Andrew Wheating 2007 vs Tom Byers 1974: a dose of reality

Go speed racer go wrote:

not much wrote:

I wonder if the OP (Go speed racer go) IS Tom Byers?

Why is the guy so continually obsessed with pointing out how much "better" of an improvement Byers had compared to Wheating?

Give it a rest. They both made phenomenal improvements. We can't predict the future with Wheating but I hope he is able to have a longer, more consistent career than Tom.

No I'm not Byers. By your logic then you must be Andrew Wheating? Who else would want to perpetuate the myth of "rube to champion" so bad?

More ad hominem please.

You obviously haven't read my posts carefully or are confusing me with someone else. I'm not trying to perpetuate anything--I'm trying to MINIMIZE your perpetuation of an unnecessary need to create a competition between two runners who BOTH exhibited an improvement in a fairly short time.

I'm trying to play fair and say let's give props to BOTH for the improvements they've made. I just don't see what's driving you to not do the same. Why does it bug you so much that people are amazed at Wheatings improvements? It doesn't have to take anything away from other people's improvements? I sure wish I could have that kind of improvement....

Byers was an incredible and exciting talent. All the brouhaha here seems to be about his improvements in 1974, but it wasn't until 8 years later in 1982 that he ran his lifetime best of 3:50 and change.

I saw Byers get spiked badly in his calf at the start of a Hayward Field race by a German runner (Wessinhage??). The runners were called back because it was declared a false start. With blook streaming down the back of his leg, Byers ran a fabulous race beating a cast of internationally ranked runners in the process.

Byers was a sight to see around Hayward Field, usually accompanied by his beautiful model wife. He left serious competition to join the corporate world and succeeded there as well. Here is a link to an interesting story about Tom Byers, pointing out what an incredible track athlete he was for many years and into his 40's:

http://members.aol.com/track2ceo/byers.html

not much wrote:

I'm trying to play fair and say let's give props to BOTH for the improvements they've made. I just don't see what's driving you to not do the same.

Go speed racer go wrote:

I agree that Wheating has the potential to run 3:50 someday, perhaps this year. I hope to see it.

Go speed racer go wrote:

not much wrote:

I'm trying to play fair and say let's give props to BOTH for the improvements they've made. I just don't see what's driving you to not do the same.

Go speed racer go wrote:

I agree that Wheating has the potential to run 3:50 someday, perhaps this year. I hope to see it.

But, your out of context quote does nothing to deal with what I'm saying. So you said Wheating had potential. But, that's not the main thrust of most of your arguments here and you know it. You are still vigorously downplaying the amount of his improvement in most of your posts. That was the purpose of your original posts and subsequent ones too....re-read your own language.

Rob Myers (3:53 mile pr) is closer to Tom Byers in talent. For one thing his running PRs are closer to Byers, and their last name rhyme.

I still think US mile running was in better shape a quarter century ago. Right now the US is relying too much on Lagat and Webb. In the early 80's Steve Scott was complimented by sub 3:50 milers like Spivey and Maree, and several 3:50 runners like Byers and Harbour. Even John Gregorek was good for a 3:51 mile, and it was not even his main event.

I always thought Myers would be America's next 3:50 miler to compliment Webb and Lagat. Rankin has a lot of speed, but he is even more erratic than Lukezic and Myers.

Having the A standard Myers goes into the trials with a psychological advantage. Besides he already has a 3:33 1500 pr along with his 3:53 mile.

Still, things are a lot better today for US 1500 meter runners than in 2000. What a low point it was for US mile running back in those dark days. Stember, Lunn, and Jenning never could make either a World Championship or Olympic finals.

My memories of TB races and interviews:

'76 OTs - led thru 800 in 1:54 (1:52?) or something silly like that and faded to last.

Dropped off the radar screen for several years.

Came back in 1980 to qualify for OTs again and ran a few good races. ALWAYS took it out hard. He was hired as a rabbit a few times as a result.

1981 he was in good shape and training w/ Delinger. There were some choice Delinger comments printed - the usual, "the race is not Tuesday" i.e don't race workouts, and also about taking a bat to Beyers (or other athletes)

In '82 he really turned it on, won some good races at the end of August/early September, then won the 5th Ave Mile. That was basically it.

Spivey posted here a few years ago, talking about how he read Beyer's logs and was blown away by the workouts TB was doing.

It sounds like TB was very talented, but could not find a coach who could bridle his enthusiasm.

Wheating? Who knows....

The high point of Byers career was 1982 when he ran his 3:50 mile and was ranked 7 in the world.

In 1976 Olympic trials he showed his inexperience by blasting through the first lap of the 1500 in 54 seconds. The broadcasters at the time were even commenting on this crazy move. Predictably he fell off the pace and off the Olympic team. However, he got many ranked US runners angry with him for also burning them out and keeping them off the team. It was said that there were several US runners looking for him after the race.

In the early 80's he was suppose to be a rabbit in a race that included both Coe and Scott. However, Byers decided to reject his rabbit duties and went on to win the race. After this race Coe commented that we "ran like hacks".

So exactly how much did the talented Mr. Myers improve from age 18 to 20?

Mr Bored wrote:

Rob Myers (3:53 mile pr) is closer to Tom Byers in talent. For one thing his running PRs are closer to Byers, and their last name rhyme.

.

Message:

[quote]replier of posts wrote:

One of these?

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/topic/article/Tom_Byers/1900-01-01/2100-12-31/mdd/index.htm

Ha! I'd forgotten about this race. Very refreshing in an era when Covette were exciting but predictable. Byers had guts to go for it. He got lucky, though: the rest of the field just miscalculated. Never heard of him again.

I agree while a good effort, more of a case of the field watching each other and letting the race slip away. The field only closed with a 58-59 second last lap which even in those days was not much of kick considering the speed of the runners involved.

Anyway i am roughly the same age as Byers and alot of runners in those days got labeled as "crazy" including myself. Since there was alot of good competition guys rea;;y experimented with training, In the previous decade 3 high school kids had broken 4 minutes in the mile, and while i was in HS a couple of local boys(soCal) were within a couple seconds of doing again.

You could go to the library and find out what kind of workouts the best guys were doing and then you had coacheslike Tabori working your ass off.

Consequently guys were trying things like speedwork the morning of races, 23 mile "recovery" runs, triple workouts, running in lead vests etc. Most of our cross country team would work as parking valets on Fri night after our meet, they would parkthe cars on the street usually about a half mile away and run back & forth until 2am and then meet for our Sat long run 17-20 miles at 7 am.

In hindsight, people would call us nuts and they were right but then again most of the guys we were running against were doing the same thing.

Byers was good, but for his time his improvement was defintely less spectacular than Ryun who went from a 5minute mile to the Olympic team in 2 years.

So i can't understand using him as a measuring stick for any modern runner. As far as nuts, I doubt it, a little flaky sure but training wise pretty typical of the era.

Byers coach on Track and Field news commented that Byers never really believed in himself. Scott thought he has the ability to be one of the great milers.

It was a shame that the great US milers from the early 80s where overshadow by the even better UK milers. In those days Anglo American milers ruled the world. The great African runners where waiting in the wings, and within a few years they started their quest for the top. They have not looked back since.

Let me clear this up for you. Some people have the ability to run 3:36. Others have the ability to win a race that is running around that pace. If you can't understand the difference go back and watch that race. The tools it takes to win are not in every runner. GENERALLY, and especially in championship races, it takes a mighty kick to win. He appears to have a mighty kick and has already run 1:47 low this season. If he gets faster (common sense suggests a decent probability of that) than would he have more or less of a chance at being competitive in a championship race?

I think maybe you are confusing "could" with "will". I don't think anyone is saying he's ready to do this tomorrow. But he certainly looks very promising. Is that too much credit to give?

oldhalfmileguy wrote:

You could go to the library and find out what kind of workouts the best guys were doing and then you had coacheslike Tabori working your ass off.

I drive by Tabori's shop every morning...

The kid from Sudan is better than either. Also the Rend Lake guy. Both should be a reality check for you Americans that even though it isn't 1974 you haven't gotten any better.

Except that neither runs the mile haha! The best African miler is an American !*chuckle*

LightningBolt wrote:

The kid from Sudan is better than either. Also the Rend Lake guy. Both should be a reality check for you Americans that even though it isn't 1974 you haven't gotten any better.

Great F'ing race. Could you imagine a pacer maker winning off the front like that today? Felt like a TdF stage where someone goes off the front, and the peloton is chasing him down over the final meters. This time the breakaway succeeded!

Can't get the actual article (that someone linked to?) to come up for me, but IIRC when Ovett et al. came by the 400m, they were told *Byers's* time for the first lap, not theirs! Naturally, they believed they were going plenty fast enough, and that Byers would die. He did, but not soon enough...

Those of you who know me, I can't help myself, so flame on.

John Schiefer

1988 4:40 1600m

1989 4:20 1600m

1990 4:18 mile, 3:49 1500m

1991 4:05 Mile (4500 ft), 3:45

1992 3:42 1500m 4:01 mile.

Yeah, I know, I'm no Tom Byron

Schiefinator!

Nice progression, if a bit boring :)

schiefer wrote:

Those of you who know me, I can't help myself, so flame on.

John Schiefer

1988 4:40 1600m

1989 4:20 1600m

1990 4:18 mile, 3:49 1500m

1991 4:05 Mile (4500 ft), 3:45

1992 3:42 1500m 4:01 mile.

Yeah, I know, I'm no Tom Byron

Schiefinator!

Schiefer, that looks like a normal progression. What is the purpose of your post?