I don't want to hear about US marathon depth-check out these 1981 BM results

I ran Boston in 1979 when I was 18 and ran 2:46 (with about 2 min of walking at the start before I made it into a run). I was pretty impressed with myself until my finishers certificate arrived in the mail about 2 months later and it said 1164th place!

I also ran the Gasparilla Distance Classic 15K in 1983 and ran just under 48:30 and finished 99th. 5:10 miles and I still have to lean at the finish to break the top-100!

The hobby-jogger depth was definitely a tad deeper "back in the day".

Just one more reason you should listen to your elders. They were faster than you!

And to add insult to injury, many, Many, MANY of those guys had real jobs in addition to their training!

oregon oldtimer wrote:

I ran Boston in 1979 when I was 18 and ran 2:46 (with about 2 min of walking at the start before I made it into a run).

God you are old. How did you survive without microwaves, refrigerators, or chip timing?

This is a compelling statistic, but I wonder if the number wasn't skewed a bit on account of the number of marathon options. Today you can practically find a marathon to run every week. Back then? Might be a different story. If there were fewer marathon opportunities, it stands to reason that those marathons that were available would draw a greater share of the talent pool.

But that is just an undeducated guess, as I wasn't around at the time. I'd love to hear from some of the vets out there, who might be able to talk more about just how prevalent were marathon races in the late 70s and early 80s?

I can say that back in the late '70s, in Washington and Oregon their were the following marathons: Seattle, Sauvie Island, Seaside, Birch Bay, Skagit Flats (?), maybe a few other small ones. Today I would guess that there are about twice that many. MAybe some other PNW vets can chime in.

oregon oldtimer wrote:

I ran Boston in 1979 when I was 18 and ran 2:46 (with about 2 min of walking at the start before I made it into a run). I was pretty impressed with myself until my finishers certificate arrived in the mail about 2 months later and it said 1164th place!

I also ran the Gasparilla Distance Classic 15K in 1983 and ran just under 48:30 and finished 99th. 5:10 miles and I still have to lean at the finish to break the top-100!

The hobby-jogger depth was definitely a tad deeper "back in the day".

18??? How did you do that? Impressive. I ran it the same year and was several minutes ahead of you but I was 28...

I would love to see conclusive evidence that when you compile all the current US marathon times they would be lesser (greater?) than the depth of past (75?-85?) marathons. And, forget about the course measurements-it doesn't negate the number of past finishers under 2:15, 2:20, 2:30, 2;40, 2:50 or sub 3 and beyond.

Runn262 wrote:

Brian Maxwell. Founder of Powerbar finished 20th.

He's listed as from Berkeley, which is where he lived at that point i guess, but he's from Toronto.

Died far too early from a heart attack at age 51.

Reminds me of this article from Outside a couple years ago. Lots of the same stuff this thread is bringing, but also some additional data and perspective, too:

https://www.outsideonline.com/2127116/great-slowing-american-runner

As for the courses possibly being shorter, they would have to be shorter by many, many minutes to account for the differences were talking about. 30 or 40 seconds shorter on the winning time might only mean the difference of a runner or two dipping into the 2:20s. It doesn't account for things like 50 runners at NYC qualifying for the OT.

But it does make me wonder about number of marathons across the country, as others brought up. Has anyone seen data on how many runners hit the OT every four years? Is that number consistent, or falling?

Brianruns10 wrote:

This is a compelling statistic, but I wonder if the number wasn't skewed a bit on account of the number of marathon options. Today you can practically find a marathon to run every week. Back then? Might be a different story. If there were fewer marathon opportunities, it stands to reason that those marathons that were available would draw a greater share of the talent pool.

But that is just an undeducated guess, as I wasn't around at the time. I'd love to hear from some of the vets out there, who might be able to talk more about just how prevalent were marathon races in the late 70s and early 80s?

Yes, it definitely is. Look at the numbers for the fastest and deepest marathons in the US, which off the top of my head, I would say are Chicago, Boston, New York, California International, and Grandma's. Actually, just looked up a Letsrun article on CIM, and 297 people broke 2:30 in those races in 2017. That's about the same number that broke 2:30 at this one Boston marathon.

But back in 1981, if you want to run a fast marathon in the spring, where are you going? Probably Boston. Not the options that we have today.

ummm wrote:

its boston. The course has been the same for years. The start and finish lines etched into the streets

Not too long ago it went on Ring Rd.

Used to not go under the rd near the last turn onto Hereford.

Check this video wrote:

Yes, Boston has remained a point to point course but the start and finish have not been painted on the ground forever. 1982 duel in the sun they made a right on Hereford with clock showing 2:07:39, made a left on Boylston with clock at 2:08:16. Finish time 2:08:48. So 32 seconds from left on Boylston to the finish.

When Meb won the race (see video link 2) he has already made the turn onto Boylston and clock shows 2:07:03, so lets use 2:07:00. He finished in 2:08:36, so 96 sec he took to run from the last left turn to the finish.

It is hard to admit that an old course may have been measured short, but it is harsh reality that many could have been.

It is hard to admit that U.S. marathoners were generally much faster in those days, but it is harsh reality that they were.

It's pretty common knowledge that, after (1) the BAA decided to start offering prize money and appearance fees, (2) Prudential Insurance withdrew sponsorship in protest, and (3) John Hancock Insurance assumed primary sponsorship, the Boston Marathon's finish line was moved from the Prudential Plaza area to the vicinity of the John Hancock building, beginning with the 1986 race. The total distance was not changed.

There are definitely many more marathons today and that does dilute the depth of the field in each race. But when you looked at Track&Field News' annual lists you saw much more depth before 1990,just grabbing a year, than after. If we had as many people in their 20s and 30s running 100 plus mile weeks and racing 2-4 marathons a year you'd see more of that kind of depth but that era's gone.

I know that and any runner about my age (50 over) knows that. Millennial students think Rupp’s is hot running times the best from 37 years ago used to do almost on a monthly basis, and they used to work and run. You will not see a generation of US runners like that again. You are lucky you ONLY have Rupp,

Donyiyo wrote:

I know that and any runner about my age (50 over) knows that. Millennial students think Rupp’s is hot running times the best from 37 years ago used to do almost on a monthly basis, and they used to work and run. You will not see a generation of US runners like that again. You are lucky you ONLY have Rupp,

Rupp is hot? Nobody thinks that. Nobody.

No. Millineals are soft and merica has gotten fat.

/thread

This thread has been done a dozen times. 2/10.

The other thing is that in my area there used to be a lot more people running sub 15 for 5k than now as well.

forwhatitsworth wrote:

It is taking every bit of self control I have to not post my BM results from this morning.

#gross

#whydoyouhavethatkindofdata?

bowel movement? pics?