Great article today in the Globe and Mail. Not yet 20; Tom Longboat took over four minutes off the course record to win in 2:24:24 despite the cold and windy conditions.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070414.LONGBOAT14/TPStory/?query=TOm+Longboat
Yeah, great story. I've always been inspired by the legend of Tom Longboat. How long was Boston in 1907? James Christie, the sports writer who penned that piece, assumes that it was the full 26.2. My understanding is that it wasn't until London '08 that the marathon distance was established at 26 miles 385 yards. I recall reading somewhere (Derderian, no doubt) that Boston was 25 miles for the first while, and that the distance fluctuated as the road was improved over the years. After a Finn blew away the world record one year, they remeasured the course only to find that it had shrunk by a thousand yards or so since they'd last bothered to measure it.
Of course, winning the race was what mattered, more so than making sure the distance was exact. 24 miles, 25 miles, 26 miles - whatever it is, it's way too far to be fun. Anyway, Derderian would know how long the course was in any given year, I suspect. I looked in his book on Boston, but couldn't find anything about how long the course was in '07.
Christie makes the point that Longboat's time in '07 would have been good enough for 27th last year, but of course such comparisons are dubious, given the shorter course on the one hand and the harsh conditions the runners back then had to endure on the other. Just the shoes alone, let alone the knee-length canvas shorts (with a belt!) that Longboat is wearing in the photo in Christie's article would add an hour to my marathon time, I suspect.
Longboat was a running god. If he were competing today, the Canadian marathon record wouldn't be thirty something years old and counting.
Anthony Skuce.