“Pre didn’t understand the concept of winning”- Jonathan Gault

In truth, Jonathan Gault doesn't understand Pre's concept of winning. For Steve Prefontaine, winning was not just some final result of the end of the race. Winning, and losing, were ever-present possibilities within the race itself. Whoever is ahead at any moment is winning and so the true victory is not about getting the final nod from the race officials; it involved being in first from first step to last. So, good to be first at the end; far better to beat your opposition at every step; and best of all to do so by testing the limits of human potential throughout.

makes sense. A guy who wasn’t smart enough to know driving drunk is bad also didn’t know what it even means to win a race.

Michael Phelps also wasn’t smart enough to know drunk driving was a bad thing but still managed to win 23 gold medals.

I suppose he didn’t, but he was in his prime as an athlete when he died which is unfair to make a statement like that.

Can I nominate this for Post of the Day?

If I had a nickel for every elite athlete who drove drunk in 1975... I'd have a lot of nickels.

If I had a nickel for every PERSON that drove drunk in 1975 I'd be the richest man the world has ever seen.

If I had a nickel for every time a cop just told a drunk driver to drive straight home in 1975 I wouldn't be near as rich but I could probably still afford my own private island in the Caribbean.

Suffice it to say that things have changed.

The fact that 200 years ago slavery was legal and everyone had slaves doesn’t make it morally correct.
The fact that it used to be socially acceptable to beat your wife doesn’t make those who did any less of an A-Hole.
etc.

While “things change”, the fact that driving while drunk enough to slam into a wall is both stupid and wrong doesn’t change.

Well I guess fortunately I guess a lot of people like yourself got together and made it that way so that you could vilify Prefontaine in 2023.

It's funny though, at that time in some states it was actually legal to drink beer while driving. I guess that was like slavery and wife beating too, eh?

can you please clarify your stance? It appears to me that you are arguing that it wasn’t a bad decision for Prefontaine to drive drunk that night? It was literally the dumbest (and last) decision of his life.

you continue to circle back to whether or not it was legal. This is irrelevant. Only a fellow drunk driver would believe that driving with a BAC level twice the legal limit isn’t dumb, irregardless of the legality. It is legal for me to go climb the giant cliff down the street with a .16% BAC level. But if I die trying, it is totally appropriate for people on the internet to “vilify” me for it.

That Pre guy was overhyped.

Didn't make it internationally and lost the fight of g forces with his MG-A (I think).
Rock won, still there.

Guess 4th at the Olympics and 2x Silvers at the World Games isn't international enough for you?

I'm always very impressed by people living today who know for certain how they would have viewed things had they been raised in an earlier era, with the full weight of the influences and experience that pushed upon people of that era. I kind of wish we could peer through a wormhole and see how we'd all have turned out had we lived in each past era. A lot of people would be very, very surprised at what they would have believed and done, I'm certain of that. For this exact reason I always laugh at people who say they're "on the right side of history," as if they or anyone else alive today will have any say in that. Relatedly, I sometimes wonder what things/beliefs/practices that seem benign today will be seen as the things/beliefs/practices of backward, psychotic, bigoted people by the lights of the future.

the story of drunk driving in the 70s is important for context and nuance. it doesn't imply what he did was right or wrong, just that it was acceptable behavior and society had not concluded how dangerous was

to conclude that you would have been different is the ultimate ego trip

same with the slavery issue you bring up - Lincoln was not for abolishing slavery until late in his life. to judge him for that is to assume you would have had better clarity of vision and. moral judgement than ol uncle abe - based on your posts, I have zero doubt that you don't have either over lincoln

and i don't believe you would have been any wiser than pre - it is easy to judge and throw stones and insults 50 years later.

I won some 1/2 mile and one mile races back in college where I played it safe and didn't try to run my fastest race and always felt guilty afterwards.

Felt better in races I did not finish 1st where I felt a had given all I had

Gault is right. Prefontaine didn't seem to grasp the concept of winning. Here is a Prefontaine quote.

There is a lot to admire in this post, but it doesn't mention winning at all. It's ironic that Prefontaine's massive talent prevented him from learning how to race to win.

I'm far more impressed with Dave Wottle coming from last to 1st in the 1972 Olympics 800m. Wottle was last at 100m, but he didn't panic. He was last at 500m. It takes a lot of courage to be last in the Olympic final and still have the discipline to run your own race. Wottle won in one of the most epic come-from-behind races in Olympic history. Wottle understood the concept of winning.

As I wrote in the original thread, the notion that Pre didn’t understand the concept of winning is a weird take when we consider all the NCAA and US national championships he won.

What American born male has won an Olympic gold medal at 5000 in the last 60 years? For that matter other than Kenyan born Chelimo and Lagat what American has medalled at 5000 in the Olympics or Worlds?

Maybe the comment should be "Americans don't understand the concept of winning". Also like to remind that Pre was coached by Bowerman and Dellinger, I don't think they coached him to NOT win.

Also was this Gault dude even alive when Pre ran?