George and most other runners of his era trained a lot more than what they'd like to admit. In 1886, heavy training was considered to be unsporting.
Bannister, on the other hand, was busy with medical school and could only train for a small amount of time. His posted training schedule is likely to reflect what he actually did.
Nope, it's actually the exact same deal with Bannister. Training hard was seen as unsportsman-like and frowned upon by society. Bannister and his friends, Chataway & Brasher, likely downplayed their training to fit in more with the 'gentleman' model of athletics, an age when men was supposed to be well rounded. In fact I recall Brasher calling Bannister out for some of the details in his book......something like that.
George and most other runners of his era trained a lot more than what they'd like to admit. In 1886, heavy training was considered to be unsporting.
Bannister, on the other hand, was busy with medical school and could only train for a small amount of time. His posted training schedule is likely to reflect what he actually did.
Nope, it's actually the exact same deal with Bannister. Training hard was seen as unsportsman-like and frowned upon by society. Bannister and his friends, Chataway & Brasher, likely downplayed their training to fit in more with the 'gentleman' model of athletics, an age when men was supposed to be well rounded. In fact I recall Brasher calling Bannister out for some of the details in his book......something like that.
Peter Snell ran 100-mile weeks and began setting WRs less than 8 years after Bannister's first sub 4. Training norms did not change that drastically in such a short time.
Besides, even if you assume that hard training was frowned upon in 1954, when would Bannister sneak in those extra miles? He was too busy with med school and only had time to run during his lunch breaks.
I have made similar arguments for a long time. It's impossible to know for sure how fast RB could have run with all the things we have in 2022, and it's unlikely he'd be 3:43 material just because that's totally insane, but I think we can say with high confidence he would be under 3:50. Just having better shoes and a modern track would probably bring him down to 3:55.
I've also said similar things about Kip Keino... Dude ran 3:34.9 in Mexico City (~8000ft) in 1968 with arguably not great pacing. Have the Kip Keino of that day race at sea level with pacers and modern shoes and track and he drops 7 seconds bare minimum.
In the end you have to appreciate athletes for how good they were in their era. Bannister did the impossible. Lots of guys do it now, but people literally thought it was impossible back then. Same sort of thing as the sub 2hr marathon. Only RB didn't have millions of dollars of people and trainers etc backing him. He just had himself and couple of friends (Chataway and Brasher). Love it.
You think that a modern track and superspikes would only bring him down to a 3:55 from a 3:58 PR? I find that to be highly unlikely.
My mile PR on a modern track with superspikes is 4:22. A week after that, I time-trialed a mile on a dry, well-maintained dirt track with old spikes for the hell of it and couldn't break 4:30. This was despite having excellent pacers and near-perfect weather that day.
Roger Bannister ran 3:58.8 which means you think he had a shot at breaking 3:40? Give me a break. Your logic is very poor. What are you smoking?
Original synthetic rubber tracks: 3:55
Mondo tracks: 3:54
Mondo tracks and 2010s-era spikes: 3:53
Mondo tracks and 2020s-era superspikes: 3:51
More mileage: 3:42
Living like a pro runner without medical school stress: 3:41
Altitude training: 3:40
aside from whatever drugs you’re on to think he could run anywhere near 3:40, i’d also like to know just how bad the superspike propaganda is that you think it’s worth 2 seconds whereas every other shoe advancement from 1955-2019 is only worth 1
Living like a pro runner without medical school stress: 3:41
Altitude training: 3:40
aside from whatever drugs you’re on to think he could run anywhere near 3:40, i’d also like to know just how bad the superspike propaganda is that you think it’s worth 2 seconds whereas every other shoe advancement from 1955-2019 is only worth 1
I actually low-balled it. There's evidence that superspikes drop 3 seconds/mile and not 2:
"For 2022, the number of sub 3:57 became nearly the same as previous average of sub 4:00 mile. Same is true for Sub 7:50 vs previous sub 8:00 3k and sub 13:40 vs previous sub 14:00 5k. Shoes appear to be slightly less effective at 1 mile vs 3k/5k. 1 mile diff is ~3sec."
Agree with the 3:54 capability in today’s era. He’s have added a bit of cross training. The optimal mileage probably not much higher. A couple of 30’ runs in the pool maybe.
Funny you should mention a potential benefit to altitude for Bannister. This is ironic and also doubtful. He couldn’t have trained much harder.
He was actually doing some training runs with additional oxygen not less.
Bannister did the impossible. Lots of guys do it now, but people literally thought it was impossible back then.
If Bannister did the impossible in his carefully orchestrated time trial, Landy went beyond the impossible by smashing Bannister's time a few weeks later in an actual race.
Contrary to the oft-repeated assertion, nobody who knew anything about middle-distance believed that a sub-four was impossible in 1954, when Bannister ran the first sub-four paced time trial and Landy ran the first sub-four unpaced race.
You think that a modern track and superspikes would only bring him down to a 3:55 from a 3:58 PR? I find that to be highly unlikely.
My mile PR on a modern track with superspikes is 4:22. A week after that, I time-trialed a mile on a dry, well-maintained dirt track with old spikes for the hell of it and couldn't break 4:30.
All it means is that that you had a good day followed by a bad day. It has nothing to do with Roger Bannister.
Nope, it's actually the exact same deal with Bannister. Training hard was seen as unsportsman-like and frowned upon by society. Bannister and his friends, Chataway & Brasher, likely downplayed their training to fit in more with the 'gentleman' model of athletics, an age when men was supposed to be well rounded. In fact I recall Brasher calling Bannister out for some of the details in his book......something like that.
Not only was he studying 12 hours a day for his medical exams, he passed with flying colors and went on to contribute significantly to nueroscience. He also retired at his peak, missing the chance of getting that elusive Olympic gold, to pursue his academic career. I find it hard to believe he was skipping studies to run some extra 10 milers.
The greats of the past in athletics are dismisses like in no other sport that I know of. Only a minority of idiotic boxing fans believe, for example, that Tyson Fury would KO Muhammed Ali in 20 seconds, or Canelo Alvarez make Sugar Ray Robinson look like a novice. But here, even talking with respect about anyone pre 1960's marks you out as a fruitcake. And of course, Peter Snell only won because he didn't have any Kenyans to race against (even though he did).
People are so dumb they look at the respective times - which give an illusion of objectivity - and compare them, and see that Bannister was 15 seconds slower than El G, and conclude he was not on the same planet. You'd think with the obvious advantages in terms of seconds that super shoes have shown (which are only the latest generation of upgrades out of many since the 1950s) people would have learnt a bit more respect for the greats of the past. Not to mention the EPO that has been rampant in the sport for decades now.
At around the same time as Bannister, Jim Peters broke the marathon WR in 2:20 off of something like 30 miles per week. His training consisted of every run being as close to marathon pace as possible.
Elijah Manangoi returned from a 2 year ban (1 year really because of lockdowns) still in his prime, trained his socks off, and yet was running almost 10 seconds slower. And the majority here seem to think that is normal, and doesn't indicate he was taking EPO. Yet the same people will laugh at runners from the 50's for running 10 seconds slower than today in leather spikes, on dirt tracks, and on 30 MPW training. And no 'supplements'.
The weather conditions were horrible during the day of the race, and it was noticeably windy during his sub 4 run
No it was not noticeably windy during the race. On the contrary.
At 5:15, Bannister, Brasher and Chataway were warming up, making small talk. Brasher and Chataway knew it was not their decision, but all three realized that although the wind was blowing strongly at times, there were periods of quiet.
A few minutes before the six starters were called to the mark, Bannister looked up at the flag atop a nearby church. Earlier, it had been flapping furiously. Now, as Bannister looked up, the flag was limp. Bannister signaled to his friends. “It’s amazing that one can be indecisive up to the point of decision,” Bannister said. “When I noticed that the wind had settled the flag, I talked to myself and realized that I must do it.”
Nope, it's actually the exact same deal with Bannister. Training hard was seen as unsportsman-like and frowned upon by society. Bannister and his friends, Chataway & Brasher, likely downplayed their training to fit in more with the 'gentleman' model of athletics, an age when men was supposed to be well rounded. In fact I recall Brasher calling Bannister out for some of the details in his book......something like that.
Not only was he studying 12 hours a day for his medical exams, he passed with flying colors and went on to contribute significantly to nueroscience. He also retired at his peak, missing the chance of getting that elusive Olympic gold, to pursue his academic career. I find it hard to believe he was skipping studies to run some extra 10 milers.
The greats of the past in athletics are dismisses like in no other sport that I know of. Only a minority of idiotic boxing fans believe, for example, that Tyson Fury would KO Muhammed Ali in 20 seconds, or Canelo Alvarez make Sugar Ray Robinson look like a novice. But here, even talking with respect about anyone pre 1960's marks you out as a fruitcake. And of course, Peter Snell only won because he didn't have any Kenyans to race against (even though he did).
People are so dumb they look at the respective times - which give an illusion of objectivity - and compare them, and see that Bannister was 15 seconds slower than El G, and conclude he was not on the same planet. You'd think with the obvious advantages in terms of seconds that super shoes have shown (which are only the latest generation of upgrades out of many since the 1950s) people would have learnt a bit more respect for the greats of the past. Not to mention the EPO that has been rampant in the sport for decades now.
At around the same time as Bannister, Jim Peters broke the marathon WR in 2:20 off of something like 30 miles per week. His training consisted of every run being as close to marathon pace as possible.
Elijah Manangoi returned from a 2 year ban (1 year really because of lockdowns) still in his prime, trained his socks off, and yet was running almost 10 seconds slower. And the majority here seem to think that is normal, and doesn't indicate he was taking EPO. Yet the same people will laugh at runners from the 50's for running 10 seconds slower than today in leather spikes, on dirt tracks, and on 30 MPW training. And no 'supplements'.
Leave your anti-African crap out of this, Coevett.
And why wouldn't Bannister run some extra miles? Landy often ran after midnight because of his studies.
You don't know. Why would you believe a medical doctor would be clean? Medical doctors and pharmacists know more than anyone how drugs aid &/or harm human body. Medical doctors and pharmacists are smart enough not to get caught.
What steroids were available to a UK runner in 1955? How would he have acquired them? I think Dianabol had just been invented. But that only started to spill into the bodybuilding community around that time.
He ran sub 4 while doing less than 30 mpw during base phase and just 15 mpw during the competition phase. That in itself puts him ahead of nearly every other sub 4 miler as far as talent goes.
Now add in the fact that he ran that sub 4 on a cinder track on a windy day without modern spikes, let alone superspikes. Then add in the psychological component of breaking a barrier that many assumed to be impossible to break.
He'd definitely be under 3:43 if he tripled his mileage, had modern equipment, and ran in excellent weather conditions. Maybe even under 3:40.
That was actually an ideal situation to train at the time - the sport was basically amateur back then. He had access to some of the best sporting facilities and to the best coaches available. He also had a hand-picked team of pacemakers to the 4 minute mile and he carefully chose his races. In a way his set up was sort of like the NOP of the 1950s
People who were not in university back then had a much harder time to do training, they were either doing back breaking factory or mining work, or in the army and had to get their training in very early in the morning or late at night.