FKT or WR? wrote:
I guess all this is considered a "world record" because it involves Guinness and their standards. But shouldn't all of this simply be a FKT instead?
Thoughts?
Technically there are no official World Records for ultrarunning, except for 100K. IAAF is the only international governing association for running, and they only certify 100K. For practical purposes, the "world best" performances recorded by the IAU (International Association of Ultrarunners) are generally referred to as World Records. The events for which these "records" exist are 50K, 100K, 100M, 1000K, 1000M, 6 hr, 12 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr, and 6 day. It's a bit confusing, because US records include other distances (e.g. 50M, 200K). However, there is no such thing as a transcontinental "world record", as far as any running governing body is concerned.
Guinness "world records" are something completely different. They will certify anything if you give them money and an appropriate amount of evidence. (E.g., there's a record for fastest marathon run dressed as a nun.) In many cases, this evidence turns out to be insufficient; there are definitely some bogus ultrarunning Guinness World Records.
In this case, this is what he's after:
http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/fastest-crossing-of-america-(usa)-on-foot-(male)