If Bill McChesney holds the 5k, and 10k records at Oregon, Why is Pre the dominant idol?

because billy was in salazar and chapa's shadows? the ducks of the late 80s were loaded, add ken martin and art bolieu and that is a great 5.

Because Pre was as charismatic as Barack Hussein Obama

Cuz it's about the W's at Hayward Field baby

Darbyshire of Great Britain wrote:

They both died in car crashes, I realize Pre won more championships, but timewise McChesney was faster.

This theory had been beaten to death on these boards. Using "timewise" as a point of reference when comparing runners from different generations should be a secondary consideration, at best. Once again, "timewise" you will find that Wejo is faster than Zatopek and Nurmi! Does that mean that people should admire HIM more than them?

Because the Nike/Eugene propaganda machine needs the Pre myth to make believe they actually are something. Pre got his "reputation" by racing against Americans--that Europeans didn't respect him that much diminishes the commercial value of the myth, so this isn't discussed. Likewise, McChesney racing and beating Olympic medalists (while Pre lost to them, obviously) diminishes the value of the Pre work of fiction.

How many Kenyans do you think talk about a guy who finished 4th in the Olympics 37 years ago?

The myth that is Pre. I think it's the 'stache.

This theory had been beaten to death on these boards. Using "timewise" as a point of reference when comparing runners from different generations should be a secondary consideration, at best. Once again, "timewise" you will find that Wejo is faster than Zatopek and Nurmi! Does that mean that people should admire HIM more than them?[/quote]

You certainly have a point, but Prefontaine and McChesney were hardly from different generations, Pre was born in 1951 and McChesney in 1959.

Pre held multiple AR's as well as multiple NCAA and AAU titles while still at Oregon. I'm not sure, but I don't think Bill McChesney ever set as many AR's or won as many titles as Prefontaine. He definately was not as dominant during his time at Oregon. That doesn't mean McChesney wasn't a great Oregon distance runner, he just wasn't as dominant during his time at Oregon. As someone else has mentioned people remember who wins and how you win, not how fast you ran.

asdfjasdfj wrote:

You certainly have a point, but Prefontaine and McChesney were hardly from different generations, Pre was born in 1951 and McChesney in 1959.

Agreed... in this instance, that was a poor choice of words on my part. Ultimately, it still falls back to how well you actually performed (championships and records) during your era. I was a big fan of Bill McChesney, but he didn't have anything approaching the sheer number of titles and records that Prefontaine did.

Another thing: McChesney died at 33, whereas Pre was 24, so the thinking is that Pre is the one with more unfulfilled promise.

Billy was a great runner, a great human being, and quite charismatic. Unlike Pre, Billy's death came well after his running career had come to a close. The loss of any human life especially the likes of Billy and his older brother Tom is tragic on many levels

This shows the difference between folks who saw Prefontaine run at Hayward, and those who didn't...

BTW; Billy rocked a pretty nice stache as well.

Pre was unbeatable at the NCAA level from his sophomore year, on. His relationship with Hayward will never be duplicated again...never. Billy lost races in college, often. Like it's been said, at times, Bill wasn't even the best runner on his own team. Of course, at times, he was.

The age difference and the fact that we got to see the era of Bill McChesney while losing Prefontaine before his prime.

Good question, though. It goes to show that it's not always about the "numbers".

Thats a coincidence. I was thinking the exact same thing some months back as I was going over the UofO record books.

I'm not going to argue against PRE being the dominant idol. But McChesney is one of the great American and UofO runners who is not well known. It should be noted that he had a PRE-like charisma to him when he ran. He gave it his all, and I think he used to playfully turn his head to the crowd and hold out his tongue to show that he was tired and could use their support.

I think the 1980 Olympic boycott is one reason he didn't get more attention. But above all he had some kind of foot injury that was never going to go away and which made him retire early before his prime.

I would like to know how many Kenyans talk about the great Henry Rono?

BTW, Here is an all time great LetsRun thread all about Bill McChesney. LetsRun.com should almost publish it as a small book its that good - just people reflecting on their memories of McChesney including his brother Steve:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=679837&page=0

pre841 wrote:

Billy was a great runner, a great human being, and quite charismatic. Unlike Pre, Billy's death came well after his running career had come to a close. The loss of any human life especially the likes of Billy and his older brother Tom is tragic on many levels

What? Charismatic isn't a word that one would use to describe McChesney.

To answer the OPs question - McChesney had a very mediocre college career. Pre won almost every race he ran.

When he performed on the track I would call him charismatic. I can't speak to how he was off the track.

And to call him "mediocre" in his college career is just stupid and doesn't deserve a response.

Coach D wrote:

Because the Nike/Eugene propaganda machine needs the Pre myth to make believe they actually are something. Pre got his "reputation" by racing against Americans--that Europeans didn't respect him that much diminishes the commercial value of the myth, so this isn't discussed. Likewise, McChesney racing and beating Olympic medalists (while Pre lost to them, obviously) diminishes the value of the Pre work of fiction.

How many Kenyans do you think talk about a guy who finished 4th in the Olympics 37 years ago?

First of all, you do realize that when Pre was 4th in a star studded Olympic field he was 21, right? You're little jab at Pre saying he obviously lost of medalists is ridiculous. McChesney didn't even make the final, so he obviously lost of them too. Lasse Viren refused to race Pre, and you'd be crazy to think Pre wouldn't mop the floor with that cheat in those non Olympic years.

Secondly, you also realize you sound like a giant ass and like every other vocal letsrun poster talking about the "propaganda machine?" So you're going against the mainstream, but you conform to the mainstream, and misguided, opinion on your peers. You are an idiot.

How many great Kenyans 37 years ago had the personality of Pre? Well, there is a language and ocean barrier from them so why would we market or pay as close attention to a Kenyan similar to Pre? The real reason Pre is the "dominant idol" is obvious. Pre was a hardass, and raced with reckless abandon and fired up crowds. He put on a show and often dominated races. Oh yeah, winning 3 xc titles, 4 3 mile titles and losing just 3 times as a collegian is alright too. That's why he's so marketable. McChesney was not nearly that successful as a runner and didn't have that strong kind of personality or racing style.

And if you think our sport would be nearly as popular without the Nike propaganda and Pre himself, you are so wrong it's sick. There's a good chance you wouldn't have picked it up if it weren't for Pre and Nike. So you letsrunners need to chill and quit being so negative all the time, it's strange.

Ryan Foreman wrote:

When he performed on the track I would call him charismatic. I can't speak to how he was off the track.

And to call him "mediocre" in his college career is just stupid and doesn't deserve a response.

His college career was mediocre. Best finish at nationals was a 3rd and a 5th.