4-minute mile barrier question

All good points, but are any of them relevant? What was different in Landy's race in June 1954 from his races in the previous months? It's not like he had Bannister pacing him in June. (Did he have other pacers? I don't know anything about the circumstances of Landy's first sub-4:00 run.) Why was he suddenly able to run a 4 second PR?

closer to his peak? better training? better conditions? who knows. why is anyone "suddenly" able to run a 4 second PR? landy had a five second (or more, i can't remember) PR in '52, was that the result of a mental barrier, too?

landy also had a chataway, a rather good runner, to race when he ran his 3:58.

as i said before, the debate can never be settled. it's all conjecture and no one cause, or causes in combination, will ever definitively be able to be pointed towards. read the perfect mile. gives about the best sense regarding the issue as you'll find.

relax... wrote:

he is using an example and the actual numbers don't matter it is the message he is trying to show.

As long as I have a message to convey I can make up any crap I want. Got it. Thanks.

Here is the email I sent to the guy after I said his facts were incorrect

If he gets bombarded w/ emails, then he will more likely correct it, but we should encourage him to keep the story as it brings running to the public attention, but just get the facts right

FREDERICK,

THANKS FOR YOUR RESPONSE. I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE RUNNING IN YOUR LIST.

THERE IS A GOOD WEBSITE THAT HOLDS A LOT OF INFORMATION REGARDING THE MILE. CLICKING ON THE "REGISTRATION IN DATE SEQUENCE" CAN GIVE YOU THE DESIRED INFORMATION. THIS LIST GIVES YOU EACH NEW SUB-4 PERFORMER.

IT DOES NOT LIST SUBSEQUENT PERFORMANCES BY ATHLETES THAT PREVIOUSLY BROKE 4. BUT THAT NUMBER WOULD ONLY ADD PERHAPS LESS THAN HALF OF THE TOTAL.

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/%7Ersparks/sub4.htm

IT IS TRUE THAT MANY MORE BROKE 4 AFTER BANNISTER, AND HIS BREAK THROUGH CONTRIBUTED TO THAT, BUT MANY OF THE SUBSEQUENT RUNNERS WOULD HAVE DONE IT ANYHOW. THEY WERE CONFIDENT, READY, AND ABLE...BUT BANNISTER BEAT THEM TO IT. THE LIST I GAVE YOU IS UPDATED THROUGH 2002. TODAY WE ARE CLOSE TO 1,000 PERFORMERS.

THANKS

in reply to:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me. Can you give me some official reference for your information. I was around at the time and watched newsreel of Bannister break the four-minute barrier. I'm sure I remember more than six athletes running a four-minute mile in the following three years. It seemed like every week someone else had done it, although I cannot prove 300+.

I'd be happy to revise my website, if you can give me something to refer to.

Thanks

Frederick

The guy changed the information on the website. Its better than before. His email back to me still shows that his understanding of track and field and the sub-4 mile is suspect. Unofficial runs??? What in the world...

here is his email:

It has been a long time, so I cannot remember where I found the numbers I quoted previously. Also, for my purposes, unofficial runs under 4 minutes could have been used, so those numbers might have been correct, even though I cannot support them. Remember, I did not say the record had been broken 300 times, or that only official times were used. I said that the mile had been run under 4 minutes 300 times. Maybe it was.

Anyway, to accommodate the official record and still use the story for the inspiration I intended, I have revised my webpage -

http://www.bspage.com/1article/peo13.html

Allowing that some unofficial sub-4 runs would have been accomplished and some runners did it more than once, I believe the wording I have used is sufficiently accurate.

I thank you for your help.

Frederick

If by "a few years" he means 20 years, and by "hundreds" he means 200, then I guess it's sufficiently accurate now.

Unoffical runs? BS did they break 4 minutes in their backyard with a stopwatch and then call the newspaper and tell them about it?

Anyone breaking 4 minutes would've been recorded.

I'm the guy who has you all up in arms about the inaccuracy of my webpage. Here is the revised piece--

In 1954, Roger Bannister broke the world record and ran the mile in under 4 minutes. In the whole of the history of the human species, no-one had been able to do that. It had been considered impossible - beyond the physical limits of the human body. Year after year, runners had come closer and closer but no-one was able to break the 4-minute barrier.

Not only did Bannister practice and train, he constantly rehearsed the event in his mind until he truly believed that he could do it. Even though nobody before had been able.

Yet, within six weeks of Bannister breaking this psychological barrier, it was broken again, and within a few years the mile had been run in under 4 mnutes hundreds of times!

Belief holds us back more than anything else - far more than fear; more, even, than physical constraints.

I am not the guy who invented the numbers and I cannot remember where I got them. But it's a good story from an inspirational point of view. And, please remember, this is one of a number of articles about personal motivation, inspiriation and suchlike. I thank all of you who helped me find the correct official times.

The point that I think many of you are missing is that runners had been running the mile for many years before 1954. Although they got closer and closer, no-one could break that barrier. Once it had been done, I remember at the time, it seemed like every week or so someone was reported as having done it. I was there, but unfortunately didn't keep count!

I'm sure many times in the late 50s someone ran the mile under 4 minutes but it wasn't an officially sanctioned event and the time didn't get recorded officially.

Anyway, I hope the revised wording keeps you aficianados happy and still inspires and motivates my business readers.

Thank you all for your input.

Frederick

Business Mentor

Frederick wrote:

The point that I think many of you are missing is that runners had been running the mile for many years before 1954. Although they got closer and closer, no-one could break that barrier. Once it had been done, I remember at the time, it seemed like every week or so someone was reported as having done it. I was there, but unfortunately didn't keep count!

Memories from 50 years ago tend to be pretty unreliable.

Frederick wrote:

Anyway, I hope the revised wording keeps you aficianados happy and still inspires and motivates my business readers.

Thank you all for your input.

Frederick

Business Mentor

I guess this was a polite way to say "thanks, but now get off my back you bunch of running geeks."

I did a search on this and came up with a reference to Tony Robbins spouting the same statistics so my guess is that you were using his quote as yours.

Here is another rehashing of it with even more ridiculous numbers.

http://www.career-in-your-suitcase.com/Articles/MIH/barriers.htm

Quote from the above link: To date, 955 runners have run sub-four-minute miles, accomplishing it an astonishing 4700+ times.

I seriously doubt it has been that often by that many runners as the mile is rarely run these days.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=degree/merron/040506&partnersite=espn&GT1=3391

I would be willing to accept Neal Bascomb's numbers (Neal wrote the brilliant "The Perfect Mile").

Frederick, "unofficial" times are bullshit. You are just trying to cover your ass. This stuff gets passed around and no one ever goes back to check the veracity of it.

Since you have floated the numbers out there, I would say that you should provide a reference for it. The internet lists the progression of the WR, but the only site I know of that lists them is one provided on the 1st page of this post. Of course we need to trust his listing, but it is more than you have given us. Given your lack of track knowledge, I say you are in serious credibility trouble.

I have found several articles that say sub4 was run by 16 riders by 1957. All were in newspapers who have people who are supposed to check these things.

Phil. wrote:

wineturtle wrote:

Others in 1956 sorry no times but from the narrative in R.L.Quercetani's book Athletics

Rozsavolgyi-Hun

Delany-Ire-(think its3;59 flat

Nielson-Den (3 59.10

You would think a list would be easy to find but none that my limited skills can find (T&FN has all the 'merkinslisted)

Here's a list that was kept up until '02 by when about 950 had done it.

http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/%7Ersparks/sub4-dat.htm

The site is no longer updated because, sadly, Bob sparks is no longer with us. It would be great if someone took on his mantle and kept the mile stats going.

luv2run wrote:

I did a search on this and came up with a reference to Tony Robbins spouting the same statistics so my guess is that you were using his quote as yours.

Here is another rehashing of it with even more ridiculous numbers.

http://www.career-in-your-suitcase.com/Articles/MIH/barriers.htm

Quote from the above link: To date, 955 runners have run sub-four-minute miles, accomplishing it an astonishing 4700+ times.

I seriously doubt it has been that often by that many runners as the mile is rarely run these days.

Since that article was written in 2003 the 955 number is correct at shown in the list I referenced earlier and which was apparently forwarded tp 'Frederick'.

Thee 4700 implies that each 4 minute miler has done it on average 5 times which seems feasible since at least one runner has done it 100 times!

Phil.

Quote: Frederick, "unofficial" times are bullshit. You are just trying to cover your ass. This stuff gets passed around and no one ever goes back to check the veracity of it.

You, Sir, may choose to disregard them, but they certainly existed. In 1954 I was a field and track school athlete (high jump was my forte, though) and I don't think any of our times, jumps, etc. were officially recorded, nor were any of the local events' scores recorded beyond the local organization level in adult athletics, either. Considering that local amateur organizations exist all over the world, there must be far more local amateur times for the mile than all the official records combined.

Can you confirm that none of these milers ever ran the mile in under 4 minutes?

To dismiss them so carelessly, to 'prove' your own grandiose opinion, is just not sportsmanlike.

so, when you're mentoring business people, do you tell them that it's okay if they make up stuff? you know, like when doing their accounting?

Frederick wrote:

You, Sir, may choose to disregard them, but they certainly existed.

Unofficial 4-minute miles in the time period of 1954-1960 almost certainly did NOT exist. The idea that dozens of people were anonomously running 4-minute miles at local AAU meets or in practice during this time period is absurd to anyone who knows anything about track. Yes, there were hundreds of small meets during that time period where no permanent records were kept. And it is very doubtful that anyone ever ran a 4-minute mile at one of those meets. It is a certainty that there were not dozens that did so (which would have to be the case for your statement "within a few years the mile had been run under 4 minutes hundreds of times" to be true).

Can you confirm that none of these milers ever ran the mile in under 4 minutes?

How is anyone supposed to prove that? I also can't confirm that no one has ever stepped on Mars, but it is almost certain that no one ever has.

You, Sir, may choose to disregard them, but they certainly existed.

You have yet to present us with any particular instance of a sub 4 performance worth "disregarding". All you have is a broad, sweeping, unsubstantiated claim that the feat was repeated several times over in training and in local meets.

Considering that local amateur organizations exist all over the world, there must be far more local amateur times for the mile than all the official records combined.

I compete in such amateur track meets, and I've yet to see a sub 4 mile at a low key all-comers meet, even in this day and age (I've seen close to 4 but not sub 4 ...) Sub 4 miles are infrequent enough, even today, that a sub 4 is good enough to make the USATF annual list (http://usatf.org/statistics/topMarks/2005/outdoorTF/men.asp ). This is not just because the mile is seldom run either -- an equivalent performance in the 1500m also makes the list. The bottom line is, you just don't get people routinely running sub 4 at obscure meets. Even today, it's pretty hard to do, and anyone who's running sub 4 is pretty good.

This notion of yours that the barrier was purely psychological makes for a great story, but you don't make a very strong case for this.

luv2run, the claims asserted in the link you provided seem very accurate. There is nothing in that web page that seems off. The claims aren't outlandish at all and to claim they are is an error on your part.

Frederick, I appreciate you taking our concerns into consideration and ammending your website. I would recommend checking out the link luv2run posted as the information seems pretty accurate (the numbers may even be low considering the material is slightly dated). The writing does a good job discussing the psycholgical barrier while maintaining high integrity. Good luck with your website.

Eric

I seriously doubt it has been that often by that many runners as the mile is rarely run these days.

Seems plausible to me. I'd say after the record dropped below 3:50, in the late 70s, there would have been many athletes breaking 4:00 (check the annual lists for the 1500m and you'll see several sub-4 equivalent performances by people you've never heard of). And there were some athletes who ran several sub 4s. For example, John Walker ran over 100 sub 4s.