Athletics Weekly | New IAAF ratification rules will result in scrapping of most historical records - Athletics Weekly

New IAAF ratification rules will result in scrapping of most historical records

This topic contains 115 replies, has 29 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of dpickup dpickup 8 months ago.

Viewing 25 posts - 76 through 100 (of 116 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #65831
    Profile photo of luckyspikes
    LuckySpikes
    Participant

    Heptathlon WR would also go (should have gone when they changed the javelin spec of course)

    Yes, thanks, I missed that. So the new record would still be Joyner-Kersee but with a much more attainable 7044 points.

    #65833
    Profile photo of craigj
    craigj
    Participant

    Just as ridiculous as the other proposal, and by mentioning Radcliffe & Edwards in particular it appears that they are pandering to specific athletes wishes. Paula has retweeted this so are they against it completely, or do they selfishly just want a date that means they keep their own records?

    Had some of them not been broken recently, starting from 1991 would mean that the outrageous Chinese records would still stand, and are we really any more confident about the new record holders in those events anyway? If anything ever does transpire they will revert to the Chinese again. What on earth does getting rid of Flo-Jo’s records, but allowing someone like Wang Junxia’s, who still has the 3k record, to stand achieve?

    #65847
    Profile photo of larkim
    larkim
    Participant

    I agree, it solves nothing. We have no more proof that some of today’s records are clean than we have that some of the old records were doped.
    It’s an unnecessary side show.

    #65861
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    It would appear that those who consider the latest proposals irrelevant, a sideshow or impossible to be equitable about are prepared to accept, reluctantly maybe, the gigantic farce that we have endured in the sport since the nineteen eighties when there was little or no proper testing, no blood testing I believe, no passports, and science was way behind todays method of checks.
    Why should we reject any attempt to disavow the copious cheats of yesterday which we are all aware, because the new system of reset cannot be perfect.
    Don’t get it.!!!

    #65866
    Profile photo of craigj
    craigj
    Participant

    So are you for the proposals, and from which date?

    There is no prefect solution, you can’t wipe records arbitrarily and whatever date is chosen some athletes records are going to end up as collateral damage if you wipe them all. This 1991 date is a nonsense though, if they’re going to argue that it’s about having trust in the records then I suspect retesting and passports have caught far more people than out of competition testing did. It didn’t catch Marion Jones, the Chinese, the two disappearing Greeks (who could never be located anyway) or countless others that are dubious. Is 1991 just a convenient date as it’s the more recent athletes who’ve complained the loudest, and Paula will be first in the queue at CAS if they go ahead with the original proposals?

    #65872
    Profile photo of sovietvest
    sovietvest
    Participant

    Another example if how utterly incompetent the sport is at marketing itself. Why on earth is this being discussed two days before the Word Champs? Yet again Hansen reinforces “doping” and “athletics” in the minds of the public. If he was the CEO of a major company and gave an interview days before a product launch that raised some previous negative publicity, he’d be fired.

    If Paula and Edwards drop their opposition to this, they are hypocrites.

    #65873
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    I would say start a new set of records from ,say, January 1, 2018 or 2019 and call them by a new name; simple stuff, pre and post 2018 world records or better Old WRs and new WRs. All the crap we have observed all these years and which many will just accept with a ” oh well, we cannot do anything about it shake of the head” I find somewhat depressing; in case the lawyers get busy.
    You know what you can do with CAS… !!

    I am indifferent to certain athletes whose egos could do with bringing down a bit. This whole issue is bigger than a handful of athletes!
    Just because we reset cannot mean that nobody ever tries to cheat again; that’s so obvious that it does not mean a thing.
    There is no perfectly satisfactory way of dealing with the issue.

    #65875
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    The 2017 WC stats book is out online; great stuff as always.
    I note that Page 16 has a list called 21ST Century World Bests… like it.!!

    #65883
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    I will never be in favour of this proposed reset of world records.

    Most people don’t know or give a fig what the world records are. Those that do, e.g. most on this forum, recognise which are dodgy and which are not.

    So why penalise people who hold clean records ?

    I’m no way convinced that what we now watch can be considered ‘clean’. I hope things are improving, but then I’m an optimist.

    #65886
    Profile photo of miles
    miles
    Participant

    The 2017 WC stats book is out online; great stuff as always.
    I note that Page 16 has a list called 21ST Century World Bests… like it.!!

    Great to see the new stats book, always enjoy that; however doesn’t seem to be downloadable as a PDF this time which is a shame.

    #65890
    Profile photo of laps
    Laps
    Participant

    I am in favour of resetting the records and indeed the latest proposal. Refreshing and good for the sport to recognise its past failings and try as best it can to correct them. It needs to turn over a new leaf and this is a necessary part. Just my opinion, but there again I am optimistic that with an increasingly determined drug testing regime coupled with regular retrospective testing Athletics will come as close as any sport will to a dope free environment. Of course it cannot do the impossible.

    #65996
    Profile photo of ursus
    Ursus
    Participant

    I will never be in favour of this proposed reset of world records.

    Most people don’t know or give a fig what the world records are. Those that do, e.g. most on this forum, recognise which are dodgy and which are not.

    So why penalise people who hold clean records ?

    I’m no way convinced that what we now watch can be considered ‘clean’. I hope things are improving, but then I’m an optimist.

    Agreed, Steve.

    Just because records were set in a certain era doesn’t mean they’re automatically dirty. There are some, that I think we’d all agree are “dubious”. Flo Jo’s for instance were so inconsistent with her past that we can’t really take them seriously.

    But others from that era eg wHJ and mDT have been closely challenged, and for that reason alone are credible to stay on the books. Athletics doesn’t have linear rates of improvement, it has always thrown up exceptional performers, and one off performances, light years ahead of their contemporaries. Has anyone ever had real cause to doubt Beamon, Edwards, Bubka, Bolt or Zelezny? One day there will be a female Bolt or WvN who’ll consign some of the most dubious track records to history. But athletes of that calibre don’t come around every day.

    Still firmly of the view that we should retain the status quo…..unless we can be 100% certain that any new records will be clean. Which we can’t.

    #71161
    Profile photo of dpickup
    dpickup
    Participant

    This matter is in the news again:
    ‘The proposal by the European Athletics Council to disregard all athletic world records set before 2005 should be abandoned, insist experts in an editorial published online in the British Journal of Sports Medicine.’

    I agree.

    For full article see
    https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-12/b-dpt120517.php

    #71168
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    Never saw it as anything other than a lunatic proposal, punishing clean athletes were it to be adopted.

    And there is no guarantee that I’ve seen that can reassure us all (without doubt) that all recent world records are clean.

    #71225
    Profile photo of dpickup
    dpickup
    Participant

    Slowly current athletes are chipping away at the pre-2005 WRs.
    Currently
    – Men’s WRs: 12 of the 24 are pre-’05
    – Women’s WRs: 13 of the 24 are pre-’05

    A look at the ‘stubborn’ 25 WRs prompts one to think that there are athletes out there that could break some of them in the next season or two …

    #71274
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    To those who disagree with this idea what do you think is the actual solution then?

    The idea that future records maybe unclean is exactly what is holding athletics back. You keep everything the same people aren’t any better than the ones who are coming with ideas to change the sport.

    You’ve got athletes out here doing outstanding performances and are losing out on sponsorship, revenue etc because no one cares about their performances… why? because the general public just look at world records and say wow they are still so much slower than XXXX

    So I will ask again before posters come with semantics and what ifs

    WHAT IS THE SOLUTION?

    #71277
    Profile photo of dpickup
    dpickup
    Participant

    JustRunFast
    Like Brexit, Jerusalem … there is no easy answer
    Meanwhile the sport’s Championships excite and delight …

    Breaking those pre-’05 WRs
    Men
    DT 74.08 ’86 – not yet
    HT 86.74 ’86 – not yet
    SP 23.12 ’90 – top men are nudging up, Crouser, Kovacs, Hill
    LJ 8.95 ’91 – not yet
    400h 46.78 ’92 – not yet
    HJ 2.45 ’93 – Barshim has been near …
    4x400r 2.54.29 ’93 – not yet
    TJ 18.29 ’95 – Taylor b.90 & Pichardo b.93, set the event alight in ’15
    JT 98.48 ’96 – some amazing surprises lately but still 4.04m to go
    1500 3.26.00 ’98 – got-near Kiprop & Kiplagat now past their peaks …
    5000 12.37.35 ’04 – not yet
    stch 7.53.63 ’04 – Kipruto 0.01 sec off 6-yrs ago!
    Women
    800 1.53.28 ’83 – Semenya – but that’s another story
    400 47.60 ’85 – not yet
    SP 22.63 ’87 – not yet
    HJ 2.09 ’87 – Lasitskene b’93 3cm off & young
    LJ 7.52 ’88 – not yet
    DT 76.80 ’88 – not yet
    100 10.49 ’88 – not yet
    HEP 7291 ’88 – not yet
    (12.69/0.5, 1.86, 15.80, 22.56/1.6//7.27/0.7, 45.66, 2:08.51)
    200 21.34 ’88 – not yet
    4x400r 3.15.17 ’88 – not yet
    TJ 15.50 ’95 – not yet
    MAR 2.15.25 ’03 – not yet
    400h 52.34 ’03 – Muhammad 0.3 off

    ADD there will be great surprises next year in our sport in any 1 of the 48 events, though whether at WR level we’ll have to see.

    #71280
    Profile photo of larkim
    larkim
    Participant

    @JustRunFast – I disagree, no-one is lacking interest in, say, w100m despite the fact that the WR is out of reach, for example.

    Interest is generated by good competition between well matched athletes with some degree of unpredictability just as much as it might be by a dominant individual achieving world record performances.

    Any records which are dodgy just have to stand in the absence of sufficiently reliable evidence to overturn them. And today that means short of the individual coming forward and admitting to the doping we should just let these records stand and trust that the development of the sport will at some point allow them to be over-taken by athletes held to the standards of the day in terms of testing / results.

    We can’t prove records are clean TODAY so the only practical thing to do is recognise that there are limitations, accept them, and move on whilst continually trying to refine testing processes so that those limitations gradually fall away.

    #71310
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    @Larkim

    You are thinking from your own perspective as a hardcore athletics fan and not someone who just follows the sport. It’s easy to say we should just let standards surpass some records, some are not being touched for another decade or more who is getting close to 47.60 in the womens 400????

    First questions general sports fans ask is:
    1. What did X run?
    2. How far is that from the world record?

    Of course no one is thinking about this from an athletes perspective certain records have been untouchable for nearly 30 years. While we as an athletics community understand how good some athletes are they won’t ever get the recognition they deserve simply because they are so far down the All time list.

    Are people gonna actually sit here and tell me Valerie Adams is genuinely the 22nd best shot putter of all time and Brittney Reese is the 9th best Long Jumper? ERASE THEM RECORDS

    #71311
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    Also please lets get out of the athletics community bubble and act like people don’t down play the abilities of current athletes because they are so far behind some world records. We are not talking about generating interest at worlds and olympics these happen by default. We are talking about improving the the profile of our sport from individuals to whole seasons of track and field.

    If people are ok with athletics being just about a world and olympic games then sure leave everything as it is. :unsure:

    #71321
    Profile photo of levitasverum
    LevitasVerum
    Participant

    There should be a distinction made between world record performances which will be verifiable by the inevitable progress in anti-doping detection technologies and those performances that are not verifiable because samples were intentionally destroyed thereby preventing future testing. Whether we like it or not all performances achieved during the era before samples were preserved, are unverifiable. This is similar to world record performances achieved before the introduction of robust verification processes including electronic timing and anemometers etc.

    I am sure all athletes would like to beat these historical world records, however they should not be penalised financially when no one can prove that these world records were achieved without the direct or indirect aid of performance enhancing drugs.

    #71324
    Profile photo of larkim
    larkim
    Participant

    @Larkim

    You are thinking from your own perspective as a hardcore athletics fan and not someone who just follows the sport. It’s easy to say we should just let standards surpass some records, some are not being touched for another decade or more who is getting close to 47.60 in the womens 400????

    First questions general sports fans ask is:
    1. What did X run?
    2. How far is that from the world record?

    Of course no one is thinking about this from an athletes perspective certain records have been untouchable for nearly 30 years. While we as an athletics community understand how good some athletes are they won’t ever get the recognition they deserve simply because they are so far down the All time list.

    Are people gonna actually sit here and tell me Valerie Adams is genuinely the 22nd best shot putter of all time and Brittney Reese is the 9th best Long Jumper? ERASE THEM RECORDS

    Honestly, I think you over-state the importance of records like this. Look at the public perception of someone like Farah for example. Do most Brits care (or know) about the gap between his performances as the world records? I suspect in truth it is only the hardcore athletics fans that do know or care. I equally doubt that when Bekele was crushing those records that many other than hardcore fans knew or cared about it.

    When watching on TV or reading about it in the press (which is where most non-hardcore fans will learn about the sport) what most fans would want to see is good quality competition. Which is why the m100m final was eagerly anticpated this year in London (no-one in their right minds thought the WR was in any danger).

    There may be limited interest in many disciplines at big meetings, but that is largely down to the hardcore fans not really being engaged or enthused, or lack of local interest at the sharp end.

    Obsessing about World Records would be way down the list for most people.

    #71325
    Profile photo of larkim
    larkim
    Participant

    And I also don’t thin we can ever realistically expect interest in athletics to extend much beyond the Olympics and the World Champs. And t’was ever thus.

    #71328
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    And I also don’t thin we can ever realistically expect interest in athletics to extend much beyond the Olympics and the World Champs. And t’was ever thus.

    I agree with your penultimate post, Matt, but not this one.

    There used to be tremendous interest in European Athletics, and the four-yearly Champs were well attended. As were the Europa Cup and the World Cup, subsequently now ruined.
    In fact the old International matches used to be televised and quite popular as well.

    #71337
    Profile photo of larkim
    larkim
    Participant

    Perhaps I lost a little nuance in that, and I’m sure you’re right Steve in some regards. But we’ve still got to contextualise this.

    I know football is a poor example in some ways but the numbers are telling when we’re trying to describe “interest” and “popularity”. Every weekend about 30-40,000 crowd into 20 Premier League stands in England to watch their sport in person. Add in the other leagues plus Scotland and we must be getting close to 1,000,000 people every weekend physically watching a sport.

    Even with a big DL meeting over 2 days, we’re talking about 100,000 in the UK annually (perhaps a little more). And even in the halcyon days of the past, UK attendance at an athletics meeting would barely have registered when compared to other “popular” sports.

    And yet, we still get DL broadcast on terrestrial FTA TV, the Olympic programme revolves around the culmination of the Games being the athletics, the World Champs are broadcast live, we’ve got indoor UK meetings plus indoor worlds and europeans broadcast. Given how few people actually participate or go in person to watch, athletics is very well supported on TV channels, and given how demand led that sort of programming is surely we have to conclude that the British population at least remains interested in watching athletics on the TV.

    But in between each major event, does the man in the street follow athletics any more or less than they really used to? I get my interest in athletics from my dad, and yet growing up in the 70s and 80s even he was only really cogniscent of the headline grabbers either in terms of outright performance or in terms of rivalries and / or personalities.

    I think we’re looking back with rose tinted glasses a little, though that of course may be my blinkers too – I can only describe what I think I see!

Viewing 25 posts - 76 through 100 (of 116 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Product Reviews View All
Don't Miss
Videos
AW Offers