Roger Bannister : Anyone can do anything?

Asian American wrote:

negroids are in general superior athletes

Not, of course, that El G is "negroid."

present wrote:Not, of course, that El G is "negroid."

No, he's caucozoid.

portsea wrote:

"no, we dismiss them because he ran 3:59.4 and the world record is now 3:43.13."

-you lads are either idiots or just too young to realize what you are talking about. bannister did this:

1.) on a wartime diet

2.) training sessions fit into a 45 minute lunch hour during MEDICAL SCHOOL

3.) WITHOUT drugs (please don't whine about el g being clean- you have to be distinctly naive to believe that)

4.) no coach (though stampfl did advise him his last year)

5.) on a cinder track on a blustery english day

6.) broke a barrier that prior to this was theorized was IMPOSSIBLE as to the limits of human performance

unbelievable run! i have had the pleasure of meeting sir bannister a handful of times and he is about as nice a bloke that one could meet.

I see. So your saying we SHOULD model our training after Bannister. From now on I will adjust my diet to a "wartime diet" and I will limit my training sessions to less than 45 minutes per day.

I don't think you Bannister fans are getting the point. OF COURSE Bannister did amazing things on limited training in less than ideal conditions. But that doesn't mean we should model the same training if we want our times to improve. I guarantee that Bannister would not train the same way he did in the 50's if he had the knowledge of today's top coaches and the luxury of more time to focus on training.

I don't think I buy the "mental barrier" claim. Most elite distance runners aren't head cases...when approaching a major milestone, they don't suddenly decide they've reached the limits of human capability. Maybe most of society thought a 4 minute mile was impossible, but Bannister probably just wanted to keep getting faster...

Josiah wrote:

What WAS Bannister's training?

Honestly, your best bet is to get his book, currently titled "The Four-Minute Mile." It's a quick and interesting read--$16.95 in paper, dunno how much in cloth.

In the paper edition (at least) are reproduced two pages from his actual training log. A bit difficult to read, but it certainly puts the lie to the notion that his *only* workout was 10 x 440 w/ 440 jog. However, that workout certainly figured as his benchmark session.

He also did 3/4-mile time trials with some frequency. The last couple weeks before his first sub-four (his PR was 3:58.8, from his second sub-four):

Apr 22 "10 x 440 59.0 in 50'"

Apr 23 8 miles plus strides and? [hard to make out]

Apr 24 3/4 3:00 (60, 61, 59)

Apr 25 "2x7[? hard to read] miles slowly"

Apr 26 3/4 3:14.6, 15' rest, 3/4 3:08.6

Apr 27 2 x 150, 2 x 880 grass "~2.2 85" rest." [hard to read]

Apr 28 3/4 2:59.9 (59, 62, 59)

Apr 29 "Jogging" and 2 x 50

Apr 30 "Easy" 880 [race?] in 1:54.0 (56.5, 57.5)

May 1 No running

May 2 No running

May 3 No running

May 4 No running

May 5 No running

May 6 Mile in 3:59.4--57.5, 1:58.0 (60.5), 3:00.7 (62.7), 3:59.4 (58.7).

How many sub-4 miles, with or without pacers, have you run?

HELLO???

50 years difference???

Of course they are not similar.

What is with some of you? Bannister's achievement was superior when viewed in historical context. His story is fascinating.

El G was superb, no doubt, maybe the best of his time, but Bannister was the FIRST to do it. Time moves on, this is like those here who are fixated to an unnatural degree on Pre: y'gotta let go.

Comparing the two of them is like comparing college hoops of the same era with the current NBA. It just doesn't wash.

Mambo King II wrote:

How many sub-4 miles, with or without pacers, have you run?

Another keen logician on letsrun.com.

I've actually been a bit surprised that more wasn't made of Bannister's use of pacemakers. Obviously, pacers are used in most nonchampionship track meets on the international circuit these days, but I seem to remember that pacing was generally regarded as cheating up through the 1960s. I suspect that, had some North African guy run sub-4 in a paced mile a week before Bannister's run, there would have been much commentary in Great Britain about the "illegal" pacing scheme, and the North African's run would have been relegated to a footnote in track history.

I'm inclined to regard John Landy as the first legitimate sub-4 guy, although he lost to Bannister in their big showdown in the Commonwealth Games that year, and he clearly lacked the talent of Bannister, who -- along with Jim Ryun -- probably had the raw talent to compete head-to-head with the current crop of world-class milers.

So how many sub-4's have YOU run?

Mambo King II wrote:

So how many sub-4's have YOU run?

With or without pacers?

Landy was paced to his sub-4 by Chris Chataway.

Chataway was in Landy's WR race in Turku, but did NOT set any pace for Landy. After a Finn, Kallio, led the first 600 m (and it apparently was not pre-arranged as pacing) Landy took over the lead, and stayed in the lead the rest of the way. Chataway, chasing, was quite close into the fourth lap, but Landy passed 1320 in 2:56 and shortly thereafter put Chataway away for good, finishing almost 40 yards (or meters - whatever) ahead, in an official 3:58 (actually 3:57.9, rounded up according to the rule in effect at the time). Chataway, whose previous fastest mile was 4:07+, ran 4:04.4 in second....

Bascomb, "The Perfect Mile pp.208-211.

Not this will carry a whole lot of weight around here, but to add a little to this Bannister vs. El G thing, some magazine rated Bannister's 4 minute mile as the greatest sporting achievement of all time, with no mention at all of poor Hicham.

I don't remember what magazine it was, maybe it was the BBC or something, I think the link came from a post here. I did a quick google search and couldn't find anything. I'm sure someone else knows what I am talking about.

My own personal opinion: Bannister for sure.

good Bannister interview here:

http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/ban0int-1