These guys didn't wear, watches, heartrate monitors, garmins nor iPods.

geographerologist wrote:

800 dude wrote:

Mohammed Mourhit ran sub 27 for Belgium, though he was a drug cheat.

He was African, not east-African, but African nonetheless.

Now that is ignorant!

Even in Kenya if you go away from the Rift Valley you don't get elite runners

You are right on one thing though - the drug cheats tend not to be born or live at altitude (not all of course but at world elite level that is the case)

As for the other guy I am not talking about gloves - erm thats clothing, but about gadgits like Garmin, ipod's etc, (ok they are small but basically they are just small computers that are crap in comparison) enjoy them if you must but they don't make you run faster

I used to train on a mountain every week without all that crap it just goes against why I go running. ok you could say why take a watch, but I would even switch that off the time and just have a look after a couple of hours

Different story. Some runner was catching me once round a local park. I put the boot in for 400m but he still closed up and was racing me. Then I noticed this slow beeping noise. HR monitor - anyhow I know the Borjos went on about not needing to prove yourself - but no way would I let some local muppet beat me. Unfortunately, my usual trick of blitzing the pace for 1/2 mile wasn't working. I'd given everything I had, couldn't hold that pace for much longer and it looked like he had me. Suddenly a rapid beep, beep, beep, beep - his HR must have maxed out. He had me beat but because he thought he was flat out he gave up

I happened to click on this video of the 1979 Boston Marathon under suggested links

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yTVylg2xCM&feature=related

The top comment was by Tom Fleming. I thought that was pretty cool

Bill easily won this race in 2:09:27, an American Record in 1979 ... he could have run faster if "pressed" ... the weather was perfect that day and the wind to our back about 20 mph with temps peaking at 40F ... I ran 2:12 something ... the best I could do that day for 4th place overall!

Well.... wrote:

I happened to click on this video of the 1979 Boston Marathon under suggested links

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yTVylg2xCM&feature=related

The top comment was by Tom Fleming. I thought that was pretty cool

Bill easily won this race in 2:09:27, an American Record in 1979 ... he could have run faster if "pressed" ... the weather was perfect that day and the wind to our back about 20 mph with temps peaking at 40F ... I ran 2:12 something ... the best I could do that day for 4th place overall!

Fun video, back then I never thought that I would be this old (55) haha.

If Kenya have 50 in the top 100 every year should we not have at least a dozen.

We need to give better support to the serious up & comers with or without the so called tech "advances" what would you do to correct Bill Rodgers form, haha.

I have BR log 1976 just about ready to go, will post here, mind blowing, amazing year for BR.

Go Nathan go Meb!!! NYC

[quote]throw money at it? wrote:

You chose what is obviously a genuine aid in getting the job done (food, shelter, footwear) and ignore the rest. They still ran faster than any tool using so-called tools like GPS, HRM, compression gear, arm warmers, breathe-rite strips, underwater or lower gravity treadmills, etc. It's obvious to some of us, don't know why you're failing to figure it out.

[quote]akdcts wrote:

If this nonsense is "obvious" to you, you must be a moron.

Gebreselassie uses breath-right strips.

Conversation over.

I don't know any singular runner who uses each and every tool you just mentioned. How would the elites in 85 use products if they were not invented yet? And I would guess that they would have used at least 1 or more of the products available today if they had the chance. What is wrong with a Garmin? What is wrong about knowing how far you actually ran or what your HR is?

I agree that some of these products that are sold today are totally ridiculous and their effects are arbitrary, but I don't see how going without running tools makes you a better person or at the very least an honest runner.

They also didn't have their recent workouts broadcast on the internet (see Ritz thread) for all of us to rip apart before the race even happens. Technology has it drawbacks.

You rang?

ukathleticscoach wrote:

As for the other guy I am not talking about gloves - erm thats clothing, but about gadgits like Garmin, ipod's etc, (ok they are small but basically they are just small computers that are crap in comparison) enjoy them if you must but they don't make you run faster

I used to train on a mountain every week without all that crap it just goes against why I go running. ok you could say why take a watch, but I would even switch that off the time and just have a look after a couple of hours

I'm really playing devil's advocate here, because I've never ran with anything more than a watch. But I rarely hear of any serious runners that use an ipod during training - that has to inhibit body awareness on some level, but I suppose some people may feel they need a distraction.

I just think it's narrow-minded to write off gadgets like HR monitors for every person. For some, monitoring heart rate could help guard against over-training. For some, it may be a source of unneeded stress. It's not a black & white issue.

Ignoring the need for individually tailored training is a mistake, in my opinion.

I can't really tell whether de Castella was wearing a watch in this race, but there's a photo of him before his marathon WR in which he's wearing a watch (with calculator!) and with a few numbers written on the back of his hand (splits? hard to make out)(de Castella on running 1984 p.62 Currey O'Neil). In contrast, Jones was certainly renowned for running blind and scoring big time(Chicago 84) or blowing up after going out too quick (Euros 1986).

To summarize some of the responses:

1) They weren't using these gadgets because they weren't available. Period. The argument of the OP is similar to the creationist argument in defense of belief that "Newton and Galileo weren't atheists". Right. But atheism wasn't really an option at that time.

2) A huge difference between today and 20 years ago seems to be the depth of sub 2:20 marathoners. With a bigger sample, there will be more extreme values, simply because of a bigger field of fast runners. So the fact that some American was breaking 2:09 or 2:08 20 years ago isn't evidence against today's training or technology but only evidence of the likely results when you start with a bigger field of fast runners. The evidence that today's training and technology are actually helping is the fact that the top American runners are faster than those 20 years ago despite the sample of fast runners being much smaller.

3) Why are runners so anti-technology, especially with something like a HR monitor? All elite nordic skiers across the world train with HR monitors. Google any image of shirtless elite xc skier (from any country) working out on roller skis and they are likely to be wearing the chest strap. Are these guys all tools? The beauty of a garmin watch and HR monitor is that we aren't wed to tracks anymore. Guys who still run on tracks are the tools. (after all, a track is a modern invention)

You're just being fatuous.

Sam L. wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

So they wear gloves big deal

Now f off and argue about nothing with someone else

Another translation: "I don't really know what I'm talking about, so I'm going to tell the people who disagree with me to F off."

What pieces of running equipment are OK to use? Which are for sissies? Where do you draw the line?

Steve Jones = brass b*lls