Track & field News decided to post this unsubstantiated crappy article on their Facebook page a couple days after roger Bannister died. It's a rerun of an article that was published in 2004, and Bannister commented on it in an interview after publication. Since he's dead I guess T&FN feels safe in sharing it now.
https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/revealed-the-sheffield-factory-worker-who-beat-roger-bannister-by-29-days-1-9047559
T&FN Craps All Over Roger Bannister's Legacy
Other Running Related Topic
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
The entire "4 minute mile" thing was BS media hype anyhow. Nobody cared about the mile but Britain, it would have been done long before if anyone had, and nobody with even minimal knowledge of the record progression thought it was unlikely, let alone impossible. Ever, in the entire history of the event. The only pause in the progression occurred when the olympics killed the sport for professionals in the early 19th century.
Speaking ill of lies is not the same as speaking ill of the dead. -
So a guy named Ken Wood did it first, in training, with no photographic proof, heresay evidence and unreliable witnesses. Really reliable. Was Ken's track legit? I have my doubts.
Also answers Jeremy Clarkson's statement of there being no great Ken's. -
The mile was the main record is countless countries.
-
Look, if it's not on Strava and there were no independent timers, it didn't happen. No one believes this stupid story. Bannister was the first.
-
You don't know much about T&F history, or the process of documenting world records, do you? Do yourself a favor and do some research while your latest zit outbreak runs wild and then come back and post when you know something. Or maybe just read the posted article to get a start.
The Olympics didn't exist in the early 19th century. Do some research on that too.
Or just go back to Snapchat.
Bad Wigins wrote:
The entire "4 minute mile" thing was BS media hype anyhow. Nobody cared about the mile but Britain, it would have been done long before if anyone had, and nobody with even minimal knowledge of the record progression thought it was unlikely, let alone impossible. Ever, in the entire history of the event. The only pause in the progression occurred when the olympics killed the sport for professionals in the early 19th century.
Speaking ill of lies is not the same as speaking ill of the dead. -
This story has come up before. Wood was a good enough runner for that to have been possible. Glenn Cunningham also used to tell a story about running a mile in under four minutes in training though I think he was the only person who believed the story. And there are accounts of Indians doing it in the 19th Century, I think there are accounts of someone doing it in the 18th Century. It doesn't matter. Those things may or may not have happened. To get credit for a record you have to do it in a recognized competition and Bannister was the guy who did that. The other stories can be interesting though.
-
HRE wrote:
This story has come up before. Wood was a good enough runner for that to have been possible. Glenn Cunningham also used to tell a story about running a mile in under four minutes in training though I think he was the only person who believed the story. And there are accounts of Indians doing it in the 19th Century, I think there are accounts of someone doing it in the 18th Century. It doesn't matter. Those things may or may not have happened. To get credit for a record you have to do it in a recognized competition and Bannister was the guy who did that. The other stories can be interesting though.
Have you seen the story of the fossilized footprint in the Australian Outback where they reckon that someone was significantly faster than Bolt? The book is called Manthropology. Sounds like this but the difference is a sub 4 mile was a big story, I can't see anybody turning down that sort of fame and prestige. -
Pierre de Coubertin acolyte wrote:
You don't know much about T&F history, or the process of documenting world records, do you? Do yourself a favor and do some research while your latest zit outbreak runs wild and then come back and post when you know something. Or maybe just read the posted article to get a start.
The Olympics didn't exist in the early 19th century. Do some research on that too.
Or just go back to Snapchat.
Bad Wigins wrote:
The entire "4 minute mile" thing was BS media hype anyhow. Nobody cared about the mile but Britain, it would have been done long before if anyone had, and nobody with even minimal knowledge of the record progression thought it was unlikely, let alone impossible. Ever, in the entire history of the event. The only pause in the progression occurred when the olympics killed the sport for professionals in the early 19th century.
Speaking ill of lies is not the same as speaking ill of the dead.
Zit outbreak? Wiggy is almost surely a bitter old man. -
Bitter old man wrote:
Pierre de Coubertin acolyte wrote:
You don't know much about T&F history, or the process of documenting world records, do you? Do yourself a favor and do some research while your latest zit outbreak runs wild and then come back and post when you know something. Or maybe just read the posted article to get a start.
The Olympics didn't exist in the early 19th century. Do some research on that too.
Or just go back to Snapchat.
Bad Wigins wrote:
The entire "4 minute mile" thing was BS media hype anyhow. Nobody cared about the mile but Britain, it would have been done long before if anyone had, and nobody with even minimal knowledge of the record progression thought it was unlikely, let alone impossible. Ever, in the entire history of the event. The only pause in the progression occurred when the olympics killed the sport for professionals in the early 19th century.
Speaking ill of lies is not the same as speaking ill of the dead.
Zit outbreak? Wiggy is almost surely a bitter old man.
Shingles then. -
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:
So a guy named Ken Wood did it first, in training, with no photographic proof, heresay evidence and unreliable witnesses. Really reliable. Was Ken's track legit? I have my doubts.
Also answers Jeremy Clarkson's statement of there being no great Ken's.
It does at least seem feasible given that the guy did break it officially later and probably multiple times too. Usually these claims are exposed like Jill Greathouse -
Very old news. This claim of Ken Wood's has been much discussed in the past. He may well have been physically capable of running sub 4 - although by 1954 his competitive performances hardly support this claim - but there is absolutely no evidence to support his claim. Who timed/witnessed the sub 4 run? Has this person ever come forward to support the sub 4?
Silly story, really. Bannister did run the first official sub 4. And, reference to other posts on this subject, it was not something that only Brits bothered about. Landy and Santee were chasing the goal in Australia and the US, Hagg and Anderson chased it in Scandinavia in the 1940s. It was a worldwide thing.
Of course, if the 1939-45 was had not happened it is quite likely that the barrier would have been broken before 1954. Gerschler had an athlete - Harbig - run 1:46 for 800 in the 1930s and most people would say that thie time is more impressive than 3:59 (?). -
Bad Wigins wrote:
The entire "4 minute mile" thing was BS media hype anyhow. Nobody cared about the mile but Britain, it would have been done long before if anyone had, and nobody with even minimal knowledge of the record progression thought it was unlikely, let alone impossible. Ever, in the entire history of the event. The only pause in the progression occurred when the olympics killed the sport for professionals in the early 19th century.
Speaking ill of lies is not the same as speaking ill of the dead.
Wasn’t there an American trying to get the record too? Can’t remember his name rn but I’m 100% sure there was -
Gotta bee wrote:
...
Wasn’t there an American trying to get the record too? Can’t remember his name rn but I’m 100% sure there was
Wes Santee, who ran a 3:42 1500m in 1954. So he was right there in fitness and ability, but just didn't put it together. -
There are at least three other claims not including this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-minute_mile#Possible_other_claims
The point is that none of them were substantiated, though -- and more importantly none of them were video-recorded. Any random bloke could break 4 minutes running down a steep slope, or if they start the clock 10 seconds late, measure a 1500m track, etc. So it's possible these people weren't "lying" but ended up embellishing a story that has been playing telephone for in some cases hundreds of years now.
milermb wrote:
Gerschler had an athlete - Harbig - run 1:46 for 800 in the 1930s and most people would say that thie time is more impressive than 3:59 (?).
yep, I'd say a 1:48 mid is about aerobically equivalent to a 3:59.9. -
The enjoyment of buggery between the participants remains an open issue even though Track and Field News is in California is such a progressive state.
-
Strava or it didn't happen wrote:
Look, if it's not on Strava and there were no independent timers, it didn't happen.
Great post. I got a good laugh out of it. -
The book 'The Perfect Mile", documents very well the chase for sub-4 between Landy, Bannister and Santee. As I recall, Santee got screwed over somewhat by the NCAA, and later the AAU in his quest for sub-4.
-
Also in the book it told of how close everyone was coming to breaking 4 minutes leading up to Bannister's run. There were 4 or 5 guys within a second or two of it in documented races. Any of those runs could have been under 4 minutes if they let a coach using an uncalibrated stop watch do the timing on it.
-
Ken Wood's Wikipedia page claims he ran 3:59.3 in July, 1957. That appears to be true. Here's a video clip of that race (listen at :51), in which he was fourth to Derek Ibbotson's 3:57.2.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tovnWBhN9AE
