You post the all-time road records and BUTCH CASSIDY ought to slink off to Brazil and die in a cave again.
You post the all-time road records and BUTCH CASSIDY ought to slink off to Brazil and die in a cave again.
clockwork orange wrote:
i am guessing you are forgetting ritz's 28:00 solo 10k run - yeah he would beat a lot of your top guys.
28:11 ( 1) Dathan Ritzenhein (CO) 30 Dec 1982 05 Nov 2005 Mobile AL USA
BUTCH CASSIDY. wrote:
No, what was said was American distance running is in decline....
Wrong, I read the entire thread, the only one who said that American distance running was in decline was YOU.
The closest anyone other than you came to saying that was the numerous posters who pointed out the obvious: first, 33:30 was a terrible time for the first American at Falmouth to put up. second, the depth of American distance running is nowhere near what it was 25 years ago. Both statements are irrefutable facts.
Americans are on an upswing at the top. With the number of good high school runners increasing year after year we may eventually see the depth of days past.
NO, the depth of american running is getting a lot closer. It's the depth of American road running that is kind of low. Then again more of our guys are doing track, which is probably a better thing to do anyway, than road whoring.
clockwork orange wrote:
NO, the depth of american running is getting a lot closer. It's the depth of American road running that is kind of low. Then again more of our guys are doing track, which is probably a better thing to do anyway, than road whoring.
No one said the depth wasn't getting closer. It is. Except in the marathon, where the depth is still deep in the gutter.
collegenewrunner wrote:
This race really demonstrates how the depth of American distance running has fallen.
The first American in 2006 runs 33:27 which wouldnt have gotten him in the top 10 Americans in '79, 27 years later.
This is the post from which I was referring. This person seems to be pointing to the idea that American distance running is not as good as what it once was, especially in the year 1979. Which is why I decided to compare the 1979 Boston marathon with the most recent 2006 Boston marathon. This comparison clearly shows that the "depth" in American running has not declined/"fallen" at all, since Americans put 3 in the top 5 (and Gilmore, if I recall, wasn't far off).
You're statements regarding the current US runners are absurd. Meb, who is an American, would destroy every the very best person on your list over every distance, except the marathon which he is still maturing and developing. Bill Rodgers would have been lapped by Meb on the track. Even the youthful Ritzenhein would destroy him and he's clean. (not to suggest, of course, that Salazar used any sort of performance enhancing substance......................) No one in the 80's experimented with doping...................Nevertheless, the argument that Meb is not American is just sad and boring. Give it up. I think everyone knows Kennedy was better than all of your list combined...right? But I'm not pointing Kennedy out because he's a few years seperated. But Goucher would be great on the roads, but he chooses to compete elsewhere. Lagat, who spent nearly all his life in the states, is leagues LEAGUES above and beyond ANYONE in your oldtimer list. LEAGUES. He's one of the worlds fastest miler...EVER. He's broken 13 in the 5k twice, and raced it only a handful of times.
The bottom line is: All the "back in the day" runners who post on this site are clinging to the glory days of what-used-to-be, and can't accept the fact that the runners today are stronger, faster, and generally more talented. If you don't agree let's just look at the international scene and compare times...Salazar ran 2.09. Great time. It only happens to be 4 minutes slower than the current world leaders...nearly 1 mile down the road, Salazar would be straggling his doped up Mexican bones while Tergat is sipping tea talking to the media.
And Butch may have died in the desert, but he came out guns blazing...
Butch Cassidy. wrote:
This is the post from which I was referring. This person seems to be pointing to the idea that American distance running is not as good as what it once was, especially in the year 1979. Which is why I decided to compare the 1979 Boston marathon with the most recent 2006 Boston marathon. This comparison clearly shows that the "depth" in American running has not declined/"fallen" at all, since Americans put 3 in the top 5 (and Gilmore, if I recall, wasn't far off).
.
You don't understand the meaning of the word "depth" my friend.
1979 was BEFORE the surge of American running depth. Boston 2006 doesn't even come anywhere close to comparing to Boston 1983 (which you try to ignore), at the top, and throughout the depth of the results (see previous post).
In the early 80's 2:11 marathons by Americans weren't uncommon, 2:15s were a dime a dozen, and everybody could run a 2:20 marathon.
Somewhere on Letsrun there's a year by year comparison of sub 2:20 marathons by year. 2006 will be the best year in 2 decades but it won't compare to the 1980s averages.
Butch Cassidy. wrote:
This is the post from which I was referring. This person seems to be pointing to the idea that American distance running is not as good as what it once was, especially in the year 1979. Which is why I decided to compare the 1979 Boston marathon with the most recent 2006 Boston marathon. This comparison clearly shows that the "depth" in American running has not declined/"fallen" at all, since Americans put 3 in the top 5 (and Gilmore, if I recall, wasn't far off).
The original comparison was FALMOUTH 1979 to FALMOUTH 2006. Anyone can see that a comparison of Falmouth in 2006 (in perfect conditions) to Falmouth in any year in the 1980s shows the top American would not place in the top ten in but a few (if any) races.
I'm curious why you won't compare Boston 2006 to any year other than 1979?
Why not compare 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, etc to 1979, or any other Boston Marathon of the 1980s? What's there to hide?
My understanding of "depth" is only in reference to the previous post which mentioned 12 American runners in the late 70's and early 80's; I then listed 12 current American runners (and added Webb for 13) that would compare legitimately with any 12 American runners in history. If you are to solely base your arguement on marathon results, it seems a bit narrow/restricted of an arguement, since my understanding of "depth" applies to a broad range of events, from 1 mile to the marathon. But with that said, American marathoning is improving steadily and is without a doubt not "falliing" off. I hate to bring the argument off course, but the times over the marthon distance in the 80's can be questioned, since they were'nt measured as accurately as they are today. Still, the 80's were a good decade for American marathoning, I'm not debating that. I'm arguing the notion that current Americans don't show any range or depth in distance running.
The original comparison was FALMOUTH 1979 to FALMOUTH 2006. Anyone can see that a comparison of Falmouth in 2006 (in perfect conditions) to Falmouth in any year in the 1980s shows the top American would not place in the top ten in but a few (if any) races.
I'm curious why you won't compare Boston 2006 to any year other than 1979?
Why not compare 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, etc to 1979, or any other Boston Marathon of the 1980s? What's there to hide?[/quote]
I only compared 79 Boston with 06 Boston because the previous poster mentioned the year 1979. The argument was made that Americans "depth" has fallen off or is decline. I simply showed this wasn't the case by offering the most recent Boston marathon results. Nothing to hide. Proud to support American runners. That's all.
Butch Cassidy. wrote:
...Salazar would be straggling his doped up Mexican bones while Tergat is sipping tea talking to the media.
And Butch may have died in the desert, but he came out guns blazing...
Mexican bones? Say what? Friend, this is one example why your posts make my head hurt.
There were so many Americans running faster 'back in the day' than currently, it's not debateable.
In your eariler example, you said Meb is better than AlSal & DickB. It doesn't take a lot to note Meb is SLOWER than them on the all-time marathon list. Be careful w/generalizations.
Butch Cassidy. wrote:
I only compared 79 Boston with 06 Boston because the previous poster mentioned the year 1979. The argument was made that Americans "depth" has fallen off or is decline. I simply showed this wasn't the case by offering the most recent Boston marathon results. Nothing to hide. Proud to support American runners. That's all.
But the previous poster compared FALMOUTH TO FALMOUTH, which showed that the depth is nowhere near what it was in 1979.
If you want to compare MARATHONING in 2006 to MARATHONING in 1979, then why not compare the depth of the entire year? What are you hiding?
Last year, if I recall correctly, NO male American marathoner broke 2:20 until the fall. If that's not 100% correct, it's close.
It's likely the depth of the '80s road running talent was something we will never see again in our lifetime. I'm proud to have toed the line with some of those guys and experienced it firsthand. There's a big difference between claiming something theorectically on paper (claiming Teg, Lincoln, Torres, Webb would be right up there in the pantheon of greatest 80's road warriors) and looking at the all-time lists and the result sheets. Your doping claims and short course claims are weak. Understanding a little about history may help you avoid making foolish assertions in the future. Take a look at old Bloomsday, Crim, Peachtree, Itasca, Springbank results.
Get it right, Salazar would be straggling his doped up Cuban bones....not Mexican
1. More road races nowadays, so "depth" gets stretched out.
2. Posters who are arguing for the 80's dominance competed in the 80s and are automatically biased.
3. people have realized that running road races destroys your track potential (well, this one I am hoping more people realize).
No offense, but I would imagine your head hurts on a regular basis then. Now, follow along. I'll type slowly for you. When you say: "There were so many Americans running faster (in the 80's/back in the day)..." are you referring to the marathon only or to the entire range of events, from the 1500 through the Marathon? If you are only referring to the marathon, then refer to my previous posts to find an answer, as I thought I made it clear that my argument was dealing with the issue of "declining"/"falling" American depth in US distance running. As for the Meb/Marathon issue, I never argued Meb's times haven't exceeded AlSal or DickB, or even B. Rodgers, etc. I did note however that Meb has just begun his marathon career and was nonetheless FASTER over every other distance. I wasn't generalizing at all. I made a clear point-of-fact statement. So, you see, afterall the issue of whether Americans are running faster today as opposed to the 80's is very debatable, depending on a number of various factors. I hope this post doesn't drive you to Advil.
scotth wrote:
Ummmm, since the course hasn't changed since Day One, that would mean it's always been 7 miles. Why they called it 7.1 miles I don't know. They (the ubiquitous 'they') were wrong.
Umm umm umm, hem 'n' haw...
...'THEY' in this instance refer to the race organizers, the editors of the souvenir book, the website's authors, Sports Illustrated, the Cape Cod Times, and countless other journalists, all of whom called it a 'classic 7.1 mile road race' or some variant thereof year after year after year.
Korir and Kiplagat Win SBLI Falmouth Road Race
Falmouth, Mass. ö Aug. 12, 2001 ö Under threatening skies and humid conditions, nearly 8,000 people officially completed the SBLI Falmouth Road Race. Kenyans John Korir, winner in 1999, and Lornah Kiplagat, defending women's champion, bested the field over the 7.1 mile distance. Kamel Ayari from New Rochelle, N.Y., and Harrilyn Beehner of Saratoga Springs, N.Y., were the winners in the wheelchair division. Colorado's Dan Browne and Kristin Chisum of Wayland, Mass., were the top Americans.
Sager Runners Take to the Streets of Falmouth, MA in the 2005 Falmouth Road Race
"It was a crazy idea, given life during the 70's running boom. Cape Cod runner-bartender Tommy Leonard watched Frank Shorter's 1972 Olympic triumph and imagined a race from a bar called The Captain Kidd in Woods Hole to his place, The Brothers Four in Falmouth Heights. It would snake along the scenic coves and inlets of Nantucket Sound, and it would be 7.1 miles long because that was the distance between the bars." T.L., Sports Illustrated, July 11 - July 18, 2005.
And so, the Falmouth Road Race was born. Today the race starts in front of the Woods Hole Community Center and and ends near the Falmouth Heights Ball Field. Ranging from narrow, hilly and winding roads to four flat miles, all culminating with a steep hill the last half-mile, the 7.1 mile Falmouth Road Race is a Cape Cod institution. Last year runners raised over $1 million dollars for many national and local charities.
-----------
Wherever did you get the idea it was always 7 miles?
(Oh never mind, I'll just ask Rich Sherman myself. )
Since 1977 the Falmouth Road Race course has been the same distance-beginning at the front door of the Captn. Kidd Rest. on Woods Hole's (Famouth) Main Street all the way to the ball field in Falmouth Heights.
The course was measured in the late 70's or early 80's at just over seven miles - thus the 7.1 miles. The course was (sort of) destroyed in the hurricane (1991) and roads had to be rebuilt.
Two years ago it was remeasured and was found to be 6.99999999 - thus 7 miles.
The course has not changed. But the American distance runners have changed, just look at the time comparisons. The foreign invasion has changed distance running. There are more races out there offering prize money, but the only summer races you want on your resume are Peachtree, Bix7 and Falmouth. Then you can add in Freihofer's*, Utica, NY Mini*, and Crim, and the circle would be complete.
Aye, right you are, lassie. I have steered my browser to the official log
RACE HISTORY
The Falmouth Road Race celebrates its 29th running this year and the spirit which made the first Falmouth so special is still present today. More than 9,000 runners will gather in Woods Hole for the 2001 renewal, including many of the world's elite, though the essence of the event remains a fun run. Back-of-the-pack joggers share the road with the best, forming a tapestry of colors from the start on Water Street to the finish at the beach in Falmouth Heights.
Sponsored for the first time this year by Savings Bank Life Insurance of Massachusetts, the race is one of the showcase events in distance running and woven into the fabric of summer on Cape Cod, like Fourth of July fireworks and Labor Day weekend cookouts. The little race that could belongs to Falmouth. It was first held on a Thursday afternoon because that was founder Tommy Leonard's birthday. It is 7.1 miles because that was the distance from the Captain Kidd in Woods Hole to Tommy's workplace—the Brothers Four in Falmouth Heights.
there used to be a 7 mile marker about 30-40 yards from the finish line. So my guess is its slightly more than 7..unless theyve changed the distance a little.