I’ve ridden the Boston course on my bicycle. I read somewhere that a time in Boston would be ineligible for a world record, because there’s too much elevation drop from the start to the finish. And also that no one will ever set a world record time in Boston because there are too many up and down hills on the course. Flatter is faster.[sup]*[/sup]
I’m sure it’s safest and fairest to start the wheelchairs separately from the runners. But I think it’s also part of the event to have everything build up to the finish of the men’s race. They even start the Red Sox game early so the fans can be out in time to see the end of the race.
When I read that, I think it was talking about runners only. Don’t know if it applies directly to wheelchair marathoners, too.
This year the winner of Boston ran the fastest marathon time ever recorded; 2:03:02. But it doesn’t count as a record because Boston is a downhill course and illegible for IAAF records. It’s over 30 seconds faster than the 2nd best time, set later this year in Berlin. The hills are tough, but it can be very fast course if run properly.
The mens wheelchair marathon record was set in 2004 in Boston at 1:18:27.
Formal city racing events clear the streets for the race, in which case the wheel of a racing wheelchair wielded by a top form athlete will totally rock, because a well designed and maintained wheelchair is far more efficient at preserving momentum.
But if it’s an informal and improptu “city streets course of a few miles”, like two people in Manhattan saying “race you from here outside Grand Central Station to the tip the Battery when the crosswalk light turns green”, obviously the foot runner has the advantage because of all the cars, pedestrians, buses, etc., in the way, not to mention the constant stopping at corners that will be necessary that will totally kill the momentum preserving advantages of the wheelchair.
Or if the race course goes through narrow, tiered cobblestone streets like in Toledo (Spain) or similar old cities throughout Europe.