How is 4:26 the American 35-39 mile record?

SoCal Pete wrote:

It's all good. And if you're not making a living at it, it's all just for fun.

But if you're Number One ranked in the world (45-49)with a 14:45 it's probably even more fun! Congrats on the great ranking Pete!

All I can say to you Fred is how useless I think it is to waste your time thinking that what some people on here think is A)Important and B)Credible, uless they post a name with their "opinion". Trust me, I've wasted a LOT of time on here doing the same thing defending those whom I support. The nameless faceless individuals who want to have an axe to grind will always win. As a guy who is the same age as Eric who still likes to hit the track and "race" sometimes, (although "races" for me now are like what repeats used to be), I'm proud of what you are doing and am often amaized to see Eric's performances. Eric, there's a lot of others I know of that feel the same way I do, so reguardless of what the nameless and faceless "experts" on here have to say, you should be proud. See you at Findlay.

Don Jackson

P.S.-Now watch as myself and my "opinion" are attacked in three, two, one.....

DJ,

I was thinking the same thing, Fred must understand that well thought out messages mean little on this website. Passion for the sport means nothing on this website. Studens of the sport have no place on this website. People who spend their free time trying to organize teams have no place on this website. People who drive all over the f#cking midwest shuttling grown men and women who refuse to give up their passion for this sport to numerous races thru out the year have no place on this website. So with that, it's obvious that people like Fred have no place on this website.

You running Friday or Saturday?

Vanhala wrote:

If you are 35-39 and think you can beat Eric, he'll probably be at the Indoor Masters meet in Boston in March. He's thinking about running the 3000, mile, and 800. Beat Eric, and you are one heck of a 35-39 track runner! He's a super competitor and a great guy!

(Am I allowed to come out of hiding now?!)

Fred Vanhala

Well, I'm 35 and since I ran 8:53 this past weekend in a slightly subpar effort, I'd like my chances against your guy, except I'd never pay the exorbitant entry fees that USATF charges for that ridiculous master's meet. I did do it three years ago at age 32 because I had missed the indoor season coming back from injury and it was the only meet around in mid-March that was available before outdoor season in May. The whole scene at that meet was more than a little odd. A lot of people collecting their age group champion patches. The guy running the meet asked me if I'd be going to the following year's edition--in Pocatello, ID--and I laughed at him.

Maybe I'm spoiled being here in the Boston area, but around here us old farts can pay $12 at BU and have multiple meets to run indoors against an endless supply of collegiate competition, whether we can run 14:20, 15:20 or 16:20 for 5k. Much cheaper, more chances to race, and better competition to boot.

I suppose at a certain age it becomes more attractive to race people your own age rather than run against 14 year old kids at the BU mini-meet, but 35-39 shouldn't be the age where that mentality creeps in. Even when I'm getting outkicked by twentysomethings I know they're pulling me along to my best effort.

I guess I've never understood or cared that much about the master's records. I raced in open college races up to the age of 42 and ran sub 4:55 for the mile and sub 4:37 for 1500 probably a dozen times, and ran sub 2:16 for 800 meters 1/2 dozen times. I certaintly never filled any paperwork or ran in a master's nationals, nor cared to.

It's all moot at this point with Alisa Harvey around!

16x,

I agree.

There have been a number of women who have run faster than those times and never bothered seeking out the recognition. There are others that go through the "record books" looking for the soft marks to put their names on.

To each their own.

That might be true, I don't know. But with Alisa Harvey's gifted abilities, every record there is soft now.

My take on it is that the records have to start somewhere, and it's your choice to follow them or submit your times. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea for the USATF to add a footnote with the start date for the records, and perhaps even unratified records from legends such as Steve Scott. It's all for fun, IMO, and that's the only reason I am considering running in Boston.

Speaking of records, a current elite master, Sean Wade, owns the record for the Beer Mile with a time of 5:40.0. Now that's a record I would be proud of ;-)

Scott

I don't begrudge this guy having his 4:26 certified and all that but I'm very surprised to find that it isn't at least partly the responsibility of USATF to collect this stuff, not for someone else to submit it.

Now, obviously they can't be expected to go to every meet, but when actually certifying a submitted time it seems downright silly from someone from USATF to call 4:26 the "record" when they know perfectly well it isn't even close. When it is so easy to find faster performances by 35+ year old guys at big meets. All anyone at USATF has to do is go look at the well documented results Scott posted past age 35. He did some of them at some pretty big meets. It's not like we're worried that the track in Zurich is short or anything.

I don't believe it has ever been a priority of TAC or USATF to keep track of master's records. and, I don't believe the process of submission has ever been fully explained in the past.

In 1979 I was a high school senior and I witnessed that summer a 40 year old woman run 4:59 for the mile at some po-dung meet in the middle of nowhere. It was Karen McHarg (sp?), and I have never seen her name listed on any record book. The meet was a summer TAC sactioned meet, so I would have thought they would have known of her performance.

I was in awe.

Exactly Average Joe. While confirming records for the purposes of drug testing, track accuracy, etc. might prohibit the acceptance of some records, it is sheer laziness on the part of record-compilers to not look to the past as thoroughly as possible. Is this endemic to the record-keeping process? unfortunately yes. Can you blame these people? not really as it is an entirely onerous task, but seems as much a factor as poor organizational development. But it begs the question, if you aren't going to do it right, why do it at all. Perhaps that is harsh, but it shouldn't be coming down to one or two people as many others can contribute in their own way - simply by research. Does some form of paperwork need to be submitted? yes, but there are ways to do this without resorting to the present course of taking inferior performances because they are "convenient" for the compilers - in other words someone has done the work for them - and not necessarily the fastest are credited, but those for whom it is important to get in the paperwork. Shouldn't this be about who has done the running, and not about who is the better "paper-pusher".

I agree with you guys, but I'm sort of chuckling.

Isn't this history in a nutshell? Didn't Christopher Columbus "discover" America. I think the nod always goes to the first one to document or maybe the first one with a "flag".

Chad Newton ran 4:20 for a full track mile at Furman this past summer, age 36. I'll have to drag up the official results

John Hinton ran faster than that between the age of 35-39, and there may be others.

3000m Steeplechase record is 8.37

there are several 35 + guys who have run faster than that if I'm not mistaken