The other point is that long ago once a marathon runner had a big lead they were typically not chasing times. Perhaps this is why some ran many marathons each year along with other races and varying distances.
If you could win and save your body that made a lot of sense. Now we have so many boring time trial marathons with pacers to 30km.
If Frank Shorter and Bill Rogers lined up today in Boston or in New York, but they were in their bodies when they were in their prime against the top women runners of today who wins and how does the race go down?
Given Chepngetich couldn't line up today, the prime Rodgers and Shorter of the '70s have already beaten all the top women all time. Only Chepngetich has beaten Shorter's marathon time, but with pacemaking and surely with today's shoes, it is unlikely she would beat a prime Shorter.
The question might make sense for Abebe Bikila, but not Rodgers and Shorter.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
If Frank Shorter and Bill Rogers lined up today in Boston or in New York, but they were in their bodies when they were in their prime against the top women runners of today who wins and how does the race go down?
Given Chepngetich couldn't line up today, the prime Rodgers and Shorter of the '70s have already beaten all the top women all time. Only Chepngetich has beaten Shorter's marathon time, but with pacemaking and surely with today's shoes, it is unlikely she would beat a prime Shorter.
The question might make sense for Abebe Bikila, but not Rodgers and Shorter.
?? Bikila ran ~2h15mins barefoot on cobbled streets to win the Rome Olympic Marathon. Then he ran ~2h12 mins to win the Tokyo Olympics in shoes that were effectively carpet slippers by today's standards. There is no way that he would not run a ton faster in today's shoes.
This thread has only shown that it is pointless to compare today's runners with those of the past because the conditions under which people were competing were completely different.
Given Chepngetich couldn't line up today, the prime Rodgers and Shorter of the '70s have already beaten all the top women all time. Only Chepngetich has beaten Shorter's marathon time, but with pacemaking and surely with today's shoes, it is unlikely she would beat a prime Shorter.
The question might make sense for Abebe Bikila, but not Rodgers and Shorter.
?? Bikila ran ~2h15mins barefoot on cobbled streets to win the Rome Olympic Marathon. Then he ran ~2h12 mins to win the Tokyo Olympics in shoes that were effectively carpet slippers by today's standards. There is no way that he would not run a ton faster in today's shoes.
This thread has only shown that it is pointless to compare today's runners with those of the past because the conditions under which people were competing were completely different.
I don't doubt it, but just saying it doesn't make sense for athletes who were already faster than today's women, barring one woman whose PR is faster than Shorter's, who cannot line up today in Boston or New York.
Please, stop kidding yourself. You would have never made nationals in any event indoors or outdoors. Well, maybe the 10000, but you would have had to do that in 95 degree heat. You have no idea how bad the tracks were,, especially indoor tracks. Not gonna happen. You would never have even qualified in any other event. Not gonna happen.
But there is another recent thread here that maybe you could help. They are looking for an unknown 3:45 1500 guy. Are you him?
The year I ran 29:05 I would have not possibly made NCAA's I would have 100% guaranteed made it. The reason I know this is because on the list that qualified was a 29:05, 29:07, 29:09, 29:11, and a 29:12. The year I ran it they did not do regionals they went specifically off of qualifying times. When I ran 3:45 I beat both the 6th and 8th place finisher in the NCAA Div 1 1,500m. I was lastly a closer so the thought process of trying to convince yourself when you don't know who I am that kicking with the athletes would not be sufficient my 3:45 was ran off of a 53 last 400m. The only reason I did not break 4:00 in the mile as a collegiate was completely based on opportunity I did not have any. My 5,000m I ran it once as a Junior and resulted with a 14:17. I had an opportunity to race Ritz, Tegenkemp, and Solinski but chose to try and break 4:00 in the mile instead which was complete trash as the race turned into a crap show in which the pace setter went 2:27 through 1,000m I was the only athlete to go with him and once he dropped it was right into the wind alone for the last 609m. Had I chose to run the 5,000m instead of the Mile I probably would have run 13:30ish at slowest 13:38. I am not trying to put my self on a stage but I was an animal during my competition days that just did not have significant chances and when I did have the chances I always rose to the occasion.
If Frank Shorter and Bill Rogers lined up today in Boston or in New York, but they were in their bodies when they were in their prime against the top women runners of today who wins and how does the race go down?
Given Chepngetich couldn't line up today, the prime Rodgers and Shorter of the '70s have already beaten all the top women all time. Only Chepngetich has beaten Shorter's marathon time, but with pacemaking and surely with today's shoes, it is unlikely she would beat a prime Shorter.
The question might make sense for Abebe Bikila, but not Rodgers and Shorter.
If you want to nitpick, do it right. Of course Chepngetich could line up today, as there is no officially certified marathon in Boston or New York today (or two days ago when the OP started this).
Hypothetically she could even line up in the official Boston or New York marathon - she just isn't allowed to.
Please, stop kidding yourself. You would have never made nationals in any event indoors or outdoors. Well, maybe the 10000, but you would have had to do that in 95 degree heat. You have no idea how bad the tracks were,, especially indoor tracks. Not gonna happen. You would never have even qualified in any other event. Not gonna happen.
But there is another recent thread here that maybe you could help. They are looking for an unknown 3:45 1500 guy. Are you him?
The year I ran 29:05 I would have not possibly made NCAA's I would have 100% guaranteed made it. The reason I know this is because on the list that qualified was a 29:05, 29:07, 29:09, 29:11, and a 29:12. The year I ran it they did not do regionals they went specifically off of qualifying times. When I ran 3:45 I beat both the 6th and 8th place finisher in the NCAA Div 1 1,500m. I was lastly a closer so the thought process of trying to convince yourself when you don't know who I am that kicking with the athletes would not be sufficient my 3:45 was ran off of a 53 last 400m. The only reason I did not break 4:00 in the mile as a collegiate was completely based on opportunity I did not have any. My 5,000m I ran it once as a Junior and resulted with a 14:17. I had an opportunity to race Ritz, Tegenkemp, and Solinski but chose to try and break 4:00 in the mile instead which was complete trash as the race turned into a crap show in which the pace setter went 2:27 through 1,000m I was the only athlete to go with him and once he dropped it was right into the wind alone for the last 609m. Had I chose to run the 5,000m instead of the Mile I probably would have run 13:30ish at slowest 13:38. I am not trying to put my self on a stage but I was an animal during my competition days that just did not have significant chances and when I did have the chances I always rose to the occasion.
OK, I can accept that. I have a clearer view of what was going on with you. It sounds like you were a competitor first, times came secondary. I can identify with that.
How many women are actually running sub 2:15? The answer is 8 all time and one, Ruth Chepngetich is the only one who has done it twice but has been found to have cheated. There is one woman just under 2:12, one just under 2:14.
Without changing a thing, Shorter and Rogers would not lose to a single woman today. With super shoes, Nutrition, better training of today, they would be among the best US runners at the least.
The other point is that long ago once a marathon runner had a big lead they were typically not chasing times. Perhaps this is why some ran many marathons each year along with other races and varying distances.
When was this? I dont remember anything like that?
The other point is that long ago once a marathon runner had a big lead they were typically not chasing times. Perhaps this is why some ran many marathons each year along with other races and varying distances.
When was this? I dont remember anything like that?
Well most of the races were not done with pacemakers, which is a separate point. When did the pace making become so common? I don’t know. I think we can all agree that Shorter and Rodgers would be competitive with the top US men today in the marathon.
When was this? I dont remember anything like that?
Well most of the races were not done with pacemakers, which is a separate point. When did the pace making become so common? I don’t know. I think we can all agree that Shorter and Rodgers would be competitive with the top US men today in the marathon.
Yeah, I remember when Ritz debuted his marathon at NYC. There was a lot of chatter about the pacers in the pre-race technical meetings.. Despite $150k incentive, pacers all around him and perfect conditions Ritz didnt follow the pacers and ran the half split in 1:05:40. Pathetic. So what did you say about the pacers? Looks like they didn't matter did they?
The difference with Shorter and Rodgers today would be they would be running FLAT, big money races. That would change everything.
Yes the brojos routinely put up click bait but this one isn't theirs.
It’s a thread to yet again backhand African women and supershoes ad nauseam. If it wasn’t a twin then it was one of their clones.
Why the eff would you say that? The brojos didn't start this thread. They're already clones, they don't need any more. Identical DNA. Very different personalities. They do a good job at what they do.
This post was edited 5 minutes after it was posted.
If Frank Shorter and Bill Rogers lined up today in Boston or in New York, but they were in their bodies when they were in their prime against the top women runners of today who wins and how does the race go down?
Wow, most idiotic question I've ever seen posted here, and that's quite the high bar. Unless, you're making Shorter and Rogers wear shoes from the 1920's, this is a joke of a question. Put them in today's shoes and they'd be able to beat the top women runners of today (who haven't been suspended) by close to 10 minutes.
It’s a thread to yet again backhand African women and supershoes ad nauseam. If it wasn’t a twin then it was one of their clones.
Why the eff would you say that? The brojos didn't start this thread. They're already clones, they don't need any more. Identical DNA. Very different personalities. They do a good job at what they do.