4 ms·

There is a popular TED talk which argues in part that improved technology and training is key to modern records. Bannister is mentioned briefly at 3 minutes in.

There is a popular TED talk which argues in part that improved technology and training is key to modern records. Bannister is mentioned briefly at 3 minutes in. https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_better_stronger?language=en#t-169690 https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_... The speaker notes that Bannister ran his mile on a cinder track and claims it degrades performance by 1.5% compared to a modern synthetic track. Cinder tracks do look like they would be quite soft. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NGgiMDHjKM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NGgiMDHjKM This site claims that British cinder tracks were mostly crushed brick rubble. They required heavily spiked shoes. https://theolympians.co/2015/07/01/the-last-of-the-cinder-tracks/ https://theolympians.co/2015/07/01/the-last-of-the-cinder-tr...

mikestew 8y ago
As one old enough, and went to a school poorly-funded enough, to have run on a cinder track, I'm truly surprised at a mere 1.5% performance loss. Perhaps pro-level tracks in the 50s were better taken care of than our high school track, but I'd guess (and this is from memory quite some time ago) double-digit percentages of loss. When we had a home meet on our cinder track, we just ran for place because the times wouldn't even be in the neighborhood of the worst all-weather (paved/hard-surfaced) track. To run 4 minutes on such a thing with 50s nutrition and training? Unimaginable to me. Let alone compared to the rubberized-surface of a (what used to be) high-level track. Even the local Redmond high school track is miles better than the best I ran on in the 80s. As for what the "cinders" were made of, I'm pretty sure ours was made from literal cinders. The output of coal-fired power plants, IIRC. It wasn't brick rubble, that's for sure.
- JamesCoyne 8y ago
  I often wonder about the extent of training done by early-modern olympic caliber athletes. As the olympics were originally supposed to be for amateurs, it sounds like a person who devoted most of their time to training was not considered a fair sport.
  - gms7777 8y ago
    > it sounds like a person who devoted most of their time to training was not considered a fair sport. Amateurism in sports is a complex subject, but in many ways has its roots planted in classism. Its similar to how unpaid internships nowadays can reinforce a class divide in certain fields -- those with family support or independent wealth are able to take unpaid internships while those that need the money can't afford to take those opportunities. In similar ways, requiring athletes to be amateurs didn't mean that amateur athletes didn't devote a lot of time to training, it meant that those that couldn't afford to spend their time training while unpaid couldn't compete. Late 19th century definitions of amateur went even further than that: It restricted "amateurs" to those who had never profited for physical labor. That meant if you worked as a bricklayer and trained unpaid on the side, you were ineligible to compete.
ErikAugust 8y ago
Global talent pool, professionalization, performance enhancing drugs, wide proliferation of training knowledge. Those are the big ones.

mikestew 8y ago

As one old enough, and went to a school poorly-funded enough, to have run on a cinder track, I'm truly surprised at a mere 1.5% performance loss. Perhaps pro-level tracks in the 50s were better taken care of than our high school track, but I'd guess (and this is from memory quite some time ago) double-digit percentages of loss. When we had a home meet on our cinder track, we just ran for place because the times wouldn't even be in the neighborhood of the worst all-weather (paved/hard-surfaced) track. To run 4 minutes on such a thing with 50s nutrition and training? Unimaginable to me. Let alone compared to the rubberized-surface of a (what used to be) high-level track. Even the local Redmond high school track is miles better than the best I ran on in the 80s. As for what the "cinders" were made of, I'm pretty sure ours was made from literal cinders. The output of coal-fired power plants, IIRC. It wasn't brick rubble, that's for sure.

JamesCoyne 8y ago
I often wonder about the extent of training done by early-modern olympic caliber athletes. As the olympics were originally supposed to be for amateurs, it sounds like a person who devoted most of their time to training was not considered a fair sport.
- gms7777 8y ago
  > it sounds like a person who devoted most of their time to training was not considered a fair sport. Amateurism in sports is a complex subject, but in many ways has its roots planted in classism. Its similar to how unpaid internships nowadays can reinforce a class divide in certain fields -- those with family support or independent wealth are able to take unpaid internships while those that need the money can't afford to take those opportunities. In similar ways, requiring athletes to be amateurs didn't mean that amateur athletes didn't devote a lot of time to training, it meant that those that couldn't afford to spend their time training while unpaid couldn't compete. Late 19th century definitions of amateur went even further than that: It restricted "amateurs" to those who had never profited for physical labor. That meant if you worked as a bricklayer and trained unpaid on the side, you were ineligible to compete.

ErikAugust 8y ago

Global talent pool, professionalization, performance enhancing drugs, wide proliferation of training knowledge. Those are the big ones.