Accuracy of Road Roace Courses During the '70s and '80s

Trident,Here is the original post. My response addressed that post. Week in week out road races are nowhere near as deep as they used to be. If you raced in the '80s and still race today, you simply will not dispute this. Yes, the advent of professional racing has brought many more top athletes to top tier races. After Beach to Beacon, the state of Maine will not see another 30 minute 10k until the next Beach to Beacon. This was not always the case. As I said in my post, watching two athletes duke it out to a low 29 minute 10k at a local race was not all that uncommon when I grew up. It is unheard of now.

Johnny Rotten wrote:

Can anyone here vouch for the accuracy, in general, of road race courses from the era of the Running Boom? Now, of course, we have certified courses that we can reasonably assume are accurate (if run as certified). When did that begin?

I ask, because when you look at road race results from this era, when I first began running, you find many, many small 5K's or 10K's being won with relatively fast times--under 15:00 or under 31:00. Were so many runners of that time really that much faster, or did they merely race more (and faster) than your garden-variety elite of today?

Were a lot of those times run on short courses?

Not trying to cause an srgument, although undoubtedly we'll get one. I'm just curious.

malmo wrote:

Having experienced the New England Road Race scene first hand I'll tell you it's like none other. It seemed like you could run three or four races a week if you wanted to. Tom, why do you think that was so? Is is because there's a higher density of colleges there? Even in the 70s the money was good in those races.

I'd be interested in this answer also, Tom....

I cut my teeth on road racing in the late 70's and 80's, loved every minute of it. As malmo said, you knew there was always a race somewhere on every weekend of the year. As a matter of fact, I spent a lot of time at the Fresh Pond races (2.5 and 5 "miles"). I am sure Tom was there many times. These were known to be inaccurate yet we all toed the line every sat morning and crossed the line with Fred Brown handing us a Popsicle stick with our place on it...you'd look to see if you made it into the Boston Globe the next morning (top three).

I once ran the 2.5 in 13:06 and I wasn't even in the top ten....runners up front included Lynn Jennings, who I don't even think was in the top 5. Great memories...

The Lynn 9.6 in February along the ocean with a biting wind in your face on the way back...beef stew in the church at the finish. Yes, those were the days...

I moved to New Mexico last June and I cannot find a race here...and the weather is much better. There might be a 5K coming up 1.5 hours away next month ;-)

If anyone wants to see what the depth was like in the late 70's or early 80's, check out the results of the Maryland Marathon and keep in mind the course was anything but flat. The top 339 finishers broke 3 hours. Compare that to any of the current regional marathons and you get the point.

As the inventor of the Jones Counter, let me jump in here on the discussion.

I invented the Counter in 1971 because a "20 km" race I ran the year before was about a mile short. And, as people on this forum have observed, there were no 5 km or even 10 km races around then. Most were odd distances.

The course I measured was 20 km. It has been measured and certified several times over the 36 years of its existence so I know it has always been accurate. My best time was 1:19:45 in 54th place in 1981. There were 232 finishers so I was in the 23rd percentile. In 1991 a similar time would have brought me in in 23rd out of 192 or 12th percentile. In 2001 it would have given me 5th place (!) out of 136 or 4th percentile.

We are just not seeing the runners in their 20s and early 30s who were running outstanding times. Where are they?

Alan

on here arguing about if there were 5ks in the 70s.

Alan Jones wrote:

We are just not seeing the runners in their 20s and early 30s who were running outstanding times. Where are they?

Alan

There were some inaccurate courses in the 70s and 80s and there were some accuarte ones. If you ran in a race that was put on by a local Road Runner's Club chapter the course was accurate.

Marathons were accurate unless someone screwed up. I remember Runner's World once took a survey of what marathoners wanted most in a race and the hands down winner was an "accurate course." No one wanted to bust their hump in training for half a year to find that their 2:39 was a 25 and a half mile time. Runner's World would publish lists of certified marathon courses and of those known to be short. Once in a while something would get fouled up, New York was the classic example when Salazar ran his 2:08, but we were pretty insistent about accurate marathon courses.

If you're talking about other distances though, there was not as much attention paid. Like malmo, I can't recall any road 5 km's in those days. Even the road 10k's weren't taken all that seriously for a while. Most of us in the 70's thought the 10k was a track distance and if you wanted an accurate time the place to run one was on the track. A road 10k was sort of a lark at first and I'm sure a lot of them weren't accurate and I don't think a lot of us really cared, but as the distance was taken more seriously that would change.

sisyphus wrote:

As to the 5k issue. There were plenty of 5k's in California at least all through the '80s. If people need proof of this, I will dig up my old running logs and start listing them. It was a real sign of hardcore to finish your 5k, get 10-15 minutes rest and then run the 10k. If you could win both, you earned temporary local hero status.

I concur. I was in high school racing cross and track, and running 5/10Ks during the summer. In the 80s in SoCal, you could find multiple 5 or 10s to run on any given weekend.

I remember there were 5Ks for two reasons, one of which you cite above. The second reason was because there was one guy on our club team who was quite the embellisher when it came to his race times, and he would always enter into the race that the bulk of the team members weren't entered into so that he could avoid head-to-head competition. If we ran the 10, he would enter into the 5.

I remember running the Tom Sullivan 10K, and I also ran the Knott's Berry Farm 10K with the worst sunburn on the back of my legs. I wasn't even going to start, but you should have heard my dad bitching about paying my ~$20 race fee, which included both a T-Shirt and entry into the amusement park.

Johnny Rotten wrote:

Maybe all those marathons were short?

Sid Vicious wrote:

equally likely that all those marathons were long.

scotth wrote:

No.

Yes.

Summary time ... I think the consensus of this thread is that there were some short courses for races that were advertised to be 10km or whatever. But a lot of them were pretty accurate.

The inaccurate ones weren't short enough to account for the drop-off in depth that we have seen. Grant, for the sake of argument, that every 10km back in the "olden days" was actually 9.6km. That's a big discrepancy, but it only adds 70-90 seconds to the times that were being run for "10"km. Things have dropped off way more than that.

Back in the day it seems there were also more opportunities for people to run longer track races, and those weren't short. The point is that if you're racing the same distance on the track and road you'll have a better sense for how accurate the road courses are, since you know your track times.

NYCM wrote:

You can put the blame on the 1981 NYCM mismeasurement on Patricia Owens.

I'd like to hear this story. In 81 I think Paul Milvy, Brian Jones Len Dewey Alan Steinfeld were still on the Tech committee all real knowledgable guys.David Katz might have been on board that year too and he's a stickler for that stuff- As is Ted Corbitt who was always the bridge between the Executive officers of the NYRRC and the working officials.. How did Ms Owens get in to a position to effect the distance measurement? Wasn't she a Elite female athlete handler involved in runner recruitment. I do know for sure that she was not on the tech committe in the late '70s.

Any way I hope you will fill us in on that info.Thanks.

On course length:

Only by using your Jones Counter, and following the strict calibration methods required for it, have I gained a deeper appreciation for the accuracy (and precision) of certified courses. The method takes time, and a lot of care, but in the end is pretty rewarding. Thank you for it. Furthermore, having used your counter makes me skeptical about the true length of courses that don't take such measures.

My guess is there's lazy-streak in race directors, who think that a car or the latest in-vogue gmap-pedometer measured courses "will do". From a certain standpoint, runners are becoming less savvy consumers, and allowing races to perpetuate these shenanigans. Also, it is not right that USATF breezily sanctions races without the courses being certified, too. Kind of a dis-service to it's $50-a-head paying members.

On the inevitable "then versus now" performances argument:

I would guess that there are more races of most any distance in the US now than at any earlier point in history. If there were the same number of "fast" racers in the country, but spread out among more races, and diluted with a lot of neophyte runners at the back, then of course you are going to see much higher percentiles for a given performance. I think you have to look at omnibus results across all races in a given year to get an idea of where we're at, not Boston 1981 compared to Boston 2006. More like Boston 1981 compared to Boston + NYC + Chicago + CIM + etc. 2006.

The draw to many of these races, some costing upwards of $100 a pop, is not the same now as it was in the nominal-cost days of the 70's and 80s. I think that must influence the decision of today's runners in their 20s and early 30s, whether to compete at all. I've had good, competent training groups break up in the mad dash for a couple of hundred dollars worth of comped race entry fees and some free gear. Needless to say, this kind of desertion has not been necessarily helpful to make this 20s to early 30s 2:30 marathoner any faster!

One suggestion: Institute a progressive race entry-fee system, subsidizing the faster runners, and supported by documentation of earlier bona fide race results. I guarantee you would see a lot more progress, because then athletes would receive small, but constant, incentives to improve. I think this would cost very little, but with pretty substantial returns. I think this would also work to return the focus of races to true competition, and not just participation. It might even make potentially outstanding runners hungry once again.

The story about the 1981 NYCM measurement is long. I have detailed records of the valiation and the entire process. I will need to dig out the papers before giving an accurate reply. I will say that Pat Owens had nothing to do with the measurement or validation.

The course was originally measured by Bill Noel. Tom Knight and I did the Validation. Much more to come. It will open up a big can of worms! I'm not sure if we should go down this road.

Pete,

I'm from Nova Scotia too and while I'm not on that all-time best for NS I did finish top three in many 5kms and road races in the 80s and got my butt kicked many times by Norman, Mike Hamilton and Ralph Williams. Although there were not a lot of 5kms there were a few in both NS and New Brunswick in the 80s. Malmo has only heard of Carlsbad because he wouldn't stoop so low as to run in a community race against the likes of Norm Tinkham (by the way who's track PB is under 14min)!!!!

Truth is that, elites aside, the average competitive road race was run in faster times in the early-mid 80s than today. In my day a 1:17 half marathon gave me 16th place in a race like Halifax and today I'd be top three in most races this side of Montreal. Back in the day your average 10km was won in a time of 30:15-32:30 and the tenth guy ran 34:00. Nowadays a lot of 10km's in Canada are won in 34. While we have a lot more participants in the races today, the sport has exploded, the first running boom had more quality performances. It's a little sad that most of the provincial records for road and track were set in the 80s and early 90s and some of those guys are still winning road races in Canada today well into their 40s. That's just the state of the 2nd running boom: more joggers than competitors.

Feel free to disagree but them's the facts. By the way back in the day Tinkham was maybe the only Canadian collegian to ever beat McCloy in a college race, I think it was a XC event in like 86/87. And McCloy (43) last year ran our 10 mile race in a very solid 51:28 for second place nearly pipping our local stud, Colin Fewer (28), at the tape. All distances certified.

Maybe there are too many races today, thinning out the field in each race..that's where all the runners went.

I know that in my neck of the woods, there are maybe 10 races scheduled in 3 months...and then the races of the surrounding towns.....

The runners have thinned themselves out..

Also, we all used to know each other and would show up at the same races. We new where the good races were and they became a tradition..now, we are all lost in the crowd and EVERY sizable town has their own series of races.

wineturtle. wrote:Wasn't she a Elite female athlete handler involved in runner recruitment. I do know for sure that she was not on the tech committe in the late '70s.

Any way I hope you will fill us in on that info.Thanks.

Owens handled Elite males too.

Ninetonite wrote: I'm from Nova Scotia too and while I'm not on that all-time best for NS I did finish top three in many 5kms and road races in the 80s and got my butt kicked many times by Norman, Mike Hamilton and Ralph Williams.

OK, you've piqued my interest... give me a clue as to who you are? I'm not from there, but lived there a few years (military wife). Ralph is a good friend. btw, his 5k time on that list was I think 15:40, but he ran 14:26 on the track (just edging Rob Englehutt at the line, if I remember how he told me the story, and if he told it accurately, hehehe...). I think the fact that the 5k times on that list were pretty soft is an indication that there weren't that many 5k races for these guys to get decent times. Mind you that doesn't explain why the 5k times are even softer today.

Pete said "You're probably right on the first half - the fields would have been very small - but I doubt there were any non-runners, and were probably very few casual racers, competing in those races."

Most of the races I remember from 81-86 had 30-100 participants. I think the 87 Halifax half marathon attracted maybe 200 runners but typically 50 runners toed the line. In St. John's the Tely 10 mile got 400 runners in 1983 and last year had 1,854.

Incidentally back in the 80s nobody ran a marathon just to finish. It was unheard of to Gallo-walk: completing a marathon meant you ran the thing as hard as you could, and bragged about whom you beat after the race over a few beers. Breaking three hours was a goal of many runners I knew. Today they brag about finishing with 10 and 1's in 5 hours and then heading to the spa for a makeover apres-race.

Thanks David. I for one would love to hear the story,worms and all. While David is getting his ducks in a row,NYCM why don't you tell us how you believe this elite athlete handler got involved in course certification and more to the point, of being responsible for the mis-measure/course alteration. Being a runner wrangler is a far step from course operations manager even if she handled all THREE of the sexes!!!

NYCM wrote:

wineturtle. wrote:Wasn't she a Elite female athlete handler involved in runner recruitment. I do know for sure that she was not on the tech committe in the late '70s.

Any way I hope you will fill us in on that info.Thanks.

Owens handled Elite males too.

Pete,

The spring tune-up 5km was always run in April in Halifax on a tough course in cold and windy conditions. Back then the top runners were still track guys and didn't round into good shape until June-July. If one looked at the road times in June-August one would see most of those names running a faster pace for 10km than for the 5km spring event.

Also road events were a side show back then, something one trained through on their way to XC or track season. Even Ralph Wms ran some track events into his late 20s. I remember him winning a twilite meet 1,500m in like 4:00 on a Wednesday and then winning a marathon in 2:25 the next weekend. And the juniors back then were super tough. In the 1984 HS provincial meet there were 8 guys in the field all capable of running under or right on the 2:00 mark. The race was one of the best 800s I ever saw, won I think in 1:58 by Darren Stoddard and all 8 guys broke 2:03 in a slow race (split I remember was 62).

I didn't have great junior times in NS and did most of my good running in New Brunswick from 86-88 returning to NS in the summers to train and get ready for XC. If you check the Run NS website look for juniors all-time list under 8 miles and I'm there, near the bottom, with a 50:45 for the Wolfville 8 miler aka the Apple Blossom race back in the day (my PB is a 45 and change on another 8 mile course with tons of hills).