Bannister - an opinion and a question

[noone]

Today is the 50th anniversary of Bannister's record. I hope it is not heretical of me to say that in my humble opinion his the most overhyped, overrated record in history.

There have been many mile record holders over the years; he happened to lower the record under 4 minutes, which is a completely arbitrary feat. Jules Ladoumegue, Jim Ryun, Hicham El Guerrouj and many others (I am not looking this up, so I may be off by a few tenths) have lowered the record by similar amounts but did not receive the acclaim that Bannister got in his (paced) effort.

By the way I heard an interview on CBC radio today with a man who is making a movie of Bannister (really). He was not very knowledgeable about sports and got mixed up in the roles played by Chris Brasher and Chris Chataway. Anyway, he pronounced Brasher's last name as "Bray-sher" rather than having it rhyme with "Masher". Is that correct?

[vaulter83]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

Troll.

[FrankS]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

Brasher=Bray-sher! First, the dream of running 4-minutes was very long standing my 1954 and wasn't a manufactured hyped up thing. It's all been said before but, of course, the neatness of the one mile, 4 minutes and 4 laps was something that an avegage sports' fan could appreciate. And, it had become a psychological barrier as well as physical. Landy admited that. Every "so-called" barrier breaking effort needs to be applauded. I can can still remember the thrill of seeing Ron Clarke breaking the 13 min three mile barrier. But now, of course, the psychological element has been removed. For example, the breaking of the 2 hour marathon barrier is now seen as purely a physical challenge - bearing in mind that "mental toughness" will be definitely needed as well!

[Two Tone]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

Roger was the first to do it. That's what the fuss is about. One of sport's last great "barriers" in terms of achievement. One has to consider the time in which he managed his feat. Sure, it's easy to try and slight him now.

Could nonone the troll run a sub 4 mile? Probably not. It's still something that's tough to do today. Looking at the equipment, conditions, and trainging regimen, Bannister's feat is superb. Talented, intelligent man.

[tafnut]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

Hey noone - guess what? Virtually everything in our world is arbitrary. So what if Hillary summited Everest - just a hunk of rock - so what if Armstrong stepped on the moon - just another hunk of rock. It was mythical and mystical - that's why we honor it today. Other firsts are cool too - but this happened to be the special one of its time. You may choose not to honor it - most of us do.

[Tustin Flash]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

very well said tafnut!

[mike renfro]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

Bannister was first and will be remembered, but if a generation of runners had not be eviscerated (figuratively and in some cases, literally) by WWII, the barrier would have been broken much earlier. My choice would be Harbig, but if Andersen & Hagg had bigger races, they would have been in the hunt as well. There are others.

[jhc68]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

Yeah, others could have run faster, earlier, but circumstances prevented it from happening. Lots of people might have jumped 7 feet before Charlie Dumas. In fact, Les Steers probably did, but that doesn't diminish Dumas accomplishment in being the first to do so in a certified competition. As Tafnut says, it is all arbitrary, but having acknowledged that, breaking some milestone barrier is still extraordinary. In most cases, the amazing thing is that so many other athletes follow suit so quickly with sub-four miles or 7 foot high jumps, etc. And, even more amazing are the breakthroughs that no one seems capable of duplicating for many years: the 29 foot long jump or the 20 foot pole vault. I agree with tafnut, noone is delusional.

[lefterisp]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

I don't think the race itself was anything spectacular.... the fact that it was the first to go below 4 min was probably spectacular... as it should had been for the first woman to high jump over 2m, long jump 7m, for the first man to pole vault 6m etc... I personally never heard of Mr Bannister until I moved to USA.

[noone]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

I would have enjoyed to continue this debate, but if people who disagree with me insult me this board is obviously not for me.

[FrankS]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

The fact that someone hasn't heard of Bannister doesn't alter anything; for example, I couldn't name one US football player past or present - unless, for other reason besides football e.g. Actors Jim Brown and O J Simpson, and I think that the great Bob Hayes took up football after his running days. I'm from the UK.

[kuha]

Re: Bannister - an opinion and a question

To the original poster: a performance is "overhyped" when its reputation is artificially or falsely inflated. The wide-spread public response to Bannister's run proves precisely the opposite: this is one record that doesn't NEED to be hyped--the public has known and cared about it for 50 years.