Would you rather have a WR or Gold Medal?

Well, an Olympic gold medal has more street cred with the general public.

Mind you, Bannister's first sub-4 record trumps every championship medals.

But, that was a one off.

Depends.

If it's men's 800m, 1500m, then yes, I would take a WR.

If the record is soft, like the HM's, then Gold medal without a doubt.

Same goes for Centro's Gold.

I'd rather pull a David Rudisha and get both at the same time.

Disagree about the street cred. Former World Record Holder sounds heavier than Former Olympic Champion. One says you were fast, the other says you were lucky.

WR all day. WR means you were THE BEST IN HISTORY for a period of time. A gold medal could just mean you're lucky like the other poster said.

JPNATUREVALLEY365 wrote:

I'd be surprised if this isn't already a thread here but I was listening to a Citius Mag podcast where this came up and wanted to get LR input!

I'd rather have any Olympic distance outdoor WR from 400m-10,000m (and 2 miles) in, say, post-1980 times *unless* I beat a current WR holder in x-event who was not past their prime and raced well on the day.

Hello. You play to win the game.

I think every single WR performance was doped, and some Olympic golds were not.

Why would I rather have a Wide Receiver? Wait, are we talking fantasy football?

Are we counting "fastest marathon while dressed as a dildo?"

My knee-jerk reaction is Gold Medal if we are talking Olympic Gold Medal, since the Olympics is the only time most people follow the sport.

However, if you were able to set an other-worldly WR, such as Bob Beamon did, that wasn't surpassed for a very long time I would probably pick that and just hope I did it in the Olympics so I get best of both worlds.

WR is easily the greater accomplishment, that said a gold medal lasts forever where as a record usually doesn't. It's close for me but I think i would take the record.

JPNATUREVALLEY365 wrote:

I'd be surprised if this isn't already a thread here but I was listening to a Citius Mag podcast where this came up and wanted to get LR input!

A gold medal is forever.....a world record will not stand forever, just a mark.

Gold medals hold their value well. WRs are always subjected to changing perceptions due to the arbitrary nature of time and the ongoing challenges from drugs.

Fentrekker wrote:

Gold medals hold their value well. WRs are always subjected to changing perceptions due to the arbitrary nature of time and the ongoing challenges from drugs.

Having said the above, if one is thinking of the marathon in particular, I would personally much rather have a victory at Boston or New York City than in the Olympics. Any of the events in big cities are embraced more fully by the culture of running, whereas with the Olympics one has to contend with all the corruption and bs from the IOC and IAAF, neither of which are organizations that bring any joy to the sport.

An Olympic or even World Championship Gold medal is the more valuable accomplishment.

And probably a better experience at the moment it happens.

Getting the world record in an Olympic event (so not the half marathon) is generally a better accomplishment and is harder to do.

Ngeny, Ramzi, Lagat, Kamel, Kiprop, Makloufi, Centrowitz and Manangoi all of 1500m Gold Medals but no world records.

George213 wrote:Depends.

If it's men's 800m, 1500m, then yes, I would take a WR.

If the record is soft, like the HM's, then Gold medal without a doubt.

Same goes for Centro's Gold.

woud you take this above gold :

7'20.66

???

Olympic gold

no

only depending on how rich the country you won it for & how marketable you are

i doubt the german who never broke 1'44 ever in life & won gold over Kip in '00 considered himself some sorta 800 great

i don't see anyone here ever talking about that german but plenty talk here of the 200/400 split in this run

only because winning gold is immediate whereas WR is delayed until clock registers

possibly

lotta Kenyans sniffing 58'23 & anyone seriously doubt if Kamwo in cardiff if not falling flat on his face at start, sprinting like maniac to catch up in 1st 800 - 1k & still run 59-flat in

WORST CONDITIONS EVER SEEN IN A MAJOR RACE

is not 1 of the top 1/2 middle or distance runs in history ?

Noah ran 1k wr

it is serious

off crumbled legs with a 3'29.1 in his body from just 44 hours before, he ran ~ 6m !!! extra wide on 1st bend !!! on suicidal 49-high opener !!! in a 1k !!!

he still held on for 2'11.9 !!!

that if fully rested, tight in lane-1 & ideal splits, shouda been

~ 2'10-flat

if the 1k WR was 2'10-flat, woud it be less attractive than a gold,?