I always had the most respect for times. Pro athletes are chasing personal record every year from age ~ 17 until they retire. However, on a one day event (oly final) people get sick, make tactical errors, aren't on their peak year...so much can happen. But EVERYONE gets dozens and dozens of shots to run a WR. So it's a very fair evaluation.
No hate, I just have mad respect for the actual times.
A gold medal is forever (barring PED issues) and you will forever be introduced as "Gold Medalist _______" rather than "Former WR holder _______". Plus I can show people my gold medal. What do you show people for your WR? The front page of Letsrun?
Olympic gold 10/10 times.. records get broken, gold is forever.
This statement has always been a bit of a pet peeve of mine. There's a new gold medalist just like there's a new world record holder. I know the phrase is "gold lasts forever", but that's a marketing slogan more than anything. At the end of the day, former gold medalists are a line on a Wikipedia page just list former world record holders. If we remember them, it's usually because they did both, or their win/career was exceptional in some other way.
For example, consider the 5k from 1992-2000. The Olympic champs were Dieter Baumann, Vénuste Niyongabo, and Million Wolde. Meanwhile, world record breakers during that timeframe were Haile Gebrselassie (4x!), Moses Kiptanui, and Daniel Komen. Neither Kiptanui nor Komen won Olympic gold in any event. Would you say that the accomplishments of Niyongabo and Wolde are everlasting, while those of Kiptanui and Komen have been lost to the mists of time?
Now, all of this is separate from the question posed by the OP. Given the choice, I would be at least world-record-curious, but the general public seems to value Olympic gold so highly that it seems hard to choose anything else.
Hey, I can't make you understand it. But see, it's a competition, not a TT and the point of competing is to win when it counts, and nothing counts more in T&F than winning a gold medal. It really is that simple.
This statement has always been a bit of a pet peeve of mine. There's a new gold medalist just like there's a new world record holder. I know the phrase is "gold lasts forever", but that's a marketing slogan more than anything. At the end of the day, former gold medalists are a line on a Wikipedia page just list former world record holders. If we remember them, it's usually because they did both, or their win/career was exceptional in some other way.
For example, consider the 5k from 1992-2000. The Olympic champs were Dieter Baumann, Vénuste Niyongabo, and Million Wolde. Meanwhile, world record breakers during that timeframe were Haile Gebrselassie (4x!), Moses Kiptanui, and Daniel Komen. Neither Kiptanui nor Komen won Olympic gold in any event. Would you say that the accomplishments of Niyongabo and Wolde are everlasting, while those of Kiptanui and Komen have been lost to the mists of time?
Now, all of this is separate from the question posed by the OP. Given the choice, I would be at least world-record-curious, but the general public seems to value Olympic gold so highly that it seems hard to choose anything else.
Hey, I can't make you understand it. But see, it's a competition, not a TT and the point of competing is to win when it counts, and nothing counts more in T&F than winning a gold medal. It really is that simple.
Whether right or wrong, this is a totally separate argument to the one you made earlier which said "records get broken, gold is forever."
I don't believe gold medals last longer than world records in any serious sense, and I tried to justify that with my previous post. That doesn't mean that records are (or aren't) more important than medals, just that I don't buy the "gold is forever" argument.
As another example, Roger Bannister is remembered quite well nowadays despite never winning a single Olympic medal. Would you really say that Josy Barthel's 1952 Olympic gold has lasted, but Bannister's record hasn't?
This statement has always been a bit of a pet peeve of mine. There's a new gold medalist just like there's a new world record holder. I know the phrase is "gold lasts forever", but that's a marketing slogan more than anything. At the end of the day, former gold medalists are a line on a Wikipedia page just list former world record holders. If we remember them, it's usually because they did both, or their win/career was exceptional in some other way.
For example, consider the 5k from 1992-2000. The Olympic champs were Dieter Baumann, Vénuste Niyongabo, and Million Wolde. Meanwhile, world record breakers during that timeframe were Haile Gebrselassie (4x!), Moses Kiptanui, and Daniel Komen. Neither Kiptanui nor Komen won Olympic gold in any event. Would you say that the accomplishments of Niyongabo and Wolde are everlasting, while those of Kiptanui and Komen have been lost to the mists of time?
Now, all of this is separate from the question posed by the OP. Given the choice, I would be at least world-record-curious, but the general public seems to value Olympic gold so highly that it seems hard to choose anything else.
Hey, I can't make you understand it. But see, it's a competition, not a TT and the point of competing is to win when it counts, and nothing counts more in T&F than winning a gold medal. It really is that simple.
So you aren’t going to refute anything he said? Your post literally proves nothing, it is almost worthless..
Hey, I can't make you understand it. But see, it's a competition, not a TT and the point of competing is to win when it counts, and nothing counts more in T&F than winning a gold medal. It really is that simple.
So you aren’t going to refute anything he said? Your post literally proves nothing, it is almost worthless..
I'll concede the point on Bannister, but that was a bit different. But I'd rather win the Olympics than set a WR in some random meet. I'd rather win the state championship than run a PR, I'd rather win Boston than run the AR, in 99/100 scenarios I will take a big win over a fast time.
If you apply it to other sports, would you rather set the the NFL records for yards gained or win the SB, HRs vs winning the WS? I'd just rather win at any sport than set a record.