Hall's 2:08:24 equals Ian Stewart's 45:13 for 10 miles

Dear god not this again...

Ian Stewart doesn't get the recognition that he deserves. His performance happened 30 years ago, when it was more impressive than a similar performance today.

Living in the Past wrote:

Ian Stewart doesn't get the recognition that he deserves. His performance happened 30 years ago, when it was more impressive than a similar performance today.

He has an Olympic bronze...he doesn't need recognition.

Good point, especially considering that Stewart would have earned a silver medal had he not so badly misjudged his kick.

It's often said that Prefontaine ran a stupid race in Munich because he "went for it." But Stewart ran a stupid race because he went for it too late. Too late to catch the runner in front of him--Gammoudi. Stewart needed an extra 10 meters.

Gammoudi was a better runner than Ian Stewart.

I think you're right, because Gammoudi has the hardware. Gammoudi was also a better runner than Ron Clarke.

It's too bad that Gammoudi couldn't get back up and run with Viren in the Olympic 10,000 in 1972. I always wonder what the outcome of that race would have been.

Living in the Past wrote:

I think you're right, because Gammoudi has the hardware. Gammoudi was also a better runner than Ron Clarke.

It's too bad that Gammoudi couldn't get back up and run with Viren in the Olympic 10,000 in 1972. I always wonder what the outcome of that race would have been.

Good point for speculation. Also in the speculative realm, don't forget Yifter the Shifter....he may have changed the whole complexion of the race (5000).

Also, what might he have done in the Montreal 5,000 as well.

We will never know.

desert rodent wrote:

Living in the Past wrote:

I think you're right, because Gammoudi has the hardware. Gammoudi was also a better runner than Ron Clarke.

It's too bad that Gammoudi couldn't get back up and run with Viren in the Olympic 10,000 in 1972. I always wonder what the outcome of that race would have been.

Good point for speculation. Also in the speculative realm, don't forget Yifter the Shifter....he may have changed the whole complexion of the race (5000).

Also, what might he have done in the Montreal 5,000 as well.

We will never know.

Viren held off some big guns in the 5000 in both Munich and Montreal. There's no reason to think Yifter would have changed the results. If we're speculating we can throw Liquori in the 5000m speculation for '76.

Do you have any idea how that 10 miles was measured, and if it was anywhere near accurate ?

You're right, we can only speculate. But the fact that people still speculate about Yifter's chances in the 5,000 at the 1972 and 1976 Olympics only reflects the magnitude of the loss to the sport.

Yifter could usually make short work of just about anyone over the last lap of a tactical race. And while Liquori did outkick Yifter in a 5,000 in Zurich in 1977, Yifter returned the favor a few weeks later at the World Cup in Dusseldorf.

Living in the Past wrote:

Ian Stewart doesn't get the recognition that he deserves. His performance happened 30 years ago, when it was more impressive than a similar performance today.

Unfortuneately for Ian Stewart road-racing was not as advanced & sophisticated as it is now. And that is why it (his 45:13) is largely overlooked. I do believe him quite capable of ripping one on the "unencumbered" roads. Track was too tactical for a guy like that to really RUN...it was all about racing for him, on the track. The only real fast track race Ian Stewart was in (that he didn't take advantage of) was the 1972 Olympic trials.

And you're comparing a 10-mile performance to a marathon why? It seems like it would make more sense to compare Hall's recent half marathon...in that case, Stewart is left in the dust.

Anyway, those tables must have been made when half marathon performances were significantly weaker. They really don't make any sense at all in light of the recent WR.

Because he has his head so far up Ian Stewart's ass he can see out his mouth.

Tiptop 10 wrote:

Do you have any idea how that 10 miles was measured, and if it was anywhere near accurate ?

I'm glad you asked that question.

"On 8 May 1977 Stewart produced arguably his most remarkable athletics performance when he got away from the field in the first mile to complete the Michelin ten miles Road race in Staffordshire in a time of 45 minutes 13 seconds. Because the time was so unusually fast, the race organisers remeasured the course and found it to be the correct distance."

So the course was measured twice, both before and after the event. I haven't seen anything regarding the use of a Jones/Oerth counter. But if the course hadn't been measured that way (but by an odometer, let's say), don't you think word would have gotten around the running community?

Also, do you think Ian Stewart would have had anything to do with a race that was measured by a car?

Living in the Past wrote:

You're right, we can only speculate. But the fact that people still speculate about Yifter's chances in the 5,000 at the 1972 and 1976 Olympics only reflects the magnitude of the loss to the sport.

Yifter could usually make short work of just about anyone over the last lap of a tactical race. And while Liquori did outkick Yifter in a 5,000 in Zurich in 1977, Yifter returned the favor a few weeks later at the World Cup in Dusseldorf.

IIRC Liquori let Yifter get the jump on him in the WC.

Yifter had a shot in the 10,000m in Munich and couldn't pull it off. The 5000m in Montreal was not particularly fast but had some of the greatest speed merchants of that era in the race including a couple of 13:13 guys. So I'm not sure Yifter even medals in that race.

[/quote] Track was too tactical for a guy like that to really RUN...it was all about racing for him, on the track. The only real fast track race Ian Stewart was in (that he didn't take advantage of) was the 1972 Olympic trials.[/quote]

That's an excellent point, Rodent. The British Olympic Trials was the only really fast 5,000 that Stewart was ever a part of. Dave Bedford ran 13:17.21 and Ian McCafferty ran 13:19.66. Stewart could only manage third that day in 13:24.16.

Tough guy wrote:

he 5000m in Montreal was not particularly fast but had some of the greatest speed merchants of that era in the race including a couple of 13:13 guys. So I'm not sure Yifter even medals in that race.[/quote]

Interesting question about how Yifter's kick would have stood up to that of Hildenbrand and Quax. There are different types of "speed merchants." Having a great mile PR isn't the same thing as having a great kick. Yifter had a great kick. It's only speculation at this point, but I would put Yifter behind Quax for a bronze in that particular race, which wasn't particularly fast.

Living in the Past wrote:

I think you're right, because Gammoudi has the hardware. Gammoudi was also a better runner than Ron Clarke.

It's too bad that Gammoudi couldn't get back up and run with Viren in the Olympic 10,000 in 1972. I always wonder what the outcome of that race would have been.

Gammoudi was a better racer in slow starting tactical races than Clarke. He was a good racer. He was not a better runner when it came to times or potential. If Gammoudi had run the full 10k in 72 he would have garnered a bronze at best.

Didn't Hall split close to that for 10 miles during his 1/2 marathon?