I did not mean to suggest that it was a "soft" record. I said that I thought we have not yet realised the athletic abilities of people of all ages.
This is something that cannot possibly be appreciated by Christopher Leigh.
The forum lacks meaningful exchange of ideas about training due to everything positive being rubbished.
I was trying to say the same thing, but I've tended to use 'soft' to describe certain records in the past eg, when women have started new events, pole vault, hammer etc and once people get the idea the records tumble fairly quickly.
Seconded!Originally Posted by southernsoftie
I love this forum!!
Why simply say "well done old Japanese chap, for setting a new world-record", when you can start a bit of aggro?
Where would be the fun in that?
And a really nice guy too.. but he needs to loose that purple Goretex suit!
And what about the phenomenal Martin Rees - didn't he only start in his later 30's?
But that was when he was 56 (for which age the marathon WR is a short 2.27), and he's got another two years slowing down until he gets to 60...?
One of the reasons that older age-group records may be soft is that the age cohort who were part of the mass-participation running boom in the 1970s (say typical dates of birth of 1945-1950) are only now reaching their late fifties and early sixties.
Just because some has run 32 mins and so many seconds for a 10km doesn't mean that they would automatically be able to go under the record- these predict your time schedules are often as accurate as a dodgy back street medium.
The proof of the pudding is always in the eating.
Last edited by FellMonster; 07-02-2009 at 11:12 PM.
Rubbishing ideas is part of the exchanging of ideas- its all about opinions.
Respect should be given to a world record regardless of how 'soft' it is. I'm not at all bothered by the use of the word "soft".
I tend to agree with MUD'S comments, above.
I agree, it's based on the given person training for the specific goal. But I'm talking about a 58 year old who's still knocking out 70 miles a week consistently.
Fairplay to him, but this is where Christopher Leigh's comments apply.......the man in question could knock his balls in week after week doing how many miles he likes.........we all have limits, however--> and there's no guarantee even if he was doing 100+ miles a week plus all the right quality work that he'd be able to beat the record time in question.
Positive post SS. Aggro on here is negative, having read through all the posts on this thread i've picked up no tips on training, only tips on how to argue
Hills and Guinness!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote