No More World Records
According to French scientists, no one will ever again set a world record. According to me, that’s great for the sport. Okay, so French scientists didn’t say it quite like that and I don’t mean exactly what I said, but I needed to get your attention. This is extremely important.
I was recently browsing my website of choice - aljazeera.net - when I came across this article. It states:
Experts from France’s Institute for Biomedical and Epidemiological Research in Sport (IRMES) examined 3,263 world records in track and field, swimming, cycling, speed skating and weightlifting. The records spanned from 1896, when the modern Olympics was revived and accurate timekeeping began, through to 2007. From 1896 to 1968, excluding the two World Wars, when real international competition was impossible, world records were frequently and substantially smashed.
However after 1968, the pace of record-breaking slowed and, in some cases, stopped completely. As an example, Florence Griffith-Joyner’s 10.49 seconds for the women’s 100-metres, set in 1988, remains unchallenged to this day.
In other words, world records will continue to be broken, but by smaller and smaller increments. However, forty years from now, the paper suggests, we will hit a world record ceiling, a ceiling that will require us to change the way we measure times if we want to continue seeing world records.
“It means we can change the unit of measurement to take this into account, for instance using thousandths of a second for the 100m, hundredths of a second for the marathon, or grams for weightlifting, but then we might have to wait for half a century for the record to be broken,” the study’s author suggests.
Now here’s where it gets interesting. I hope you’ve been paying attention.
Some followers of our sport think that world records are required to attract fans. No world records, no fans. If we buy into that mantra, and believe this study, our sport is doomed, right?
Wrong!
This is great for the sport. Rabbited world-record attempts are boring. Using pacesetters kills the drama. Putting Defar and Dibaba in separate races at the same meet (a 3k and 2-mile nonetheless) is downright baffling.
Forget about bustin’ through the world record ceiling, let’s all congregate there and dance with Lionel. (I hope at least one person gets the Dancin’ on the Ceiling reference…)
Race directors, here is my plea: don’t build your race around record breaking attempts. Build your race with great competition and great competitors. If the chance for a world record presents itself, take it. But if you always take the world record route, you may find yourself all alone, with one athlete trying to run one one-thousandths of a second faster than the previous record.
That’s no way to attract new fans. People don’t go to a NASCAR race hoping for a track record; they go for the crashes and sheer insanity. People don’t go to an NFL game hoping for a QB rating record; they go for the big hits and circus catches. People don’t go to a MLB game hoping for a slugging percentage record; they go for strikeouts and home runs.
The way our sport is presented in person, on television, and to the media needs to change. If that wasn’t obvious already, this study provides additional evidence.
My only question is: is anybody listening?
Last 5 posts by Matt Taylor- The Toni & Matt Show #17 - Vin Lananna - July 9th, 2008
- LetsRun.com Eugene '08 - June 30th, 2008
- The Toni & Matt Show #16 - June 17th, 2008
- USOC to USATF: Change Now! - June 14th, 2008
- The Toni & Matt Show #15 - June 11th, 2008
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:30 pm |
Or, meet directors could institute the 103 meter dash, the 4700 meter run etc. to create a whole new schedule of world records which would take years to max out. It’s unlimited in its extension. We must break free of these anachronistic, old world distances which have become exhausted. Open the sport to a new series of test distances, and open a new chapter in the record books.
February 22nd, 2008 at 5:59 pm |
Did you know that the atomic clock is being improved? The old one that was accurate to 80 million (or was it billion) years is going to be replaced with one accurate to 200 million/billion years. Apparently the old one wasn’t getting the job done.
My point is, the new clock will “tick” trillions (yes, that’s right) trillions of times per second. Now we can really get accurate times.
But, is that what we want? I watched two high school girls the other day fighting to make the finals of the 55M dash. They tied for 8th with times identical to the 100th of a second. Since only 8 runners fit into the finals, one had to be eliminated. How? The officials went to the 1,000th of a second. Runner A beat runner B by .002!Runner B goes home because she’s .002 worse than runner A.
Now the race I want to see isn’t the finals. I want to see those two go at it again! And how about the parents. I’d be ready to hand my daughter a lacrosse stick and tell her to use her speed in a sport where some old guy isn’t sitting there with a slide rule picking nits.
If you can’t tell with the naked eye call it a tie. Run it again. Get people rooting for head-to-head competition. Prove superiority to us with feet - not pictures. Don’t have us wait for some guy with a computer to tell us.
February 22nd, 2008 at 8:15 pm |
Very well-said. Geb’s 2:04:26 was probably very boring to watch, I can’t imagine how that’s interesting. The 2007 New York marathon was riveting from start to finish.
February 23rd, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
I agree with, Dwight. Seeing a run-off in that situation would have been AWESOME to watch. That’s a great idea.
I understand that there is always a risk of injury in the sprints, but how cool would it be to see a tournament of, say, 16 sprinters running the 100 head-to-head over the course of the day - suddenly their ability to hold up over the rounds is front and center for the fans, and the crowd can track the road to the final showdown very easily, with anticipation building with each round.
February 25th, 2008 at 9:13 am |
Apparently Toni didn’t read the article at all and if he did, then he didn’t take much from it. Anyway, I agree 100% with the article and with Dwight. The sport is about the competition and on any given day any given person can win. I really enjoy this website and what it is attempting to do for the sport. Keep it up.