish, he picked himself up and went on to win! An attritional race if ever there was one!

The IronMan duel – Sian Welch and Wendy Ingram

And finally, for perhaps the most dramatic video we know of, we go to the IronMan Hawaii Triathlon of 1997, where Sian Welch and Wendy Ingram “race” over the final few hundred meters for fourth and fifth place.

This video, shown below, is difficult to watch, for the sheer agony that I’m sure most of you can relate to in some manner. It’s absolutely remarkable because it shows two elite athletes, both struggling with a combination of fatigue, muscle cramp and in the case of Welch in particular, hypoglycaemia. It’s quite clear that she’s in a disoriented state, and struggles to balance, find direction and stay co-ordinated.

Wendy Ingram, for her part, is cramping quite severely, and modifies her running style drastically in the final straight before the finish line.

What is most amazing, from a physiological point of view, is that the women move through different stages of what I would call “muscle activation patterns”. It’s as though there is a Plan A, which is to run absolutely normally, finishing strong (like some of the men who are finishing at around the same time as these two, you’ll see them in the background).

But given the difficulties both are experiencing, the brain quickly switches over the Plan B, which is this “modified running technique” – anything to keep going forward. Ingram’s “spider walk” is amazing, she’s clearly putting everything she has into what looks an incredibly uncomfortable running style!

Welch is unable to do even this – her muscles have simply been “switched off” and she has nothing left, mostly as a result of the low energy she has available and her fatigue – tired muscles with little fuel, and the brain says “No chance you’re running any more!” She’s unbalanced, uncoordinated and out of control. Eventually she staggers and walks to within meters of the finish line – she is on Plan C. But then she falls, taking Ingram down as well. And you’ll see in the video, the eventual winner between the two of them is the one who first realises the need for Plan D – Crawl!

So it’s an astonishing video, and you’ll hear reference to Julie Moss, a link you’ll find in the comments section of our Fukushi post from last week.

But this finish, and these two women, must surely go down as one of the bravest and most courageous, dramatic finishers in history!

Can you ever overcome the body’s limit through sheer willpower?

One question that is often asked when this whole area of “limits to performance” is discussed is this whole issue of “mind over matter”. What we are saying is that brain decides when “enough is enough”, and reduces the activation of muscle fibers BEFORE you even get near the dangerous levels of body temperature or fuel depletion, for example.

The logical question, however, is “Can an athlete, through sheer willpower, find that little bit extra, over-ride the brain’s protective reduction in muscle activation, and allow the athlete to go that little bit faster?” Professor Tim Noakes, who is one of the primary drivers of the theory of the brain protecting the body, often talks about the psychology and willpower aspects. And while they are relevant, I feel it’s not quite correct – it’s not simply a case that the guy who wants it most will win, which is unfortunately the spin that is often put on it.

So the answer is complex. Certainly, willpower and psychology play a role, and different people will tolerate different levels of discomfort. But I think that what these videos and stories show is that eventually, physiology wins the day. Peters, Welch, Andersen-Scheiss, and Ingram are all examples of athletes who have dug deep, found EVERYTHING their physiology has to offer, and quite literally run to the “edge of the limit”, but eventually, their physiology shuts down so completely that they simply could not run anymore. And yes, they survived. So in that sense, the brain did its job of protecting them, because all made recoveries, none “exercised themselves to death” (this happens, but it requires some special circumstances, we’ll discuss that in a future post).

So, to use a morbid analogy – no matter how badly you want to go, you cannot commit suicide by holding your breath – physiology wins. And similarly, during exercise, your willpower can take you that little bit closer to the limit. In fact, training takes you nearer that limit, since you learn what is tolerable and what is not. Motivation is of course important here too – given the right motivation, you might be prepared to tolerate a lot more than usual! But as you approach that “limit”, your body begins to progressively throw barrier after barrier in front of you. It becomes more and more difficult to hold the pace. Your brain is not activating muscle at the same level, and your perception of effort rises and rises. And eventually, physiology wins the day, and you stop, either voluntarily or because your legs fail to hold you up any more. This is human performance at the very extremes, but it’s still physiology!

Join us for exercise in the cold next post!

Ross