As of today, would you rather have Galen Rupp's career, or Bill Rodgers' career?

mrexample wrote:

Bill Rodgers = Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin etc....

Galen Rupp = Justine Bieber

Bill is a bit more like Beck actually.

Things were different back then. Most people at least knew who Rogers was, not so much for Rupp.

I remember when Bayi set the WR for 1500 at the Commonwealth Games and Walker was 2nd- it was on the evening news- yes, the major networks showed a world record set by an African in a meet that the USA was not running in.

People knew who they were.

I wonder how much more popular the sport would be if the current top runners ran in more road races and mixed with the masses.

If I recall correctly in 84 Steve Jones went through halfway well under 62 minutes(may have been a little over 62 I can't find official splits right now). Canova on an old doping thread here argued that with pacemakers and a more sensible first half a 2:05:XX was possible. This is with 1984 technology and footwear. Negasa just went from 2:09 to 2:03 with 4% on...Jones was running in crap compared to even subpar racing shoes of today. Athletes today are not better...but they have MUCH better shoes.

Takinadump wrote:

If I recall correctly in 84 Steve Jones went through halfway well under 62 minutes(may have been a little over 62 I can't find official splits right now). Canova on an old doping thread here argued that with pacemakers and a more sensible first half a 2:05:XX was possible. This is with 1984 technology and footwear. Negasa just went from 2:09 to 2:03 with 4% on...Jones was running in crap compared to even subpar racing shoes of today. Athletes today are not better...but they have MUCH better shoes.

It was '85 when he was under 62 through half.

The shoes he raced in were not bad at all but quite minimalist. in cushion. His training shoes were another story. I tried a pair of them on back in the day and they were awful.

Bullet_Proof wrote:

I don't give a sheet about how "loved" Billy Rodgers is. Outside of the running world, no one knows who he is. From that standpoint, he is the same level famous as Rupp. With that particular aspect being equal, Rupp wins.

You're incorrect about this. Rodgers is the more recognizable name to the masses. Maybe not all of the masses but more non-running/t&f fans will recognize him than the name of Galen Rupp who no one outside the sport knows who he is.

back in the day guy wrote:

Takinadump wrote:

If I recall correctly in 84 Steve Jones went through halfway well under 62 minutes(may have been a little over 62 I can't find official splits right now). Canova on an old doping thread here argued that with pacemakers and a more sensible first half a 2:05:XX was possible. This is with 1984 technology and footwear. Negasa just went from 2:09 to 2:03 with 4% on...Jones was running in crap compared to even subpar racing shoes of today. Athletes today are not better...but they have MUCH better shoes.

It was '85 when he was under 62 through half.

The shoes he raced in were not bad at all but quite minimalist. in cushion. His training shoes were another story. I tried a pair of them on back in the day and they were awful.

They were awful back then imagine compared to now. That's crazy.

Yeah RIIIIIIIIIIIGHT...........it's the shoes.............

I think Bill is an icon

like Bob Dylan or Mickey Mantle

Takinadump wrote:

back in the day guy wrote:

It was '85 when he was under 62 through half.

The shoes he raced in were not bad at all but quite minimalist. in cushion. His training shoes were another story. I tried a pair of them on back in the day and they were awful.

They were awful back then imagine compared to now. That's crazy.

Quite a few of the shoes back then would stand up just fine today but the shoes he trained in would not be one of them.

Many shoes today are also terrible and a hindrance to good running.

Rodger won 22 marathons for no money

I want to see America's Tricentennial wrote:

Whose career would I want?

Rodgers

Who would I rather be today?

Bill Rodgers - age 71

Galen Rupp - age 32

I'd rather be Rupp

How the heck is Rodgers already 71 years old?

For you youngsters, go find a local newspaper from the 70s. The sports section might have been 6 to 8 pages and routinely covered multiple sports. They certainly covered Bill Rodgers great career and anybody who read about sports knew him very well winning the biggest marathons multiple times. They covered all sorts of track and field, indoor track, road racing, and marathons. Full results of big races were often listed in the newspaper.

Now with the internet, it is much more specialized and if you don't already have an interest in a sport, you may never see anything about it. Much harder for the average person to know about somebody in a sport unless it is televised often.

I rather have my own life. Which I do.

I'd think you'd know this, Wejo.

That said, I lived it all and don't really know it, but:

Salazar ran Rotterdam 1983 because Deek ran 2:08:18 at Fukuoka 81 after Salazar ran 2:08.13 at NYC 81 and either did, or did not have the world record. This was going to settle it, but all it did was show that Lopes was the danger man.

He ran Fukuoka 83 to atone for his Rotterdam showing. Seko was still an Olympic favorite, so this was again an effort to make the world right again. Problem is, he faded just like Rupp.

He went from the race against Rono in rain in April 82, followed up with Boston in 82 against Beardsley, to show how he'd double-up at the LA games, to:

Not even winning the US trials after getting his butt handed to him on the world stage all during 1983.

After the Olympics, I guess he owned a restaurant in Eugene or something, and was struggling to run 5 miles or an hour every day or something. Eventually things changed for him, and I mentioned in another thread that I ran against him a few times in races that apparently nobody knows about, basically before both the 88 and 92 trials. I was running high-30s, so I could see him finish a minute or so in front of me.

To my knowledge he never ran, or attempted another 26.2 mile race. He ran up to halfs, then Comrades, of course.

Scratch that, he DID attempt the Trials races.

oldformerfastguy wrote:

Yeah RIIIIIIIIIIIGHT...........it's the shoes.............

Here you go. This is 99 percent the model of shoe Rodgers raced in, from 76 through 81. Given better materials available today, it's probably even better. Use it instead of Boost, or Pebax, or Zoom or whatever, and let us know.

FFF wrote:

oldformerfastguy wrote:

Yeah RIIIIIIIIIIIGHT...........it's the shoes.............

Here you go. This is 99 percent the model of shoe Rodgers raced in, from 76 through 81. Given better materials available today, it's probably even better. Use it instead of Boost, or Pebax, or Zoom or whatever, and let us know.

https://www.zappos.com/p/onitsuka-tiger-by-asics-ultimate-81-black-white-2/product/8750758/color/196917

No, the older models were actually better. Take it from someone who used both.

The ultimate '81 is still a really nice shoe though but it's clunkier than the shoe Rodgers wore.

It really isn't that much about the shoes.

Rupp.

No contest.

Not so fast there wrote:

FFF wrote:

Here you go. This is 99 percent the model of shoe Rodgers raced in, from 76 through 81. Given better materials available today, it's probably even better. Use it instead of Boost, or Pebax, or Zoom or whatever, and let us know.

https://www.zappos.com/p/onitsuka-tiger-by-asics-ultimate-81-black-white-2/product/8750758/color/196917

No, the older models were actually better. Take it from someone who used both.

The ultimate '81 is still a really nice shoe though but it's clunkier than the shoe Rodgers wore.

It really isn't that much about the shoes.

I know. The funny thing about this "vintage" shoe is that it's NOT the Ultimate 81. In reality, the Ultimate 81 was a completely different, more modern shoe. This shoe CALLED the Ultimate 81 is a visual clone of what Rodgers raced in, but is not the same shoe. It's between the two.