1. Americans grabbed 22 of the top 23 finishes, with Dean Matthews finishing 23rd in 2:14:46.
2. Overall, 84 runners broke 2:20. That still stands as a record for a single marathon. Seventy-six of the 84 were Americans. Africans: 0. Last year, by comparison, six Americans broke 2:20.
3. A total of 313 finishers broke 2:30.
Back then obesity was not a problem. Today its a major issue with most Americans and most of them would rather finish a marathon then run it fast.
Obviously obesity & slower times are symptoms to a greater problem.
I must say the stats from 1983 are impressive, that tells me that my slow...old...arse can get better, and it should be telling our borderline elites that they can get better!
the wind really helped all runners,Joan benoit ran 2'22, her first mile was 4'47. a windy day.
It was a special time in America. Ronald Reagan had announced 'morning in America.' Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were taking over the NBA. People were buzzing about the advent of the personal computer, the new ones even had lower case letters.
It was a more innocent time. Female crooner Bonnie Tyler had one of the top hits with her 'Total Eclipse of the Heart' (turn around, bright eyse).
towhee wrote:
It was a special time in America. Ronald Reagan had announced 'morning in America.' Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were taking over the NBA. People were buzzing about the advent of the personal computer, the new ones even had lower case letters.
It was a more innocent time. Female crooner Bonnie Tyler had one of the top hits with her 'Total Eclipse of the Heart' (turn around, bright eyse).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=840B27zYfOk
....and the course was 25.5 miles....
Disco dancin' muscles and cocaine
I grew up with the running boom. I noticed that at first runners were encouraged to push to their limits- work hard, race hard. Then, the tune kind of changed when they were telling runners that IF you're pushing it's ok to be "slow". It's your personal limits. That morphed into FINISHING is ok. Not only ok, but people think they're accomplished something special by finishing a 5 hour marathon.
they didn't know how to measure marathons back then, you think it was actually 26.2?
5 hour marathoners are gutting it out for 5 hours! Those 3 hour guys would be dying if they were out there another 2 hours. Yeah they're faster, but it's easier to get stiff and cramped moving in the same motion for 5 hours vs 3.
mr...obvious wrote:
they didn't know how to measure marathons back then, you think it was actually 26.2?
Was man even capable of working with tools by then?
Yes they did they had the Jones Counter (still used) in the 1970's. Jones gave my friend one in the mid/late 70's.
brazilian elite wrote:
1. Americans grabbed 22 of the top 23 finishes, with Dean Matthews finishing 23rd in 2:14:46.
2. Overall, 84 runners broke 2:20. That still stands as a record for a single marathon. Seventy-six of the 84 were Americans. Africans: 0. Last year, by comparison, six Americans broke 2:20.
3. A total of 313 finishers broke 2:30.
It would still be that fast if you just made every marathon harder to qualify for the actual race.
You should have to start an entire hour behind the real marathon runners if you can't break 2:40. It would be called the "I'm just trying to finish Coral"
If Meyer had to share some of the glow of the spotlight with Benoit, it took nothing away from the glitter of his effort on a day when a favoring tailwind was conducive to decent times and Bill Rodgers talked of maybe just one more marathon after finishing 10th.
Wind + favorable conditions + population boom + fewer marathons = more fast runners at Boston.
If you have a larger talent pool to pull from you're going to hit the jackpot sooner or later. If helps that there just weren't that many fast marathons out there. If you were a sub 2:30 runner you likely made an annual journey to New York and Boston.
Alan
For the record, NYC 1983 had good weather -- a steady drizzle (won by Dixon and Waitz). I ran 2:29:13, and was 169th o/a. I've thought part of the depth was people trying to get the 2:19:04 OT standard.
Joe, what were your performances on the roads (or track) leading up to your NYC sub-2:30 performance? Thanks for posting.
Runningart2004 wrote:
If you have a larger talent pool to pull from you're going to hit the jackpot sooner or later. If helps that there just weren't that many fast marathons out there. If you were a sub 2:30 runner you likely made an annual journey to New York and Boston.
Alan
While this is true it doesn't reflect the complete difference in depth between the early 80's and now.
At the 2008 Oly marathon trials only 6 men bettered the time of the 22nd American in Boston in 1983.
Fewer kids running these days.
Even when I was a kid I used to go outside and play with my friends, tag, hide-and-seek, WAR, etc.
I rarely see kids out running around these days. They are stuck inside getting fat playing XBOX. So it's possible those who have the genetics to become pretty good runners are stuck inside wasting away.
Also more sport opportunities in high school, more soccer teams especially.
I'd wager very few kids CHOOSE to run track or XC, it usually chooses them when other options fail to materialize.
Alan
It was also the first day that runners could qualify for the Olympic trials. There was a 366 day window to run under 2:19:04 from Boston 1983 to Boston 1984. Most of the top Americans were there.