Good news for Paula

[canalrunner]

It looks like Paula Radcliffe has been cleared of doping allegations. Happy about this but it may be the nature of the times, but despite this, I am still not sure and that is sad for me and sad for Paula Radcliffe. Sadly it is easier to believe that an extraordinary athletic achievement was done with PEDs than to accept that perhaps it can be done without. I am glad, her runs were extraordinary. I want to believe.

http://runningmagazine.ca/marathon-record-holder-paula-radcliffe-cleared-of-doping-allegations/

[Robinandamelia]

Great news!

[ian]

Such is modern sport that with the sheer number of high-profile cheaters, it's becoming increasingly unlikely that a clean athlete can dominate the dirty ones. I wonder: if Paula had been less "like us" (e.g., white and western), would we have been less likely to believe her denials?

[fingerboy]

Not that I'm a Paula doper believer but the more time's been spent on anything the IAAF's said or done recently the less I believe anything.

I don't know what to believe anymore.

Though it is surprising that they are saying someone's clean in the days with a big witch hunt. Though at the same time, she's one of the pillars of the sport. If she goes, so does all credibility of the universe.

It's similar to just plain faith.

[Robinandamelia]

I read some article about Paula's genetic makeup (really high VO2 max) that contributed to her really fast running... There was this article regarding the sub 2:00 marathon possibilities http://rw.runnersworld.com/sub-2/

[canalrunner]

I read some article about Paula's genetic makeup (really high VO2 max) that contributed to her really fast running... There was this article regarding the sub 2:00 marathon possibilities http://rw.runnersworld.com/sub-2/

Good article with some interesting paragraphs about Paula:
The most astounding marathon outlier of all time is Paula Radcliffe. Her 2003 world record of 2:15:25 is nearly three minutes faster than any other woman in history. Lucky for us, physiologist Andrew Jones began studying her when she was a teenager—his data yields clues into her VO2 max and running economy, and the prospect for a sub-two marathon............So how did she progress from good to great? If VO2 max measures your oxygen supply, the other side of the equation is oxygen demand. A measure called “running economy,” like the fuel economy of a car, reveals how much oxygen your muscles require to maintain race pace. Reducing oxygen demand (by improving your running economy) is just as good as increasing oxygen supply. And that’s exactly what Radcliffe did—she followed a sophisticated weight-training program that boosted her vertical jump from 11 inches in 1996 to 15 inches in 2003, altering neuromuscular recruitment patterns that may have given her a more powerful push-off. She also decreased her sit-and-reach flexibility by 1.6 inches (yes, you read that right). Muscles and tendons act as springs that store energy; stiff springs may store and return more energy with each stride. So elites like Radcliffe tend to be less flexible in places like the hamstrings and lower back; indeed, in one study of elite runners, those who were eight inches less flexible on a sit-and-reach test ran 27 percent more efficiently. Despite Radcliffe’s famously ungainly form, her 15 percent improvement in running economy between 1992 and 2003 corresponded with her ascent to world-beater status.

This week's story confirms this assessment. Hoping future stories will too.