What was it like being a 1990s runner?

Do your own running class homework, bro.

Everybody ran VO2max intervals and they all sucked.

It was a lot harder and more competitive. Except if you were white.

Island wrote:

Please Explain in every detail what it was like running back in the 90s. Simpler? Harder? Smarter? What was average qualifying times in the olympics and how about high school events? Tell me everything you remember from the past 😀.

Irritants like you were not so ubiquitous.

No GPS watches.

You guessed the distance you ran every day based on the time it took and what pace you thought you were running.

No cell phones or iPods, hobby joggers had to carry around big clunky walkmans.

Island wrote:

how about high school events?

I ran HS in late 80s/early 90s, and I never once ran a regular season XC meet on a weekend. Every meet was on a Wednesday or Thursday at like 5:30 PM, and it was hot as balls. I think I ran one meet on a Saturday -- districts my sophomore year.

Probably half of our meets were dual or tri meets. Nothing says fun like racing 7 other kids through some random park.

And everyone knew which courses were crazy short. I think most XC courses were middle-measured, so you could easily lop 40 seconds off of your season's best if you hit a short course late in the season.

It was a lot different:

1.There was no interest in elite running because races were dominated by seemingly fungible East Africans.

2. Even though we were told every shoe was a big improvement on previous models, we were also told to replace them after 300 miles.

3. People complained online about how running used to be a sport rather than a mass activity.

4. Alberto Salazar was a controversial figure.

5. People said U.S Olympians born elsewhere weren't real Americans.

6. Also, USATF sucked.

Oh wait....

The 90s covered my high school and college years. A few things:

1. It was the low mileage era. My high school coach was convinced anything over 15 miles a week would cripple us. I did lots of mileage at home on my own. I figured what coach didn't know wouldn't hurt him.

2. There was lots of talk of "why are U.S. high schoolers so much slower than 10-20 years ago?"

3. My coach never made the connection between # 1 and # 2.

4. I walked on at a non-power D-1 school. Being a college track athlete in those days was the next best thing to the witness protection program. You were completely anonymous on campus. No one cared.

5. Road races were more competitive than they are now.

6. We complained that Runners World was garbage. Jeff Galloway was evil incarnate.

7. Before the new-fangled internet thing came about, you waited with baited breath for the latest Track and Field News to see race results from three months ago. Nothing like finding out who won NCAA cross country...in January.

Island wrote:

Please Explain in every detail what it was like running back in the 90s. Simpler? Harder? Smarter? What was average qualifying times in the olympics and how about high school events? Tell me everything you remember from the past 😀.

I'm not old enough to actually remember, but I can answer your question. The road race scene in the US was better, but internationally US distance runners were an absolute joke.

Pretty much, hobbyjoggers were way better back in the day.

These are all very interesting. Yikes no gps watches back then?

Mexicans were fast.

We use to run insane paces during practice. My coach would wheel out 5-mile and 6-mile courses for "time trials" during practice (they were accurate). I came through the 4-mile mark in sub-20 and the 5-mile just over 25 minutes. We did very little recovery running which contributed to slower times. My PR was 25:32 at Stanford but I ran faster than that in practice more than once. One particular day I was running with Bob Larsen's Olympic group. We tempo'ed 5 miles in 25:15, Meb hit 5-miles 25 minutes but did another loop to hit 10 miles in 50 minutes. After Meb finished his 10 mile tempo I got to run a 5 mile cool-down just the two of us, that was a great day.

Basic summary for me was too many miles, way too quick, not enough rest or strength = not reaching my potential.

I knew lots of "high mileage" HS runners.

I think the drop in HS times was mostly due to cultural and population demographic changes.

Alan

American elites were slower. American hobby joggers were faster.

MC Hammer wrote:

4. I walked on at a non-power D-1 school. Being a college track athlete in those days was the next best thing to the witness protection program. You were completely anonymous on campus. No one cared.

This will never change.

I have no idea what OT standards were.

There were fewer races total and the ones that we around did not have bands every mile or on the course (maybe a few exceptions). You did not get medals for finishing (although this might have started late in the 90s).

At the end of the decade marathons became a "thing" but in the early 90s people were more "serious" about the marathon. You had far fewer participants in road races.

Shorts were shorter.

If you could get 5 guys to run between 15 and 15:30 for 3 miles you'd win multiple state and national titles without any real competition.

Perception was that if you ran more than 50 mpw you'd end up with no top end speed and over trained.

In the early-90s, anyway, you had those guys who were forged in the 80s and prepared to run the 10K times they saw when they were young and developing. Which meant that a low-30 might get you top 3 at a local race. Once those guys turned it off, though, the remainder of the 90s sucked. Low mileage ruled, and you can see how well that turned out.

I was a near-30 drunkard, and would run 34s hungover, and be top 3 ...