Lack of 10k success in the 70's

the most interesting part about malmo's 1:01 (and the part you are too ignorant to understand): it was an AMERICAN RECORD and very nearly a WORLD RECORD... the fastest half-marathoner IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD up to that point crossed the finish line exactly 8 seconds before him...

not too shabby, if you ask me...

dirt, Culpepper ran what amounted to the 14th fastest time in US history. That is a great start to a promising marathon career. 20 years ago that time would have been up near the front/winning on a fast course like Chi-town, now days that time leaves the runner 3 minutes behind the leaders in 9th.

Look at AlSal & Nenow both runners ran 27:25 & 27:20, at the height of their best races the WRs were 27:22 & 27:13. Meb takes down a 15 year old US record & is still 51 seconds behind todays world standard, not good. Improvement but still a time that would only be competitive 10-12 years ago, not today.

Look back to Virgin his 2:10:27 at Boston & his 27:30 track 10K US-record, plus the 2 WxC titles, he was World competitive in his day on all surfaces. Today he would be common place on the world level, good but nothing special. The point is it's 2002 not 1982, so 27:33 & 2:09:41 is also-ran material.

The US has not kept pace with the rest of the world over the last 30 years. Take out Meb & KK from the equation, think about it, now how do you feel? Sorry but how do you like the picture I drew for you dirt, think about it....not good huh?

You painted the exact picture that I am aware exist. We are no longer competitive on the world level. I have claimed this all along. We agree on that point. The bigger question is would we have been competitive in the 70's if the african nations would have been involved as they are today. Absolutly not. The guys from the 70's want to tell us how much better they were back in the day but the marathonis the only distance that the numbers back up their argument. Several people tell me that that had to do with the accuracy of the courses. I don't know that. I do know that the Nike OTC course was very questionable. The funniest part is that the guys from the 70's want to act like they are giving us this information to try to teach us something. Actually, if Americans fair well for any distance you can count on hodge or malmo to be on the board within hours telling us how it was better in the 70's. How does that teach us anything? Let go, the sport has passed you by. The next time I need advice on how to handle a short marathon course with a lack of africans in the race I'll make sure to check with the oldtimers. If I need advice on how to underachieve at other distances and find excuses for why, I'll check with the old timers. I know I am being disrespectful to grandpa and I should just let him continue to see the past as he sees it. Afterall, that is all they have got at this point. I remember some posts on here about why is hodge and malmo not coaching at the college level. BECAUSE THAT GRANDPA WOULD BE REALITY.

Correction: Culpepper ran the 11th or 12th NOT the 14th best single best time of 2:09:41, sorry.

Answer: We were competitive, see above in my previous post the few examples that I gave.

False dirt

dirt your wrong, never heard either one of them ever bash a guy who has put it on the line. In fact a few weeks ago I saw where malmo wished Culpepper good luck after others had been negetive.

dirt whatever, go suck your thumb. Reality is we are improving towards being as fast as we once were, but not on the same progressive level as the rest of the world is at this time. We need more guys like Med, KK & Culpepper.

Ok I am now sucking my thumb. Some excellent advice again from a defender of the senior citizens. I now see why we should listen with excellent advice like that. Boy, I am listening and learning. With this vast knowledge that malmo and hodge picked up during their glory years. HOW MANY CURRENT ELITE ATHLETES DO THEY COACH? How many team national championships have they coached? Why hasn't the Farm Team or Hansons or any of the major Shoe companies picked up on these guys vast knowledge of the sport and hired them as coaches? Why hasn't a major college program taken advantage of their wealth of knowledge and experience? Did Meb or Culpepper or Browne or Hauser or Verran or Baker or.......ask either of these guys direction in coaching them through their first marathon? Do you think any of these guys will look to them for direction in their next marathon? THAT MY FRIEND IS REALITY.

Back to basics, no reason to defend me from the cyberhydra Dirt. These cowardly trolls pop up every now and then. Clearly, he's got an imaginary axe to grind and he and his anonyms will create "facts" to justify. Look, the guy claims that I'm always bashing the young bucks and I'm always bashing Salazar about drugs. Both claims are categorically false. I don't say anything about anyone that 1)I wouldn't be comfortable saying to their face and 2) wouldn't pass the slander threshold. It's not my style. Bitter has never been an adjective that could be used to describe me. Heck, Blue Pride even got me laughing with that one.

What this kid Dirt doesn't realize is that everyone in the industry, not just the runners, reads Letsrun: the fans, recreation runners, shoe geeks, race directors, coaches, trainers, sports agents, journalists. Everyone means everyone. Have we forgotten the Calaba/knife debacle yet? I, for one, do not post anything that is false or that I wouldn't want everyone to read and be held personally accountable for either. I prefer facts over bullshit. Truth over lies.

It appears to me that Dirt just cannot stand either Hodgie-san or myself providing an insiders historical perspective of the sport. In the short time since Marc Andreessen invented the web-Browser as we know it, allowing instantaneous communication with other like-minded enthusiasts, who would have thought that distance-running in America would see a revival because of it? You think it's a coincidence that about six years ago the "less is more" mindset went out the window? Does anyone really believe it? Anyone to claim the I am here to "live in the past" doesn't know me at all. Dirt doesn't. When we provide statistics, it's to illustrate that today's runners can be just as competitive as yesterdays. We also provide with the stats, a glimpse of the mind-set that was going on back then too. We were there. Dirt was not. Never once, have you ever heard Hodgie-san or myself claim "we were better". The stats prove that it's not the Kenyans, nor the money, nor a training venue that makes runners. It's the mind and the heart. Dirt has neither.

The fact that Dirt is so thin-skinned that he cannot see the truth, or speak the truth, speaks for itself.

What, pray tell, does work ethic and ability have to do with coaching? Two different disciplines my friend. The reverse certainly isn't true. Once again, if you can figure it out, use the search function and you will see that they have been asked why they don't coach. Like in any discipline, often the smartest people are those that know what they don't know. Ignoramuses aren't held back by that limitation and just forge blindly ahead. You may also want to search for "Summer of malmo" which is a constantly requested treatise on lots of boards by young wanna bees. They would probably be the first to admit that many of yesterday's runners don't have the talent of today's runners but through hard work, they squeezed every last drop out of what they were handed.

We get it Dirt. Hodgie and malmo suck?

Could you fix global warming next?

A few comments on my webpage.

VIEWER COMMENTS:

Here are some correspondences and comments from various viewers of this site. If you have something to say, send your comments here .

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Keith Dowling

Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 7:32 PM

Subject: thanks

Bob, This is Keith Dowling. I ran 2:13.28 at Boston this year and would like to thank you for your site. It's hard to find (detailed) information on the old school greats from the '70' and 80's and the information you provide is extremely beneficial.

Thanks for helping me make my first Boston a great experience. Keep up the inspiring work!

From: Thomas R. McArdle

Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 10:09 PM

Subject: The Garden of Eden

I just took some time to really read through your site. It sounds like Boston was the place to be back in the late 70s and early 80s. I wish that was still the case today. I like training in Boston for most of the year (jan and feb not great). The only problem is that there are not enough trails within running distance. However, running does not get any better than the Lincoln woods. Thought your training looks a lot like what I do. It was interesting how few quality sessions you put in leading up to your marathon PR. It was mostly mileage and races. It gives me faith that I am doing the right thing up here in Hanover. Anyways just wanted to say I really enjoyed your site, it is ridiculous that so many fellow American distance runners are not willing to share their training methods with other people. We should all be in together. Best of luck with everything and thanks for the emails.

Tom

Once again, dirt, discussion closed.

"This is a PARTIAL list of guys running 2:10 and 28 Low on a CONSISTANT basis"

Dear Old Guys,

I'm as sad as anyone that the Internet didn't show up a little earlier than it did. Had I been reached by the "More Mileage" proselytizers a little earlier, my running career might have been very different.

But let me mention a point: it's overblown hype like this comment that makes "new guys" begin to tune out things that the "old guard" has to say. Verifiably false recollections of "the good old days" don't get discussions like this moving along very well.

"Meyer,Rodgers,Lindsey,Sinclair,Hunt,Bickford,Bjorkland,Durden, Virgin,Fox....even guys like Coppess,Heffner, Jon Anderson, Sandoval,Tabb, Wells, Hodgie."

"This is a PARTIAL list of guys running 2:10 and 28 Low on a CONSISTANT basis"

"But let me mention a point: it's overblown hype like this comment that makes "new guys" begin to tune out things that the "old guard" has to say. Verifiably false recollections of "the good old days" don't get discussions like this moving along very well."

BryanB2,

What hype?

It is easy to verify that all of the above (and others) ran 2:09-2:10 or 28:low or both.

I agree that they ran those times. I'm not talking PRs.

I'm more interested in the implication that they did it all the time, as if it was no big deal (leading to the conclusion that current runners stink because they don't).

The statement does not say "either/or", it says "AND" and "CONSISTANT." The implication is that there were these hordes of super-fast, wide-ranged, super-consistent runners. And it's this hype to which I'm referring (I'm not suggesting you had anything to do with it).

That doesn't seem to be borne out by the facts. I'm more than happy to be corrected. I've been looking for a couple hours and haven't found what has been implied.

Like Jon Sinclair- 2:13:29 28:42.54 (neither 2:10 nor 28-low)

Hunt- 2:12:14 (not 2:10)

Heffner- 2:10:55 (consistent 2:10s?)

Hodge- Your own racing-history page does not support inclusion in the list I'm addressing.

You CalTech boys take things a little too literally. Don't you think you've picked up some bad habits over at Merv, Mr. Beel? Turn off that Parsing Magnetron, it's really quite easy to understand what "goose" meant. The "partial list" means GROUP, and of that group, someone (in reality many of them) was always producing a LOW 28 and/or 2:10 on a consistent basis. Year in and year out. The statement is true.

At Caltech, we are taught that "true" statements containing elements of falsehood are no longer true. If goose wanted to contribute to the discussion with a true statement, he/she should either have spoken in a less-literal manner, or have made the list a little more accurate.

I'm merely trying to point out that the reason "young guys" attack and disregard "old guys/grandpas" is because of demonstrably false "true" statements like the one goose made. Did you miss that in your ad hominem fervor?

If the "inexperienced" are going to learn anything from the "experienced", then perhaps the "experienced" better work on their fact-recall skills.

Perhaps an and/or would have suited you better. The thrust of the arguement was/and is that these times were being run on a consistant basis by the runners mentioned and others. The list was spontaneous ...off the top of my head, but I truely believe it to be correct as others have mentioned. AGAIN...there were others Ric Rojas for one,Stan Mavis, Lodwick etc etc. My point...again...is that in the late 70's to mid-eighties a GOOD number of guys were producing results consistantly in the time ranges mentioned before. Many others were in the 2:12-2:14 range...guys like Dean Reinke(sp) and Schleisinger(sp?) That guy looked like the captain of the chess club, but ran strong...2:11. Not trying to put anyone down today or glorify the "old-timers"...just stating what I know to be true as one who has been around the sport for alot of years.

Random facts taken from the 1981 RW Annual, curent through the end of 1980. I draw no conclusions from these numbers.

Americans under 2:15 - 31, under 2:18 - 76, under 2:20 - 149

Top 6 from 1980 were:

Salazar 2:09:41

Sandoval 2:10:19

BJ 2:10:20

Durden 2:10:41

Heffner 2:10:55

Hodgie-san 2:10:59

Of the 149 sub 2:20 guys, many ran faster either before or after the performance on the list; it was only from 1980.

Of the top 50 marathoners in history, seventeen were American, and one was African. Americans like Dave Smith and Rick Callison were on the list. 2:11:40 was the 50th time in history.

There was at least one American on the all-time list at 800 (Wolhunter 2nd), 1000 (Wolhunter 2nd), 1500 (Ryun 7th), Mile (Ryun 6th, Scott 7th, Masback 9th, Liquori 10th), 3000 (Chapa 5th), and 10,000 (Virgin 2nd). The 10th best 10,000 in history was 27:36 at that point; for 5000, it was 13:14.

This may be crucially important data, or mean nada.

What it means? It means we were very competitive on the World level in the year 1980. How many guys will we put under 2:15 this year? How about 2:18 & 2:20 this year?

The world has progressed in terms of fast times, the U.S.A. has not kept pace from 22 years ago according to the facts & numbers that you have presented.

Do any of us think that the young Kenyans are worried about running faster then Kip Keino did in his day? Can we have the same confidence about our ability to surpass times that Wolhunter, Liquori, Pre & Shorter all ran nearly 30 years ago?

The decline in the U.S. started with the Carter Boycott of 1980 USSR-OGames & we fell sharply off the map shortly after the 1984 LA-OGames.

If we take Meb & KK out of the picture where do we stand in regards to USA improvement? Do we need to keep importing better runners like David Kimani, Meb, KK & Abdi so we can fill our teams with a realistic hope for a OGames medal?