In '96 I ran 3:42.1 for 1500m.
Roughly equivalent to a 3:59.9 mile, let's say 4 flat.
What is the difference 40 years later that made an average guy like me about as fast a former world record holder?
I know I ran on a faster track but what else?
Better genetics through evolution?
What?
Ryun ran 3:51.1
You weren't even close.
And even if you were, I would say the difference would be that his races were run on shitty tracks, without rabbits (some of the time), and he was setting WRs, while you were a dime a dozen...
erm, Jim Ryun did 3:51 for the mile
The difference is about 8 seconds, or 2 seconds per lap.
Did you mean Bannister?
Someone please delete this thread or change Jim Ryun to Roger Bannister.
Boy do I feel like an idiot.
Obviously evolution didn't make me any smarter.
Did you run 3:42.1 as a highschool junior? That's when Ryun did it. I think he eventually got down to 3:33. But to answer your question, I don't think that genetics or evolution has anything to do with it, since evolution occurs over millions of years. Probably has something to do with better training, better tracks and racing shoes, and an increasingly competitive environment. I'm sure others can think of more factors as well.
training.RB had a total different attitude to sport or running as most elites have today.He was an amateur, running was just his hobby and so he didn't train himself to the max and just slept the rest of the day a la Paula Radcliffe.
Evolution?? Do you have any idea how evolution works? 40 years is about 2 generations--no significant change can occur in that time. And for that matter, do you really think there is any selection for running speed going on these days?
blasttothepast wrote:
training.RB had a total different attitude to sport or running as most elites have today.He was an amateur, running was just his hobby and so he didn't train himself to the max and just slept the rest of the day a la Paula Radcliffe.
Dr Bannister did a normal day at the hospital including Grande Rounds THEN went to the track and broke the 4:00 mark......sleep the day away? I think not!
u might want to re-read that...your reply doesnt make sense.
read again wrote:
u might want to re-read that...your reply doesnt make sense.
Why doesn't his reply make sense?
Because the post he initially replied to intended to say that Bannister didn't train to the max and sleep all day like Paula does, but instead said Bannister didn't train to the max and "SLEPT" all day.
Well my mother or her grandmother never had a 3rd nipple, but I doodoo.
So it's just training.
I just trained harder than anyone in the 50's?
I averaged 60 mpw in the fall, 50 in the winter and 40 in the spring.
I focused on the 200/400 in highschool in the 800 in college and 1500 after.
Was this an approach that no one in the 50's tried?
Californian wrote:
Did you run 3:42.1 as a highschool junior? That's when Ryun did it.
Jim Ryun ran 3:39.0 as a high school junior. Much faster than you posted. And, he did it on a dirt track on a hot day in New York.
What makes Toro think he's so normal? Maybe you and Ryun and RB are all extremely talented people.
Dumbfounded wrote:
Evolution?? Do you have any idea how evolution works? 40 years is about 2 generations--no significant change can occur in that time. And for that matter, do you really think there is any selection for running speed going on these days?
Especially since health advances have eliminated natural selection to the poiont that now even the most lame human beings procreate. I mean, look at the people living in Kansas and just about every "red state".......
You just weren't the first to do it. Running that time is still impressive, but not nearly as novel as it once was.
bush bites wrote:
Especially since health advances have eliminated natural selection to the poiont that now even the most lame human beings procreate. I mean, look at the people living in Kansas and just about every "red state".......
And a majority of the people living in, say, New York or Vermont are better that people living in Kansas or Texas? Is that what you mean to say? People who live in blue states are simply better or smarter or... whatever it is you seem to think makes them better for a good chunk of the population? Get a clue, you narrow minded prick.