Take me Back to the 2000 Olympic Marathon Trials - What was Running Culture Like?

Ooof. Low point of American Marathoning.

Good question. I was 28 and running a lot. Plenty of 5ks and fun runs going on around here in Chicago, so plenty of interest. Oly marathons were not really won then in fast times by well knowns. Not sure if the crop of US distance guys were rotating out of 5k and 10k into the marathon. Kennedy was still running the 5k. Outside of him our 5k and 10k guys were not that fast as compared to the rest of the world.

wejo took some scalps that day: Todd Williams, Keith Brantly, Brad Hudson, and Jerry Lawson all left in his dust.

I believe it was really warm that day too? Not 100% sure

Hot, humid and hilly course. Millennials would have refused to start.

readrun wrote:

Was just looking at the results of the 2000 Olympic Marathon Trials. Baffling how much slower they were than what we saw just a few years later.

http://www.usatf.org/events/2000/OlympicTrials-marathon/men/results.asp

I was just a kid when these trials took place, so I'd love some insight into why the run was so slow. Was running just not popular back then? Are there better drugs/access to drugs now? Did the powerful sound of Limp Bizkit on the radio distract the public from hitting the roads?

1) It was REALLY hot at the Olympic marathon trials that year. That being said, running was a lot worse. I don't think it was any less popular. Just the coaching was awful.

I am 42 so wasn't really paying attention to what was going on in the 80s and will try to get John Kellogg to pipe in here.

2) But for the most part, distance running for the most part just bottomed out in terms of performance between late 1990s and 2000. From my understanding, the exercise phys idiots hadn't been able to find any proof that mileage worked so magazines like Runner's World had been pumping out this "run great on 20 mpw" crap for the last 15-20 years. I don't know why that took over the coaches as well but it did. I guess studies showed workouts helped and mileage didn't so people did intervals??

For example, know a current college coach who went to a BIG TIME HUGE NAME SCHOOl in the running world. He said they didn't do any tempos at all. Zero. Just intervals.

In 1996, Ronnie Harris was top 3 at the US Olympic Trials. He didn't get to go the Olympics because he didn't hit the 13:28 standard.

Once the Internet came out, the correct coaching gospel got out there again. I have no idea why it wasn't out there in book form.

It couldn't have been just coaching. While I know that the coaching was on average MUCH worse back then, there had to be some decent coaches. I don't know why people in the US were so much slower than say the 1980s. Maybe there was a lack of motivation. The US went from having like greats/winners in the 1970s and early 80s to getting crushed by the Africans.

WasThere wrote:

Hot, humid and hilly course. Millennials would have refused to start.

Exactly.

Not Rupp certified, in other words??

Good points. We really have not improved all that much as you look through track&field news rankings over time. Sure Meb is a bright spot,Hall showed brilliance at times and Rupp has given hope to maybe something greater. We have slowed down and when the africans are running fast we are not in the game. We are a mile behind literally. Coaching may be some of it, I think though its the athlete, the drive and motivation is different. They have settled for being the top american and getting a shoe contract as success.

Running has never been more popular as it is now, running shoe sales have never been greater. Peel back the layers though and its people participating vs really running ,its an event to go to with friends , raise money for a charity, the idea of running is just movement through the event, a supplement to other types of fitness training. Elites have adopted some of this attitude as well.

Maybe some of the new training groups popping up will stimulate something beyond the current scope of mediocrity.

It is interesting that we had world class runners in the 70s and 80s. Why did everyone suddenly forget how to train? I think it was more of that late 90s early 2000s generations were somewhat softer. They just didn't want to put the work in to be great.

Not sure if the money was there but someone who knew what they were doing could have made a killing in road race winnings.

Well Rojo at least you didn't say that you and JK were personally responsible for the resurgence of distance running in the US.

I think the initial shock of how African runners really started to bring down the WRs in the 1990's at all distances had to have discouraged a lot of collegians graduating back then. No longer was a 13:15 5k or 2:10-2:12 marathon going to get the job done in major races. As we've seen recently, even the most talented runners need at least 2-3 years post-collegiately before they really hit their stride at the pro level. Low mileage of the 90's and probably lower participation at the top ranks in the US caused the bar to be lowered to make International teams. By 2000, you really saw that at all distances where we had major struggles to even get 3 athletes into the Olympics in most distance events. Other than Bob Kennedy, I think the rest of the US had given up the dream of International success.

Also, Limp Bizkit probably did have a negative impact at that time. Nice job pointing that out!

This website is solely responsible for the resurgence.

Cross country participation was way down in the 90's at the high school level for whatever reason with the low point about 50% of what it is today and what it was in the 70's. The training and coaching matters but you also need a high population of interested athletes to draw from.

I think the influence of some very successful low mileage guys, Coe, convinced coaches that mileage was not the key to success. I know my high school team never exceeded 30 miles a week and that was enough to keep us locally competitive and normally sending a couple guys to states.

Also Bob Kennedy was a relatively low mileage guy and freakishly talented.

rojo wrote:

In 1996, Ronnie Harris was top 3 at the US Olympic Trials. He didn't get to go the Olympics because he didn't hit the 13:28 standard.

Same thing happened with Joe LeMay in the 10000.

HardLoper wrote:

Cross country participation was way down in the 90's at the high school level for whatever reason with the low point about 50% of what it is today and what it was in the 70's. The training and coaching matters but you also need a high population of interested athletes to draw from.

This is a good insight. Partly demographics (baby bust, following the boom of the 1960s, 70s, and 80s), the popularity seemed have died off some compared to previous decades, yes the training (at least at the developmental stages), and it was a transitional time with a lot of stars at the end of their career but before the next wave became of age.

I think it's an insult to say that the coaches were no good, nor were the top athletes. Lynn Jennings rocked in the 90s. Kempainen, Kennedy, and Williams had a good decade. There were some good milers like Falcon and Hollman ran with the best in the world. The depth wasn't there through the decade. And by 2000 most of these guys were retired or about to.

I do have a recollection of the 2000 marathon trials. Ha, first encounter with malmo. It was on TnFmedia because he was spewing some misinformation about a coach, so we set that straight.

People were pissed about the marathon! Bad luck with the weather for sure, but just the slow times and several of the favorites faded. But by then Jabe Jennings was making a splash and the likes of Webb and Ritz were getting noticed. It was a low point but things were looking up.

I was there covering for a regional running magazine in 2000. Race started at 8:00 AM although there was discussion at the technical meeting about moving time to 7:00 because of the forecasted hot weather. Demographics did not allow that to happen especially at 15 hours to the start. I remember a significant uphill just before half way that totally split the field in what was by then 80+ degree temperatures. De La Cerda pushed the pace from there to about 23 miles when DeHaven took over winning in 2:15:30. There were nine runners under 2:20 and 20th place was a shade under 2:23. I think they paid through 20th place.

Agree ---coaching has gone back to basics since then---mileage, mileage, mileage!!!! Hanson's had a few runners there too, as the program was just getting off the ground.

AND I still have my "Let's Run--WEJO " t-shirt that were given to a lucky few prior to the race.

Recently re-read Running With the Buffaloes. You can see it right there in the book, which is chronicling the 1998 NCAA XC season, with Wetmore talking about mega mileage and other coaches saying, screw it, we're going back to mega mileage.

Incidentally, it did coincide with this site's rise. That had an impact on me back in the early 2000s. From early on, I was under the impression that Lydiard, Daniels etc. were the way to go.

Also, remember HADD? I really enjoyed his training advice and he was a big proponent of loggin the miles

[quote]readrun wrote:

"Did the powerful sound of Limp Bizkit on the radio distract the public from hitting the roads?"

+1