Pat Butcher's Ovett and Coe book is disappointing

tell me more

I failed to see the necessity for going off on Bannister in the middle of the book and claiming Bannister's use of rabbits ruined track. I also thought his writing seethed arrogance and self-satisfaction, but at the same time, I was grateful for any look into Steve Ovett's life/psyche/training. (Coe, while stil interesting, is a little more forthcoming and so less intriguing to me).

I agree with your analysis. I did not know a whole lot about Ovett before reading the book. In that respect it was definitely interesting. It would be nice to have a closer look at the specifics of Ovett's training under Harry Wilson. Wilson didn't really take center stage at any point, and I would have liked to have had the chance to juxtapose him with Peter Coe.

I read the book a few years ago and thoroughly enjoyed it.

The ops accusations lack specificity.

Page numbers where he doesn't "grasp the facts" etc?

The Perfect Distance is the best book I have read on the Coe, Ovett rivalry

Good of you to review a book you have not actually finished reading.

I doubt any book containing so many stats is going to be 100% accurate. Pointing out a 0.5 error in one of Coe's times which is not one of his WR's is trite

On pacing - surely any author is entitled to express their views. There is no definitive right or wrong answer, just an opinion

I notice that you are quite a good writer - maybe a frustrated and unpublished author?

One last thing, Pat Butcher has posted here- so congratulations for insulting one of the few people on here who are actually really know anything about athletics. Well done! - I assume you understand irony.

I disagree, I quite enjoyed the booked. You are entitled to your opinion, but you fail to argue it well. You make sweeping generalized critisms of his writing, but your examples don't support that view very well. The things you attack are things Butcher never actually said, but are things you read into it (such as that he "clearly" makes some sort of implied criticism of Africans in general, which he does not). And you then take this idea that he never expressed and run with it, expanding it into a grand critique of "ethnocentric history." That is a bs notion of book criticism. You bash him for criticizing Jipcho's tactics in 68? So did 1/2 the world at the time, so did Jim Ryun, who claims Jipcho personally apologized to him. So concurring in that very widely held view makes Butcher "ethnocentric"? Wow.

Butcher is one of the few guys out there seeking to write about and publicize this sport. Authors like him have to fight to get booke about runners published. Again, you're entitled to your opinion, but if I may read into it a little myself, I agree with some of the above comments that it seems you have some personal ax to grind.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

One last thing, Pat Butcher has posted here- so congratulations for insulting one of the few people on here who are actually really know anything about athletics.

I've never heard of him.

Well, let's just say more people have heard of him than have heard of you.

I can admit to having come across as pretty harsh in my original post(perhaps unfairly harsh). The anonymity of a message board certainly allows for this sort of thing. After finishing the book I will say that Butcher's final chapter ties the whole thing together nicely (and is very well-written). It is worth reading despite the flaws that I see.

As someone who knows the rigors of researching, analyzing, and writing history I appreciate the effort that went into the book (yes, I am published, and no, I do not write about track and field). But, I stand by the idea that we can and should expect 100% accuracy. People can come to varying conclusions based on the same set of facts, but let's at least get those facts correct (even if they are minor ones).

As far as pacing goes, yes, he offers a valid critique. It is an opinion and one that I'm not fully on board with. I am curious about whether others feel this way. The question of pacing is an interesting one, and pacemakers have fundamentally transformed the sport (in some good and some bad ways, I think). I found some of Butcher's conclusions to be lacking in nuance. Once again, the Keino-Jipcho analysis offers a criticism of team tactics that could be re-examined. Why would one athlete set a race up for his teammate to win? Butcher suggests that this might be done to achieve success for one's country. Why is this necessarily a bad thing, and why should someone from the UK (or the US or anywhere else) pass judgment on the motivations that drive different distance running cultures? Likewise, when Bannister, Coe, or anyone else runs against the clock (a challenge that does have its place in Athletics), why should we begrudge the use of pacemakers? At the same time, Butcher's point that pacemakers are overused and detract from true competition between athletes on the European circuit is a valid one. So, I'll stand by my critique with an apology to Mr. Butcher for the harshness of the original post

J.R. wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

One last thing, Pat Butcher has posted here- so congratulations for insulting one of the few people on here who are actually really know anything about athletics.

I've never heard of him.

Exactly - you have just proved my point!

Thanks for your measured response.

My view on the pacing is that it would be nice to have some races outside the championships without pacers. It would do the athletes good to. But some of the paced races are also great

A lot of books on athletics are a bit sugary and PB is coming from an environment which is much more critical and intended to create some thought and debate. For example he is not critising Bannister, but the trend it started. Even Bannister said after his defeat of Landy that he never get the same excitement after that from chasing the clock as to a man to man contest.

The most impressive thing to me about Pat's book is that he has not just put quotes together, he travelled round the world to actually interview the athletes, especially ones like Hägg, & Andersson

If there isn't a name on the end of the comment, then it isn't worth reading.

Geoff Orme.

Pat is a great writer and announcer. His book is really good.. and yes there are some technical errors (which might not be his fault) but overall he is really one of the best. HIs documentary, "Arabian Knight", of Saïd Aouita is great. I will send him a mailing about your post so he can have a look at your comments.

Up.