http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2005/04/13/soaths13.xml
By Tom Knight (Filed: 13/04/2005) Paula Radcliffe's ability to earn vast sums of money from racing could reach comic proportions if she wins Sunday's London Marathon, where prize money and bonuses totalling $255,000 would be paid on a world record that is three minutes slower than her best time. A third London victory for Radcliffe, who has been paid $500,000 just to turn up, would also mean substantial bonuses from her various sponsors and leave the British runner with a cool $1 million (£530,000). It was, however, an unusually diffident Radcliffe who arrived in London yesterday to learn that the organisers are still recognising her winning time of 2hr 18min 56sec from 2002 as the world record. That is because the London Marathon is determined that only records set in women-only races should count. That is not the view of the International Association of Athletics Federations, the world governing body, who list 2hr 15min 25sec as the world best - the time Radcliffe established in 2003 when the London Marathon provided her with two male pace-makers. Already a multi-millionaire, Radcliffe, 31, insisted she was not here for the money. "I don't run for the money," she said. "Winning is what is important and I've come here to run as hard as I can." She will have to. The field includes Kenya's Margaret Okayo, the defending champion, and Susan Chepkemei as well as China's Yingjie Sun. All are said to be in very good shape, especially Chepkemei, who pushed Radcliffe to the line in November's New York Marathon. Radcliffe claimed to be very fit after 10 weeks of altitude training in New Mexico. "I'm happy with the way things have gone," she said, "and although it's difficult to compare training and times, I don't think my fitness is much different than it was in 2003." For all this, the Briton has still to shake off the psychological and physical effects of failing to finish the marathon and 10,000 metres at last summer's Olympics. There was redemption of sorts in New York, where victory came in the relatively slow time of 2hr 23min 10sec. This year, however, her training for London started late when Radcliffe had further problems with the stomach upset she suffered in Athens because of the high doses of anti-inflammatories she was taking to treat a leg injury. Those stomach problems are understood to be under control but not cured. Radcliffe insisted that the Olympic disasters had made her stronger and forced her to "care less about criticism". But many within the sport believe that her performances in Athens and New York signalled the start of her inevitable decline as a marathon force. Among her critics is the 1996 London Marathon champion, Liz McColgan, who recently suggested in a Sunday newspaper that Radcliffe was past her peak and should have taken more time off after the Olympics. McColgan said: "Paula is not on her way up to a peak. She has turned that corner where she's run at her best. She will maintain that for a couple of years but now you see the breakdown because of all the work she's done. She's not the young thing that she was and her body can only take so much." Radcliffe said she had not read McColgan's interview but she will have learned about every word from her husband, Gary Lough, who studies everything written about his wife. Radcliffe believes she can match her world record form of two years ago and would love to prove her critics wrong. David Bedford, the London race director, called her "the greatest female distance runner of all-time". Win or lose, she remains the most fascinating. ENDS
