Jim Walmsley's 50 Mile American record may not count?

I'm the one who started this thread saying someone wanted to question the record.

Personally it makes very little difference to me if the record is ratified or not. I bet HOKA wouldn't even mind the additional publicity if someone decided the record didn't count.

My take is 100% with Bruce Fordyce's take on it and I think our sport looks stupid if it isn't recognized. The fastest time on a certified course should be the record.

And the person who originally wrote me questioning the possibility of this record counting wrote me again last night right as I started this thread. They wrote,

I spoke to Mike McManus of HOKA about this and he said they may issue a statement later but he assured me that there were backup timers at 50 miles. They tried to make sure they dotted their "i's" and croosed their "t's" was the impression I got. And I can't believe someone wouldn't want a record to count in a 50 miler because there weren't backup timers, but it looks like that was taken care of. So my bet is the record gets ratified but our sport is known for losing the forest for the trees.

can't see wrote:

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Such an exercise would be neither honorable nor fair to other athletes if the result was fraudulently misrepresented, but I can’t see how such a run being a time trial would affect anything adversely.

It seems you be okay with the concept of banning fake starts in the sprints. First to the finish line means nothing. The fastest person from the point a foot leaves the blocks to the finish would be the winner. Performance >>> rules.

WTF is a "fake start"? Someone who just stays in the blocks without ever moving? Never seen that.

All the Asterisks wrote:

I think it's clear Fordyce's time is more impressive. He didn't have super-shoes and so many 35 years of tech advances. Even still, the legendary Walmsley only beat him by a few seconds.

I would argue that shoes are not really important. They are necessary for most of us but all the "improvements" are marketing gimmicks.

And yes, Fordyce was a really good runner.

The fact that this whole event rules issue is on the table and USATF is already questioning the integrity of the record shows that Hoka didn't take it as serious as they should have. But, I do like how the previous record holder relinquished the record via a written statement. That shows a lot and will probably win the case for the record. If it was the 100k record, I don't think it would be ratified.

Forest Gump here wrote:

It doesn't really matter. 50 miles on roads is not an international recognized distance. It's not raced anywhere on roads really except that one race in Chicago, I think. It's a feel good record to know that you have beaten Bruce Fordyce strong record from the 80ies. But it's not a real World Record.

I can set the 51 mile on 46% grass, 34% dirt, and 10% concrete world best. Where’s my media coverage? Can I call myself a world record holder now?

That anonymous coward that is part of USATF and the old guard that protects the legacy runners is fighting to disqualify this race because he has been turned off by Walmsley. There are tons of guys out there, like AJW and Meghan Hicks, that absolutely question everything Jim does and criticize his every move. The guys I've run with in ultras that are 45+ years old and place well at races like WSER and UTMB hated Walmsley before he started getting his results and now jump on the bandwagon. To hell with that anonymous coward. I could venture to guess who it is, but I'll keep it quiet for now.

I’m too lazy to google right now . Who is she and Meghan hicks?

Longtime record keeper Ken Young is probably rolling in his grave at the closed nature of the Hoka event. The rules are there to protect what it means to have a bona fide competition and the conditions by which every record before it are set. How can you trust they followed the rules when everyone there was paid by Hoka and had a vested interest? There’s no impartiality, opposition, or competition. This is not what sports is about.

Record Stands wrote:

Just walked into the conversation wrote:

Should we take away Roger Bannister's first sub-4?

Exactly. Even with Bannister there was controversy because of his use of rabbits and one of the rabbits hung back so he could rabbit after he was lapped.

Bannister's first sub-4 should not have been ratified as a world record. But Bannister did not use a lapped rabbit in that race; he used one in a record attempt a couple of months earlier, and properly got disqualified for his unsportsmanlike conduct.

From the man himself wrote:

Bruce Fordyce comment about Walmsleys run:

All class and eloquence.

(To all)If you haven't done the following, take up Bruce's invitation:

Run Comrades, even if you are not elite , win the race or break records, you will come away humbled by the experience. It is not a race, it is a journey that starts with your qualifier, entry, training your arse off, the expo, the drive over course visiting the Comrades Museum and the school for disabled en route and the spine tingling shoza loza at start, the people en route, the pain, the pleasure and the time spent clapping and urging others to the 12hr cut off

Then go to Bruce's after party. You will have fun, listening to stories from Bruce down to the novice, some of them tall stories. Be prepared to drink...Bruce is.

And why not even invite Bruce over for a round of after dinner talks. If he wasn't made for Ultras, that would be a close second. He may also become a mate for life.

Can you tell who won the actual race?

Can you tell what shoes HE was wearing?

Congrats to being in the select minority. :-)

The rest of the World only got the info that JW ran in Hokas and set some kind of record.

This is the kind of marketing coup events we'll have to get used to now.

The Diamond League is an effing mess.

Doping and Gender issues will only get worse from a PR perspective.

(Improved counter measures are always balanced out by increased suspiscion and testing fukkups).

The bundling of throwing, jumping and running is not niche smart to start with.

(Imagine how much popular T&F would have been if a/the field event had been something like Ninja Warrior Obstacle Course Running).

World Championships in one single city means politicians get involved.

So you know from the get-go that lots of money will be channeled to their self-interest angles that has nothing to do with the actual sport.

The Olympics are too few and too far apart.

(Why put millions in sponsor money into athletes for four years, and loose it all because of a cold/sprained ancle over the last weeks, or a doped competitor from another country getting all the headlines of the day even when your guy/gal wins).

This is in response to the following section of the original post:

wejo: "Now that I think about it I bet someone has run faster for 50 miles on the Comrades down course so we probably should correct the article. I just went and looked and the Comrades down record if an even pace were held would very close to Jim's time. Something along the lines of 4:49 and a few seconds. So I think it's fair to say the down record holder ran faster for 50 miles but maybe not if say there was a huge downhill section the last 5 miles. Anyone know for sure?"

We don't know exact times at 50 miles, because Comrades doesn't have a timing mat there, but it's fairly certain that in 2016 the winner (David Gatebe) went through 50 miles in 4hr45 low. Calculated as follows:

The nearest timing mat was at 82.67kms. Gatebe went through there in 4hr53:10. If we assume that his average pace from 50miles (80.45kms) to 82.67kms was equal to his average pace for the whole race, of 3:35min/k (which seems a reasonable - probably conservative - assumption, as that 2k section contains a nasty hill), then it would have taken him 7m57s to cover that section. Which means he went through 50 miles in 4hr45:13, i.e. not quite the 4hr43 that Fordyce estimated in his blog post, but still around 5 minutes quicker than Walmsley's new world best.

Obviously this doesn't qualify as a world best (no proper timing at 50 miles, net downhill course), it is indeed quite possibly (probably?) the "fastest anyone has run 50 miles".

Timing data is here:

http://live.ultimate.dk/desktop/front/?eventid=2921&ignoreuseragent=true

Comrades is a very contested race. The 50 mile distance is not. That is the main reason why this record was so old. Now it can sit there for another 50 years.

Nobody cares really, it's not a recognized distance.

wejo wrote:

I’m too lazy to google right now . Who is she and Meghan hicks?

Meghan Hicks is the co founder of irunfar.com a website for snobby trail runners with a very censored forum.

You didn't miss much if you are not aware of that website.

I dealt with USATF in Trans Am & I’d agree that the “issue” usually has more to do with how much money & control they get, rather than splitting hairs over the rules. One thing that ultras & track meets have in common. See, we’re not so different after all!

The 50-mile record may have been vulnerable based on theoretical splits at Comrades, but Comrades will have to deal with that if they care, which of course they don’t!

Is it possible some are a bit jealous of JW? No, it’s not possible; it’s dead certain.

As for Hoka, congratulations & welcome to race organizing: the joy of helping hard-working athletes reach their goals & motivate many others to try it themselves. The day after Babe Ruth hit the Called Shot, they drilled him on the first pitch! Such are your critics.

wejo wrote:

I just got an email from someone in the ultra community (excerpts below) who wants to remain anonymous who contends there are some concerns about Walmsley getting the 50 mile world best and 50 mile American record because what he competed in may not have been "a bona fide scratch running competition." And since I often use Steeltown Runner as an ultra expert I will say the email was not from him just so people don't assume it is him.

(Why is the rule in there that someone can't get a record at a shorter distance without finishing? If someone breaks at 20k WR in a half marathon it should count.)

Thanks WeJo. I do know of at least one very strong non Hoka athlete who was recruited to the event and declined. Someone else conjectured to me that part of the late announcement of the event was to prevent other elite runners who might have been interested from participating, so this way it was still technically open to others. I do agree with the notion of bonafide competition. The spirit of the rule is to keep someone's solo time trial, even on a record quality course from getting a record. The notion of records in athletics is to see where sport and competition can push an athlete. Other solo time trials can be exciting, but ultimately, are more novelty (a la Guinness, and they have many that are impressive, many more that make a mockery of serious endeavors) than running records. I'll note here that Tyler Andrews has the Guinness treadmill half marathon "record" and Wardian has the 50K treadmill Guinness "record" (Wardian basically did two 3 hour 50Ks within 10 hours of each other when he learned that the first was barely slower than the mark he had not been alerted to previously).

The bona fide competition is also why, though USATF ratified it, many are not happy with the ratification of Josh Cox's 50km AR as it was essentially a solo 5 mile time trial after a RnR marathon in which though others were officially entered, he was the only real runner doing it.

re: shorter record in a longer distance race - I agree. I'm no technical expert (nor ultra expert) but as fair as I can tell, it's one of these 'spirit of the sport' rules, which are always going to be gray. I mentioned it to a running historian who immediately piped up and said 'of course one can't run an 800m WR in a 1500, DNF, and have it count;' so perhaps consult with some older folks who may be able to intelligently comment on it. I still am not entirely sure why.

It's worth noting that many USATF and IAAF rules did not take ultras into account and there consistently are gray areas that have to get sorted out. Two short examples come to mind (1) Does an oversized (440m) hard surface indoor track count as a road or track record for a 6 day run? It's not as straightforward as you might think, and yes, 6 days is a real thing not a Guinness stunt. (2) For standard distances we know lapped runners can get pulled from the track to avoid pacing concerns. How does that impact 24 hour track running? It's a hairy topic, and it really takes having a race official who understands the rules, their proper application to ultras, lots of integrity, and a bit of subjective smell testing during the race.

It will only be able to be recognized by Guinness Book of World Records.

wejo wrote:

I’m too lazy to google right now . Who is she and Meghan hicks?

Meghan Hicks runs the irunfar.com, which is probably the leading website for ultrarunning in US.

Since folks here are constantly questioning the popularity and significance of ultraunning as a sport, here is what leading website means:

@iRunFar: 91.9K followers on Twitter

@letsrundotcom: 39.2K followers.

sconehead wrote:

Since folks here are constantly questioning the popularity and significance of ultraunning as a sport, here is what leading website means:

@iRunFar: 91.9K followers on Twitter

@letsrundotcom: 39.2K followers.

Looks like twitter followers to me ...the more you tweet, and the more specific that is, the more followers for a given genre.

You cannot compare the two websites vis a vis content