Article on front page by Ian O'Riordan lamenting(?) the 40th anniversary of the Irish men's mile record by Ray Flynn. One could pose the same question about the U.S. men's mile. If not for one A. Webb in 2007, the U.S. men's mile record would date from the exact same race as the Irish record, that race being won by Steve Scott in 3:47.69, wherein he could almost reach out and proverbially touch Seb Coe's jersey in Coe's WR race if the two were overlaid.
40 years and only one U.S. athlete ran faster one time? Six of the top ten times are from the 80s. Yes, the 1500 has displaced the mile on the world scene. Is that the reason?
In the U.S. men's 1500 list, the first three times are by transplanted citizens, and only four U.S. born runner have ever broken 3:31, none under 3:30. Heck, Steve Scott is 66, and owns the # 2 time in U.S. history!
Shoes-better. Tracks-better. Nutrition-better. Training/knowledge-better. Money-better. So, what's holding a new record back?
40 years and only one U.S. athlete ran faster one time? Six of the top ten times are from the 80s. Yes, the 1500 has displaced the mile on the world scene. Is that the reason?
In the U.S. men's 1500 list, the first three times are by transplanted citizens, and only four U.S. born runner have ever broken 3:31, none under 3:30. Heck, Steve Scott is 66, and owns the # 2 time in U.S. history!
Shoes-better. Tracks-better. Nutrition-better. Training/knowledge-better. Money-better. So, what's holding a new record back?
Comment