Derek Clayton still has the best marathon performance.
He ran 2:08 in 1967, in what would be regarded as a pair of slippers today.
He had no pacemakers, no GPS watch, no nutrition, took on barely any water, and trained like a mental patient. He certainly wasn't on EPO, because the synthetic kind hadn't been invented yet. Oh yeah, and he lived and trained at sea level.
If we are going to continue to make a big deal about super shoes than why don't we have the same conversation about cinder tracks and Mondo tracks?
Yes, point well made.
You can also say the same for better training and better knowledge of human physiology. If the runners of the early 1900s had understood the benefits of interval training or a high mileage base then they would have likely run much faster too. Does that automatically make their performances better than those who came after them? There will always be advances in our understanding of the human body, training techniques, nutrition, running surfaces, shoes, etc.
Records are meant to be broken… to motivate future athletes to push the boundaries of human performance. It may provide some nostalgic comfort to those who try to belittle a great athletic achievement, but these critics fail to celebrate the true meaning and purpose of athletics.
A heartfelt congratulations to Mantz and Kelati on their historic performances!
Derek Clayton still has the best marathon performance.
He ran 2:08 in 1967, in what would be regarded as a pair of slippers today.
He had no pacemakers, no GPS watch, no nutrition, took on barely any water, and trained like a mental patient. He certainly wasn't on EPO, because the synthetic kind hadn't been invented yet. Oh yeah, and he lived and trained at sea level.
Brilliant performance but no way of verifying the accuracy of the course. Before standardized measuring protocols.
The super shoes gave Mantz a significant boost. It’s unfair and inaccurate to claim that Mantz broke Ryan Hall’s record.
Runners from the 1980’s probably said the same sh*t about the asics flats Ryan wore during his AR so not sure what your point is.. shoes have always been improving.. with your logic the first marathon ever ran was the best performance
nah, I'm a runner from the 80s and we weren't saying that when Ryan ran. dudes from the 50s probably said that.
Shoes improved from the 50s to late the 70s, then didn't improve that much between the late 70s till 2016.
I don't really follow professional running at all because I think it's a participation sport and at a spectator sport but did Ryan Hall actually win his race? In American record in a race you lose is a little silly.
That's like celebrating one hitter going eight for eight when his team loses. No one cares what record you set on the way to a loss.
I don't really follow professional running at all because I think it's a participation sport and at a spectator sport but did Ryan Hall actually win his race? In American record in a race you lose is a little silly.
That's like celebrating one hitter going eight for eight when his team loses. No one cares what record you set on the way to a loss.
Yes, Ryan Hall actually won the race. You can see the photo of him breaking the tape here:
But even if Hall lost that race, people would still care. Lots of records are celebrated in team sports even when the team loses. When LeBron broke Kareem's all-time NBA scoring record, the game was immediately stopped for a 10-minute ceremony. The Lakers were losing the game and had a losing record at the time, and they wound up losing the game. Yet the big headlines the next day weren't about their loss; it was about LeBron breaking that record.
Ritz’s 60 flat, in the rain, in a championship race, also no super shoes, is better than both of them.
Was looking for this. Cant believe it took to the second page. He won a medal too. No contest his is still the best, and hall and many would likely agree.