Kind of interesting thesis. The OP says that the reason so many Americans ran "fast" times during the first running boom was that most of the courses were short.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1822836
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Most existing courses I measured in the early the 1980's (when I started measuring) were short until adjusted for certification. Whether this explains faster times I couldn't say for sure. It certainly could have been a contributing factor.
There were exceptions. My first marathon turned out to be about 1 1/4 miles too long. When the people hollered "Looking good! Only two miles to go" I thought they were crazy, as I knew I had less than a mile to go. They weren't. Carl Hatfield wound up running around 2:27 on the course, and may have missed a qualifier for the Olympic team (this was 1974). This marathon gave me the measuring disease.
Of course, it's said that the fast people in the '70's and '80's trained harder than they do today, as speed may have been seen as more important than healthy lifestyle. I recall seeing it said by some racer "health is something you pass through on the way to fitness."
There were exceptions. My first marathon turned out to be about 1 1/4 miles too long. When the people hollered "Looking good! Only two miles to go" I thought they were crazy, as I knew I had less than a mile to go. They weren't. Carl Hatfield wound up running around 2:27 on the course, and may have missed a qualifier for the Olympic team (this was 1974). This marathon gave me the measuring disease.
Of course, it's said that the fast people in the '70's and '80's trained harder than they do today, as speed may have been seen as more important than healthy lifestyle. I recall seeing it said by some racer "health is something you pass through on the way to fitness."
Here's what I placed on the letsrun.com forum:
As the inventor of the Jones Counter, let me jump in here on the discussion.
I invented the Counter in 1971 because a "20 km" race I ran the year before was about a mile short. And, as people on this forum have observed, there were no 5 km or even 10 km races around then. Most were odd distances.
The course I measured was 20 km. It has been measured and certified several times over the 36 years of its existence so I know it has always been accurate. My best time was 1:19:45 in 54th place in 1981. There were 232 finishers so I was in the 23rd percentile. In 1991 a similar time would have brought me in in 23rd out of 192 or 12th percentile. In 2001 it would have given me 5th place (!) out of 136 or 4th percentile.
We are just not seeing the runners in their 20s and early 30s who were running outstanding times. Where are they?
Alan
As the inventor of the Jones Counter, let me jump in here on the discussion.
I invented the Counter in 1971 because a "20 km" race I ran the year before was about a mile short. And, as people on this forum have observed, there were no 5 km or even 10 km races around then. Most were odd distances.
The course I measured was 20 km. It has been measured and certified several times over the 36 years of its existence so I know it has always been accurate. My best time was 1:19:45 in 54th place in 1981. There were 232 finishers so I was in the 23rd percentile. In 1991 a similar time would have brought me in in 23rd out of 192 or 12th percentile. In 2001 it would have given me 5th place (!) out of 136 or 4th percentile.
We are just not seeing the runners in their 20s and early 30s who were running outstanding times. Where are they?
Alan