precariously perched atop a motorbike. Nine times out of ten, it seems, the audio signal is lost, which leads to the usual disconcerting dead-air time, uneasy banter and laughter, and strained apologies from the in-studio hosts about “technical difficulties.” On that rare occasion when the audio signal is a success, it’s inevitable that the on-the-spot commentator’s report will be garbled and swallowed up by background noise. Stick to description by the in-studio hosts who are constantly being provided with the best images and audio updates from colleagues along the course.

11. Slow-Motion Replays/Freeze Frames. Returning to the world of golf fora moment, it has become commonplace for a telecast to include slow-motion replays and freeze frames for expert analysis of some of the competitors’ swings. There is no reason why the same technology can’t be adopted by those broadcasting a marathon. Explain to the layman at home, in detail, what allows Deena Kastor to run as fast as she does. Feel free to use a Telestrator for further clarification. The technology can also be used to place two runners side by side, split-screen fashion, so that the audience can see differences in running style. And wouldn’t it be interesting to compare Paula Radcliffe’s form during mile five and her form during mile 22 side by side?

12. Highlight an Aid Station or Two. Is it just me, or is there always a sense of heightened drama when it comes to aid stations, particularly when a large pack of runners is involved? Why can’t a camera be dedicated to capturing one or two? Don’t get me wrong. It’s not the collision-waiting-to-happen factor that intrigues me, but rather the convergence of a variety of sport-specific details: the athletes jockeying for position as they approach the station, their concentration suddenly shifting from the road ahead to the almost festive-looking tables that display each athlete’s uniquely marked bottles; the volunteers poised, like matadors, to offer additional water and endurance drinks; hands reach, feet shuffle, mouths gape, water poured atop heads, water spilling down chins . . . this all needs to be captured on film. Additionally, it is often near the course’s final aid stations where the biggest strategic moves are made. Producers of car racing make a huge spectacle out of each and every pit stop. Triathlons, too, have elevated “transitions” into veritable events. The sport of marathoning should be able to borrow at least some of the drama for its own version.

So there you have it. My battered and bruised knuckles are already feeling better just airing some of these suggestions. Other fans of the sport probably have even more ideas. The important thing is to create a dialogue. The marathon has evolved quite a bit over the years. It’s time that television coverage of the event began to do the same.

in cas

Based on a six-year average.

nations or groups of nations and by various races. Currently, the event

is arguably shared between the Africans, Europeans, and Orientals, but it has not always been this way. The following study attempts to identify trends by attaching concrete numbers and graphical analysis to the women’s marathon from 1980 onward.

In a previous edition of Marathon & Beyond (March/April 2009), we looked at men’s marathon trends. This time we will examine the marathon trends for women and compare them to the men. Therefore, we include the men’s graph again alongside the women’s.

Cm the years, the women’s marathon has been dominated by various

Data analysis for the graphs The graphs on pages 70-71 chart the fastest average times run each year (the yearly world best) for the men’s and women’s marathons from 1980 to 2008. This is shown by the thick, solid black-line plot near the top of the graph. The black line represents a six-year world-best average. For example, the six-year world-best average time for women for the six years leading up to and including 2008 is 1 2 3 4 5 6 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2:19:19 + 2:20:38 + 2:19:36 + 2:17:42 + 2:19:41 + 2:15:25 = 13:52:21 + 6

World-best six-year average for 2008 = 2:18:43.5

MARATHON TIME 6-YEAR AVERAGE

world nth bests

Ist 10th 25th weeeee 50th —- 100th —— 200th – – – – world best —e— no average USA & Canada Europe Orient

Australia & NZ Britain & Ireland

Benelux USSR Scandinavia Africa

So. & Latin America Iberia

Yearly World Marathon Best Times Using 6-Year Average—Men

2:05 World = Africa

2:07 Europe

2:08 Orient USSR

2:09 Iberia

210 So. & L America Benelux

2:11 USA & Canada Australia

2:12 & NZ Britain & Ireland

2:13 a Scandinavia

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2008 ~=—— DATE

MARATHON TIME 6-YEAR AVERAGE

world nth bests Ist

world best —e— no average

Europe USA & Canada Britain & Ireland

Australia & NZ Benelux

Iberia USSR Scandinavia Germany

Orient Africa E. Blk. So. & Latin America

Yearly World Marathon Best Times Using 6-Year Average—Women

World Europe Orient

Africa Britain & Ireland

USSR E. Blk. USA & Canada

Germany

So. & L America

Australia & NZ Scandinavia Iberia

Benelux

2008 DATE

The yearly world bests correspond to black dots on the graph that are linked by a thin black line. The thick black line is generated by averaging the dots as per the equation above. A six-year average is taken because that is suitable for a trend to be seen. If only the world-best time for each year were used, the black line would be somewhat haphazard, as the thin black line connecting the black dots shows. If too many years are used, the plot is overly smooth and trends are somewhat lost as well as unresponsive. That is, it takes too long for the plot to respond to what is happening in reality. A six-year average incorporates a few years of lag, where there are sudden changes in performance, although for our purposes six years is suitable to reveal the bigger picture.

Women’s marathon trends

The women’s world best (six-year average) rapidly improved throughout the early 1980s. We use 1980 as the starting point because that coincides with a major milestone for the marathon, a boom, where popularity soared and performances significantly improved. Using a six-year average means the figures back to 1975 are included in the data. Performance rose steadily in the mid-1980s and then, like the men, experienced a plateau by the end of that decade. By the 1990s, there was a definite decline in the best times for both sexes. In the 2000s, like the men, the women also improved, overtaking where they peaked in the mid- to late-1980s over 10 years later. The women improved significantly in the 21st century.

Notice that the women’s improvement is relatively greater than the men’s improvement. The improvement during the initial boom was over 10 minutes in eight years for the women’s world best (six-year average). The men had a twominute improvement in the same period. Clearly, the women suddenly woke up to doing the marathon in the 1980s. It appears staggering that the women improved a further six minutes in their second wave (2000s) of ascendance, the men 2 3/4 minutes. However, it should be noted that six minutes would be 2 3/4 minutes if we ignored the times of Paula Radcliffe, but similarly for the men it would be 1 3/4 minutes if we ignored Haile Gebrselassie. Without these two champions, the women (and men) of the original marathon running boom were fairly close to the absolute best experienced today by the leading bunch of athletes.

Reasons for the shortfall include not sporting today’s shoe technology, not so much high-altitude training, lack of specialist medical/physiotherapeutic resources or dietary analysis, and to cap it all off, everyone had to go to work! Let us not forget that the first women’s Olympic marathon was not until 1984 (unlike the men) and that many an athletic authority during the ’70s (and ’80s) discouraged women from running long distances (unlike the men). In general, lack of available data suggests that very few women were running marathons until the mid 1970s (unlike the men) and not recognized as marathon winners until the late 1970s or

early 1980s (unlike the men). Lack of support, low numbers running, and an absence of high-quality competition (unlike the men) helped account for the delivery of a less-than-full potential. Either way, today any imbalance appears to be corrected, and like the men, women’s world-best marathon running is on a high.

The gap is closing .. . sort of

The difference between the world records for men and women is closing. Near the end of the first boom, the women’s world record was 2:21:06 and the men’s 2:07:12, both set in 1985 by Westerners. That is 11.15 miles per hour compared with 12.37 mph; the women were 10.95 percent slower than the men (mph is used to ascertain the percentage). Comparing the top African times by 2002, the women averaged 2:18:47 (in 2001) and the men 2:05:37; that translates to 11.34 mph and 12.52 mph—the women were 10.49 percent slower.

Finally, the current world records are women 2:15:25 and men 2:03:59, 11.62 mph and 12.69 mph, or 9.20 percent slower. Women are catching up and thus could have lagged behind even if we ignore the last percentage reading. To confirm that women are in proportion closing the gap, we have applied the same to the 100th-best performance in 1985, when women were 19.9 percent slower, 2002 at 15.00 percent slower, and 2007 at 14.80 percent slower. These percentages are about 5 percent more than the ones we identified earlier and clearly show the elite women of the pack have some way to catch up relative to the men. This elite men’s to women’s gap has settled around 15 percent as the percentage readings from 2002 to 2007 are similar and indicate more strength in depth in the men’s elite field because the absolute best women reduce the gap to 10 percent. Thus, statistically, there is less competition for the women’s world record compared with the men.

Where the world-best black dots are higher than the six-year average, there are conditions for the average to improve. Where the average is higher than the black dots, a fall in the average is to be expected. In terms of the average world best, the actual women’s peak was in 2006: 2:18:05. Earlier we stated “women’s world-best marathon running is on a high,” but the slight fall in the 2007 and 2008 plots implies that a decline could have begun. The fastest time in the last two years is 2:19:19 by Irina Mikitenko (second fastest by a Western woman after four better times by Radcliffe), which is well short of Paula Radcliffe’s 2:17:18 in 2002, the time that Irina’s replaces for the 2008 data set. Historically the men and women’s plots follow the same trend, so we can hope that the women’s downturn is more an anomaly to be corrected. But the cold facts indicate at the very least another plateau because the 2009 time (only 2:22:11 was achieved by the summer of 2009 at the time this article was finalized) will have to measure up to Paula Radcliffe’s lung-busting world record 2:15:25 of 2003.

The Paula and Haile show

Paula accounts for three world bests (black dots): 2002, 2003, and 2005, and is arguably past her world-best exploits. She is responsible for taking 8 minutes, 38 seconds off the world-best plot. Without her, the data indicates 2:19:31 is sustainable for the women. From 2005, the men’s world best was the domain of Haile Gebrselassie. He is responsible for taking 4 minutes, 42 seconds off the worldbest plot. Haile is still going strong! But at 35, same age as Paula, for how long? These two marathon colossi have set the ’00s high, just as Rob de Castella and Ingrid Kristiansen spearheaded the most world-best times during the late 1980s summit. Without Haile, the other men ought to sustain a world-best average of 2:06:00, especially given Olympic champion Sammy Wanjiru’s promise, but for now going beyond Haile, that is debatable. By mid-October 2009, there were two 2:04 times set by the men (seven 2:05s and thirteen 2:06s). So the men’s best is holding up, unlike the women, which reiterates the lack of ladies who could go under, say, 2:20 and keep the women’s plot where it has been.

We have implied a lull, another plateau for the women’s (and possibly men’s) marathon world-best time (six-year average). In the men’s article, we showed how this may not be because the nth-best times for men are steadily improving and other data, especially on up-and-coming runners, suggested improvement was possible. The women’s data is not so promising.

Look at the nth world-best plots for the ’00s. The nth plots are, for example, the 10th- and 25th-best female finisher for the year in the position the number indicates, averaged out for six years. The larger the n, the more consistent the year-to-year average, as a larger data sample is being taken. Also, the larger the n, the more the underlying trend is being identified as if reading an ocean current, the tips of the waves being the initial nth—first and thus world-best average, the depths being the 200th. The 200th has really flattened off. So at the moment, there is no improvement in the depth of elite women’s marathon running. The 100th has stalled, 50th appeared to peak, and 25th on the level. Only the 10th is still healthy. A quick look at the top 2009 times (to mid-October) reveals a best of 2:22 by Irina Mikitenko. Ethiopians pack the top 10; also Japan and Russia contribute in numbers. So, no sub-2:20 glory days of yester year then.

The women have stalled

So women’s marathon running appears to be standing still. This was not so during the plateau years of 1988 to 1998. The world best had stalled, but the nth bests showed a decent rise. Obviously, there was room to further pack strength in depth at that time, which was being remedied. Projecting the nth-best lines back to 1980 below the bottom line of the graph, the 10th best is 2:43:38, 25th best 2:47:56, 50th best 2:52:29, 100th best 2:58:11, and 200th best 3:08:00. These figures illustrate that in 1980 there were only a couple of hundred open-category decent women club runners in the world!

To highlight the lack of depth, the 2 hour, 34 minute world-best average of 1980 equals a top-200th woman today. By today’s standards, the likes of Grete Waitz and Allison Roe would be practically unknown. Their times were faster than 2:34 as the six-year average was vastly improving, dispensing slower times from the late 1970s. The top women of 1981-82 were topping out at 2:26. That equates to the 30th-best woman today. So today we effectively have 30 yesteryear 1981-82 world record holders. In truth, those 30 would not be unique, as they are 30, and were Grete or Allison to be transported through time to run their world records now (with all the advantages of today, especially altitude training), well, they would most certainly be sub-2:20 marathoners.

See how steep the plots are from 1980 to 1985. The top 10 world-best female marathoners in 1981 would not rank even in the top 200 by 1988. The top 200 plot begins to deviate from the other nth bests after 2000. The other plots climb while the 200th best creeps up only a tad. This is indicative of a deficit of really good club runners in the West. Some of the men’s Western-nation plots suggest this too, and the men’s article gave analysis to prove as much, but the men’s top-200th plot is still healthy because of the great African boom. For the women, not enough African (and Oriental) booming has happened to make up for the West’s shortfall. The original marathon-running boom of the 1980s helped create strength in depth. The second wave from the late 1990s built on this, which is evident in the top 50 and even top 100, but the top 200 deviates from running parallel. There are now four minutes rather than three minutes separating 100th from 200th. This same statistic is under two minutes for the men. The pyramid is supported by the base. Clearly, elite women’s marathon running is thinning—or rather not improving. This is surprising given the surge in numbers of women competing, especially in the United States and Europe, as marathon finishing numbers show.

Erosion of the elite base is somewhat hidden. What we ordinarily see is the best. For the men, we previously concluded that in 10 years’ time, were the upward trend to continue, we would see 10 Hailes all competing against each other. What a marathon feast that would be! It would be naive to project the women’s plots upward at this time, as we have predicted a plateau. The last plateau lasted 10 years; after that, expect a dozen Paulas and that amazing 2:15:25 world record to fall. Add in that women are closing the gap on men, say an 8.6 percent difference, so from an estimated men’s world record of 2:02:51 (deduced from data in the men’s article), we could be looking at a woman clocking 2:13:25, or just 2 1/2 minutes shy of five-minute mile pace for the marathon! Today the fastest women are better than were the top-200th man was in 1980. The current women’s world record often beats many a current men’s yearly national best! We will now investigate from which countries the top women are coming.

Names and nationalities

The original marathon-running boom (in the 1980s) was led by the West. The second burst 10 years later was spearheaded by Africa. The following section looks at the mechanics of this and puts names behind the nationalities.

The colored lines refer to the continents and selection of nationalities. The continental and national best times are also ‘trended’ using the six-year-average technique. Before these are explored, it is prudent to note that, for example, the time of an American runner of, say, Kenyan stock is included in African statistics. This gives accuracy in terms of race. Thus, we are able to see whether any particular race appears to be more naturally suited to the marathon. After all, the human race comes in many different shapes and sizes, so we ought to expect performance differences. This has already been investigated with the men, so it will be interesting to see whether the conclusions made hold true for the women. The main conclusion was the possibility that the farther south one went from Europe, the faster man appeared to go. This was mainly based on the degree of slight build, heat tolerance, and living on a high plain.

Those of mixed-race parentage are included where they live. Another technicality addressed is the adjusting of marathon times where the course is an incorrect distance, be it certified or otherwise. The database used (created from other databases) to compile the graph accounts for this and various other issues. Suffice it to say that every effort has been made to ensure that the data is accurate.

Western European powerhouse

The highest colored line at the start (1980) of the women’s graph is that of Europe. Its male counterparts came second to the American men, who were overtaken within a few years. The American women managed to be the top continent in 1985. The women’s European plot holds up very well to the extent that from 1994 to 1996, Europe assumed the world-best line. Europe is the amalgamation of the best times from the Euro-nation plots graphed and other countries (such as Romania). We would expect it to remain high given the many cultures and clusters of consciousness as opposed to the USA being more of a unified mass. In other words, there are many parts to Europe, which spreads the risk of a loss in form. It could be argued that the east and west US coasts (plus the Midwest) are separate entities, as well as the southern states and Canada, the latter having its own split between Quebec and the West. This is not as severe as having various distinct nationalities and cultures, affording strong marathon runner nuclei to be independent. From the ’00s, the European women slipped roughly two minutes slower than the world best, which equates to being three years behind (the world best). Europe currently holds the crown for the top continent, unlike the men where the Africans have taken over.

Examining Europe, we see that it all began (in the late 1970s) with Scandinavian women. The likes of Grete Waitz and Ingrid Kristiansen, both from Norway, helped push the boundaries, showing what was possible. In fact, in 1987 the dynamic duo constituted the European plot. The Scandinavian decline happened when the pair stopped being the best and, like the Norse men, the standards sharply fell. Recently, both Scandinavian sexes are slightly recovering, but nothing like the 1980s glory days, especially among the women.

The great British and Irish women arrived in the early 1980s with the veteran Joyce Smith. Also in this group were Priscilla Welch, Veronique Marot, Liz McColgan, and Catherine McKiernan—the main contributors to the best times, all under 2:27, Catherine going under 2:23. Britain really emerged as the leading European nation from 2002 when Paula Radcliffe turned her attention to the marathon. Paula contributed the most, ensuring that Britain and Ireland hold the European-country, six-year average best of 2:20:54, completed in 2007. Without the one-off Paula, the British/Irish plot would be the same style as the equivalent men’s curve. That is a 1980s boom, then bust, with a gentle decline. That pattern was established by the men’s “big three”: the USA and Canada, Britain and Ireland, and Australia and New Zealand. For the women, Scandinavia could arguably replace Britain and Ireland and be part of the big three—or make that a big four until the 1990s.

USA’s top guns

Speaking of the big three, the United States and Canadian women also mirror the boom/bust trend until 2000. The boom was largely 1983 world-record-holding Joan Benoit Samuelson’s doing, her best being 2:21:21, a world record in 1985. The bust was, well, an absence of anyone great, the plot slumping to beneath 50th best in the world. However, unlike the men (with the exception of Ryan Hall, whose impact is starting to dramatically improve the men’s US plot), the women’s plot has surpassed its previous high, which was close to the world-best line in 1985. Deena (Drossin) Kastor ensured that, her PB being 2:19:36 in 2006, fifth-fastest woman of all time and under the elusive 2:20 that Ingrid and Joan may have craved. Deena has been a consistent champion. Without Deena, the US/Canadian plot would be in decline. Deena is the US’s Paula, and incidentally, another from the most excellent 1973 vintage, 36 years old at time of writing. What future for the American women now that Deena is closer to 40 than 30? Expect a downturn, especially as both athletes (Deena and Paula) ran with or into injury during the recent Olympic Games. Soon after 1973, US women’s marathon running gathered pace and although times were not glorious, at least there were times posted. The top 200 world list was more a national record of America’s good club runners. Aside from Joan and Deena, only Julie Brown, Kim Jones, and recently Kara

Goucher of the USA have broken 2:27 since, and the Canadian record is over 2:27. In 2009 (to mid-October) three women from the USA—Kara Goucher, Desiree Davila, and Deena Kastor—ran under 2:30 but none under 2:27.

Down Under

To finish off the women’s big three, Australia and New Zealand also rode the 1980s boom. Allison Roe, Lorraine Moller, and Lisa Ondieki all contributed. After this trio, again there was a decline until Nicole Carroll and Kerryn McCann of Australia joined the sub-2:27 club. Today the times are struggling to get close (with the exception of 2006) to the three founders, but in real terms the standard has really dropped from Australia and New Zealand being eighth in the world to typically 80th! Benita Johnson did her best; without her, women’s marathon running down under would be down and well under the 100th best. To conclude the women’s big three, the shape of their plots is more or less the same as the men, which tells us that marathon trends per country do not like to discriminate between the sexes (the Scandinavian women’s high an anomaly).

Eastern Europe evolves

Britain and Ireland (and Scandinavia), rather than the whole of Europe, qualify as one of the big three because the plots show a distinct difference in the marathon trend of Britain and Ireland compared with continental Europe. Geography encourages this, Britain and Ireland being islands and so detached from the mainland. Scandinavia is somewhat remote, too, fostering a trend toward independence. In today’s integrated world, this would have less of a bearing, especially as Europe is becoming more unified through the European Economic Community. The fall of the Berlin wall acted as a catalyst for Eastern Europe to develop, and the marathon statistics followed suit.

We omitted Eastern Europe in the men’s graph as the West led the way and there was a question about the programs of the German Democratic Republic and other Eastern Bloc countries because of the use of performance-enhancing drugs. We included the USSR men’s plot, which is similar to the women’s. In the 1980s, Eastern Europe specialized in athletic throwing events and tailored its chemical cocktails to maximize muscle bulk and power, anaerobic rather than the aerobic; this would not be suitable to assist dainty female marathoners. The marathon men were more likely to be interfered with, although their performances were realistic. Throughout the 1980s and ’90s, the German women played a strong role, oscillating between the fourth best and 11th best in the world until the ’00s. German Christa Vahlensieck ruled Europe in the late 1970s. Charlotte Teske ruled in the 1980s, along with Katrin Dorre, and into the 1990s extra competition came with Uta Pippig’s PB 2:21:45 in 1994, when she was the chief protagonist, making Germany the leading

women’s marathon-running nation in the world. Across the border in Poland, there was also a peak in the 1990s, led by Wanda Panfil. For clarity, we have not plotted Poland on the graph, which is already a little busy. The graph is cluttered, but then we wish a direct comparison between nations, including all the big players. Poland and Germany are now in decline, but farther east the USSR is not.

For ease of classification, we use the USSR rather than just Russia. The USSR includes a vast area of Asia (although nearly all elite athletes are from the European section): the Baltic states, the Caucasus, Ukraine, and Belarus. Since 2003, European USSR has been vying for the top European group with Britain and Ireland. However, unlike the latter, the former has many athletes near the top as opposed to one superwoman. Svetlana Zakharova, Galina Bogomalova, and Lyudmila Petrova (over-40 world record holder) lead the bunch, all under 2:22 with many others a little slower.

The table on page 85-86 is a list of nth, continents’, and countries’ six-yearbest averages. It includes countries not included in the graph. It also breaks down regions graphed like Iberia, which consists of Spain and Portugal. Romania is of interest, featuring high up on the list. Romania contributes to the best European times through Lydia Simon and Constantina Dita (PB 2:21:30). Olympic champion Constantina was a regular second best in Europe behind Paula. In fact, in 2005 the Romanian pair, backed up by other female Romanians, achieved a six-year average of 2:23:22. Romania led the way in Europe in the early ’00s. The plot, which includes Romania, encompasses the southern ex-Warsaw Pact countries. That is the region sandwiched between Ukraine and the Balkans, taking in Hungary (strong in the 1980s) and farther up the Danube into Czechoslovakia, whose greatest input would have been in the early 1990s but for at least one marathoner’s drug consumption. Regarding the Romanian women marathoners and other Eastern European countries, despite taking a little longer than their Western neighbors and big bear (Russia) farther east to make an impact, Romania has never really been in the cold, unlike its male counterparts. The Romanian women have triumphed while the men of that country are almost frozen-out no-shows (apologies to Marian Dragulescu). The same has been and is still probably so for gymnastics in Romania. So best be a woman if you wish to have a sporty incarnation in Romania. Thus, contrary to what we deduced earlier, there are exceptions: men and women of the same nation do not always mirror each other for the marathon.

The Mediterranean

The French women do not feature, and the men were not very prolific either. Has the French craving for the bicycle channeled its sporting prowess away from travel on foot? Some countries do not join the marathon party, and others need a special talisman/woman to kick-start the nation. It usually takes a couple of top

athletes to build a high six-year average. Occasionally a single athlete manages to have a super set of six or more years at the top without any other marathoner stealing her thunder. Rosa Mota of Portugal, with a 2:23:39 PB, epitomizes being number one for her country. She dominated from 1982 to 1991 and became the European and world number one. She accounted for the Iberian success, which includes Spain, hitherto unsurpassed. Carla Beurskens of the Netherlands did much of the same for her country. The Netherlands is part of Benelux, which also has Belgium and Luxembourg. Both the Iberian and Benelux plots declined until Marleen Renders of Belgium went under 2:24 three times recovering Benelux in the ’00s. The Benelux and Italian plots are very similar, although Italy had and has quite a few athletes rather than just one.

The Iberian and especially Italian men have done better than their feminine equivalents. The top Italian is Maura Viceconte, going under 2:24 in 2000. There is a lack of Spanish women, their best just making the top 100. You may recall that in the men’s article it was ascertained that Mediterranean man was a little faster than his northern neighbor. The women do not suggest this, and in fact, as a generality, the opposite could be said. Thus we question our statement that the farther south toward Africa we travel, the faster marathon man (and woman) becomes. Or we could ponder whether Mediterranean woman is capable of more, given that heat management is so important in the marathon, something that warmer-climate athletes are better at.

Latinos

The men’s article highlighted how similar the Iberian and South/Latin American plots were. This is not quite the same for the women. South/Latin American woman developed in the 1990s five years after Iberia, then effectively matched it in the ’00s. The women’s South/Latin American performances have reached a plateau, are declining, and did not achieve the success of the men. Brazilian women, unlike the men, do not feature. The Mexican Madai Perez, who ducked under 2:23, is the best in this continental group. It may be that Latin as well as Tberian man is more suited to the marathon compared with the women. We are not talking much of a difference, and it may well simply be that the slight performance gap between the sexes is due to inequality sidelining women not so prevalent in northern Europe, the US, and Australia/New Zealand. Equal opportunity and support are not befitting of underdeveloped countries, and that usually translates as the women losing out to the men.

The Orient Express

The Orient is a more independent cell compared with the rest of the world. The Orient marathon-running scene is historically self-sufficient, albeit insular. Unlike the men, the women took a decade or more to get there. Not having a finger on the pulse of Oriental equality, we can only speculate as to why there was a delay for women to ensure the Far East became a major player. It is gratifying to see the imbalance has long since been corrected; Mrs. Yin is able to go training with Mr. Yang.

The women’s plot was busy rising in the 1990s where most of the other nations were stalling. During this time, China turned its attention to the marathon, especially for the women. That is not “the women” but “for the women,” as China directs its populace to act, the state creating the provision to run by decree rather than individuals (like Frank Shorter) kick-starting something new. Yet many a Chinese entry has not been included in the data. This is because China (as opposed to Chinese individuals) had (and has) an extensive enhanced-performance program involving drugs. Such programs affect women more than men because the drugs tend to turn women into men. We excluded from the database (used to generate the graph) the marathon performances of any drug users we could identify. Drug users include whole regimes in the cases of China and North Korea.

By the mid-1990s, dozens of athletes from China simply disappear en masse from the rankings. The 1993 official ranking places eight Chinese in the top 13, with the top four all Chinese. In 1994, none were in the top 20! Chinese athletics remains a closed door to this day. Nearly all of its women compete solely in China, where it is obviously easier to keep a lid on any shenanigans. The performances by Chinese women athletes are included only where they run outside of China and North Korea, greatly increasing the likelihood of any cheats being caught. In that respect, when we talk about the Orient, consider that virtually all of the data used is Japanese (and South Koreans). The views expressed here obviously do not represent the major athletic bodies like the IAAF, which would be obligated to find proof if such a statement were made. The point is simply being made that there is no fooling the wise.

Currently, Mizuki Noguchi and Yoko Shibui are at the top and in their prime, both just under 2:20, as was Naoko Takahashi, the best a few years back. There is strength in depth, with four ladies under 2:23 and others in waiting. The top 200 is very well inhabited by Japanese and some South Korean female marathon runners. Thus, like the men, the female Japanese frame, with stereotypically shorter, more muscular legs, is good for marathoning.

Out of Africa

The last force to enter the women’s marathon arena was Africa. When we refer to Africans, for the marathon, that pretty much excludes West Africans and Afro-Americans, who very seldom have an input to the statistics. They appear a heavier, more muscular set suited to the sprints. The African women managed to

miss the 1980s and the slump of the 1990s and finally participated in earnest in the ’00s. The Kenyans and Ethiopians suddenly took over and almost assumed the world-best line as their own. It all started with Tegla Loroupe of Kenya, who peaked in the late 90s, going under 2:21, as did Catherine Ndereba and Margaret Okayo, both from Kenya, and Birhane Adere of Ethiopia in the ’00s. Catherine Ndereba’s 2:18:47 in 2001 is the fastest African time and second-fastest woman in history. There are other East Africans under 2:22 just ahead of a rapidly increasing number of sub-2:25ers. East Africa is principally split between the Kenyans and Ethiopians, which encourages rivalry and subsequently better performances.

Unlike the men, there is only one female Moroccan (and Algerian) close to the top. Aside from the lack of North Africans, African women’s marathon running largely parallels the men’s success. However, the African women have been recently eclipsed by the Europeans, and that is not all because of Paula Radcliffe. The Japanese women measure up to the Africans, too. African women do not pack the top 200 quite like the men do. African men make up 80 percent of the top 200, while the women make up about 30 percent (about 40 percent of the top 50).

In the men’s article, we thought the East African men were naturally more suited to the marathon, given their dominance. The statistics suggest this is also true for the women. Obviously there will always be exceptions, but as a generalization, consider your marathon time a few percent faster were you to be African. The men’s article speculated that this is not all due to living at a higher altitude on the African continental shelf. The African’s slight build and ability to manage heat helps. What does not help the women is inequality, which underdeveloped Africa facilitates. The women have certainly woken up to doing the marathon, but why did it take 10 years longer than the men? Lack of opportunity in underdeveloped countries would be a major factor, and social attitudes toward women is another. If it is ingrained in the national psyche that the woman’s place must be in the home, then we have the conditions for suppression of outside pursuits, be they external jobs or distance running. Today the Kenyan system has running scouts and numerous running camps for elite athletes. Women (guessing here) are a part of this, duly mixing the pool of talent and creating in-house, high-quality competition. This recipe for success could burgeon further, and so ought we to brace ourselves for the female African marathon invasion to go further?

The world plots show a definite cycle, both men and women having a second boom and then leveling off. So can we expect a consolidation period? This could apply to the African cycle, albeit on the first plateau. Given the oft-fractious nature of their political stability, it would not be a complete surprise to see Kenya (which was and arguably still is in a state of civil war), Ethiopia, and others disintegrate like Zimbabwe (and South Africa), Angola, Rwanda, and so on. In other words, forces greater than running itself may dictate the trends.

A fair race?

Man does not always create a level playing field. So expect nations to rise and fall, affecting marathon performance. What does remain (effectively) constant is man’s physical body. Despite the diversity of build, there is little deviation from what can be achieved. So performance is not necessarily dependent on race. This ensures that the marathon is a fair race. Any unfairness occurs where man creates the conditions for that to be so, examples of which we have noted. East Africans may appear to have an unfair advantage, but they are simply at the forefront of developing the marathon, and we could proffer there is little to stop other countries from following such a role model, man being the factor, not his race.

Sport in general is developing, too. In the men’s article, we noted in particular the triathlon, plus swimming, cycling, skiing, and even soccer and ball sports particular to the US poaching would-be marathon runners in the West. We also noted that prize money is a factor. There is greater incentive where there is a possible living to be made out of marathon running. Top marathon runners typically have a dozen opportunities to run 100 percent. Not many paydays, then. Women having babies have even fewer opportunities. In the 1980s, prize money was almost incidental, but in today’s high-pressure world, it is essential for the professional athlete. The standards are higher and training more involved

to achieve what is required. Everything has to work in a glorious symphony of training, personal economics, and destined harmony to sustain, let alone push beyond, the current high.

Africans abroad

In the men’s article, we stated that the trend for Africa to lead the way looks to continue. Having seen the beginnings of a downturn in the African women’s top performances, we wonder whether the potential for an African bust is there. That would be local to African nations, and while one running superpower is down (be it at war), another could remain up, lessening any major downturn. Also, we noted that there is a tendency for the cream to skim itself off into the United States and southern Persian Gulf (oil) lands. There is even a cluster of elite African women in the Netherlands (and an African won the recent European cross-country championships). Thus, good African performance, albeit under a different flag, would remain. It has been established that the Caucasian element of the big three has the same marathon trend. There are Africans within the big three, containing elite marathon runners who learned their craft in Africa. This percentage is increasing, probably proportionate with globalization. The scent of money is being followed, and it is increasingly common for Kenyan women to win American (and European) marathons and even take the next step to live abroad, economics being a factor. A few years ago, some of the Ethiopian team spontaneously emigrated after an international meeting in Gateshead, England, and regularly ran for a Scottish club!

Home-grown conclusion

While the West is attracting some of the best from Africa, the West’s own supply of talent has dwindled. In the men’s article, we highlighted that, today, the best was supported by a paper-thin pack. This is also true for the women. It is fantastic that numbers running the marathon are up, especially for women; however, the bulk jog, plod, or simply walk—not providing an increase in talent. Currently in the West, there is a circa tenfold decrease in high-quality club runners compared with the initial marathon running boom. This is especially so for the women, whose participation base hits the wall when standards rise.

In America, the heady days of densely populating the world top 200 women’s marathon list are long gone. Top US marathon development seemingly stopped evolving after the mid-’80s (apologies to Ryan and Deena). We will not try to examine the reasons for this but note: to all things there is a life cycle, and even the endless marathon must reach its conclusion. Man and woman are built to run, the prerogative of the biped. That does not mean we have to use the God-given

gift of travel on foot. A nation may choose to rest, but you (as an M&B reader/ runner) have not turned down the opportunity to fly along feeling fantastic!

Main sources for statistics: ARRS and IAAF, from which another database was compiled. PeterHarvey! @btinternet.com

National/World Marathon List: Six-year average (race adjusted)

WOMEN

World-best 2:18:05 2006 Europe 2:19:35 2007 Africa (all Kenya) 2:20:12 2003 The Orient, all Japanese 2:20:37 2005 Britain & Ireland (all GB) 2:20:54 2007 Ethiopia 2:22:18 2008 USSR 2:22:50 2006* S. Warsaw Pact (all Romania) 2:23:22 2005 Russia 2:23:22 2006 World top 10 2:23:29 2007 USA & Canada (all USA) 2:23:45 2006 Scandinavia (all Norway) 2:23:54 1989 Germany 2:24:49 1999 Benelux (all Belgium) 2:25:06 2002 World top 25 2:25:16 2006 Latvia 2:25:20 2008 Iberia (all Portugal) 2:25:44 1990 Italy 2:25:44 2003 S. & Latin America (all Mex.) 2:26:08 2003 Australia & New Zealand 2:26:35 1993 Poland 2:26:54 1994 World top 50 2:27:18 2006 Australia 2:27:36 2002 Netherlands 2:28:31 1990 Spain 2:28:49 1999 Belarus 2:29:06 1992