What is the King of Distances?

--amadeus--

Just to get a bit of debate going... What is the King of Distances? Not your favourite distance, or the one you are best at or even that you like to watch the most. Just which one is the best?

For me it can only be the marathon.

No other distance has the same mystique, from the myth of Pheidippides dropping dead after announcing "We have won!" through to Spiridon Louis, the Greek winner of the first ever Olympic marathon who had the Greek Crown Prince run with him across the line before carrying him in triumph to the Royal Box, on to the legend of Dorando Pietri in in the 1908 Olympics so exhausted that he was part carried and part dragged over the finish line and even to Kathrine Switzer the first woman to run the Boston Marathon despite a race official attempting to tackle her mid event while yelling "Get the hell out of my race!". Add to this the tradition of races like Boston stretching back unbroken over 100 years and the idiosyncrasy of those extra 200m (all for royalty!) and you have a draw unmatched in racing.

I'm not a watcher of athletics and to a casual observer elite marathons tend to be "a Kenyan in the lead, followed by a Kenyan and a Kenyan in third", rarely thrilling. And they make it look so easy. But the huge prize money now on offer in big city road racing is drawing the absolute cream of the racing crop to the marathon. And how that competition is driving performances! The world record fell 5 times in the 80's and just twice in the 90's. It's now fallen 3 times in the last 5 years and I expect it to fall again this year. Heavyweight boxing in the 70's had Ali, Frazer, Foreman. Middleweight boxing in the 80s had Robinson, Hagler, Hearns and Durant. You may not know the names of the top marathoners now but in time thier exploits today will be seen the way Coe, Ovett and Cram are, as a time when the very best were pushing the limits of the possible. Where once it was wondered if any man could run a mile in under 4 minutes we now have men who run 26.2 at an average pace close to 4:40. And there seem to have been very few doping scandals, unlike the shorter distances.

But it's an inclusive race - I will never play on the same pitch as Steven Gerrard or race against Vettel but when Haile broke the World Record in Berlin for the first time I was there. Not in the stands watching but starting from the same gun, running the same route and in the same race (even if a long, long way back!) And anyone can do it no matter how old, fat or unfit if you give yourself 6 months you can complete a marathon.

Not that it's easy - do enough of them and at some point, probably between miles 18 - 24 you will have to look deep inside yourself and decide who you want to be, a quitter or a doer. It's hard not to learn something about yourself when you commit to covering that sort of distance on foot as fast as you can. It may be accessible but it will never be easy, not if you are doing it right!

So what could possibly match the allure of the marathon? The bling bling glamour of the "fastest men on earth" in the 100m? Hah - prima donnas every one. The easy access for all 10k? But where is the challenge, the history? The lung busting 400m? When has anyone ever said "oh what a challenge, it will take a real 400m effort to do this!"

Ladies and gentlemen, I commend to you the Marathon, the King of Distances!


*I've been banned from running till my little niggle clears up. This may be my only outlet...

bart simpson

to participate in, yeah the marathon
to watch on tv 1500m would be my favourite

Peterx

I didn't even read all of your post, it was too long - just like the marathon!:D

1500m has it all, and it's over in about the same time as your favourite song. Classic distance, tactics, effort, drama, time to take it in, time to get out running yourself..

After reading a little bit about ATP and energy systems and all that I'd have to say I have huge respect for the pain required to be a good 400/800m runner.

BeepBeep67

Is it not the kilomarathon?

menoscemo

In terms of fame, money and Publicity, it has to be the 100m.

It's the only one I remember getting excited watching as a kid.

BobMac104

20 yard egg and spoon?

I think the 1500m is amazing alright . Long enough to savour but short enough to keep your attention from start to finish.

But the achievements of elite marathon runners are just insane and almost unbelievable.

gerard65

The mile - the perfect distance. Four laps, easy to calculate times. Short enough to maintain spectator interest, long enough to challange physically. Speed, strenght, endurance - it has it all.

TheRoadRunner

60 metre dash. Lycra, bling, attitude and just over 6 seconds of fun.

Sounds like my typical Saturday night

thirstywork2

1500m

Pisco Sour

For the mass participation runner it would be the marathon but in terms of elite athletics as a spectacle on TV these days it would have to be the 100 metres. Even before Bolt it has long now been the event that gathers the most hype and publicity (I actually much prefer watching a good 400m race than the 100m but no other event sucks in the casual fan like the 100m).

In times gone by the Mile was the event with the most mystique. The event had legendary status due to the breaking of the 4 minute barrier by Bannister and then legends like Landy, Elliot, Baye, Walker, Coe, Cram, Ovett, Morcelli and El G bringing the record down and down. But in recent years the event has lost a lot of interest. They don’t run it much anymore and the record is now out of reach it seems (for whatever reason), which is probably part of the reason.

Underrated distance for me is the 400m Hurdles. The perfect combination of speed, endurance and technique. Always great to watch.

Dan man

In terms of viewing pleasure, the 800m is always a great event. Short enough to keep the casual fan interested and long enough for tension to build and build. It is always so unpredictable and tactics more often than not are turfed out the window. Really looking forward to the Olympic 800m, both men and women:
can Rudisha make his dominance count on the biggest stage of all, or will he do a Kipketer?....will former world and Olympic champs Borzakovskiy, Yego, Bungei, Malaudzi get a look in, and maybe Kaki will finally get it right. Will be really one to watch, especially with the front-running tactics Rudisha tends to go for, it opens up the opportunity that he might just take it out too fast. And if he is too slow, despite his lightning finishing speed, Borzakovskiy is always a real danger.
Savinova vs Caster Semenya vs home-girl Jenny Meadows vs Janeth Jepkosgei and Pamela Jelimo in the women's.....absolutely mouth-watering prospect.

AntiVirus

5000 metre for me, perfect to sit down and watch with a cup of coffee but I love watching the relays too.

MrCreosote

1500m is the best to watch. Long enough to have tactical swings, but short enough that it doesn't outstay its welcome.

Personally I really dislike the 800m, it always seems to finish just as its getting interesting.

For participation- half marathon is the most enjoyable distance.

thirtyfoot

1500 or mile. For drama and anticipation while the race is on, there is none better. A good mile watched in the flesh is unbeatable especially at the bell when all hell is breaking loose.

TheRoadRunner

A 52 mile ultra marathon. For all the reasons amadeus listed * 2

Pisco Sour

TheRoadRunner wrote: »

A 52 mile ultra marathon. For all the reasons amadeus listed * 2

Dont remember any Kenyans doing ultras

RayCun

The marathon is too long - takes too long to watch, and the field spreads out so much that most races don't have close finishes, and you don't get many dramatic all-out sprints over the last hundred metres.

ss43

100m or 1500m. Grew up loving the 1500m so that's probably why it's there. A lot of the races are boring now though. Pacers go out at a pace too fast for everyone in the field a lot of the time so you have a single file procession and you don't even get a good time out of it. No star in the event since 2004 either takes from it at the moment.

100m has it all. It's fast and powerful. You've got the tactics. Who wrecks themselves getting a great start (Shelly-Ann Fraser in this year's world championships)? Who holds everything together even though they're not in the position they'd like (Maurice Greene against Bruny Surin in Seville in 1999) or who crumbles (Asafa Powell)? Who dies at the end cos they've over-estimated themselves. Technically, it's the best to watch also - at the top level, trying to 'guts' it out won't beat a technically proficient job. And all that in under 10 seconds!

Also if you were to do any of these events. I'd imagine the 100m feels the best - just feeling all that power must be awesome. Although you've wrecked yourself it's not the same kind of fatigue from the longer races so you can still celebrate with plenty of energy.

Marathon is great but as a spectator you have to invest a lot more for a return that isn't any better.

I think the best one to boast about is the 100m also. 100m world record would be the best to have.

TFBubendorfer

RayCun wrote: »

The marathon is too long - takes too long to watch, and the field spreads out so much that most races don't have close finishes, and you don't get many dramatic all-out sprints over the last hundred metres.

I have seen several sprint finishes in the marathon.

Tergat/Ramallah in NYC 2005, Martin Lel on a couple of occasions (London, NYC), Salazar and Beardsley's duel in then sun in Boston 1982 (ok, didn't see that live), Wanjiru/Kebede Chicago 2010, Radcliffe/Wami NYC 2008 quite a few more.

digger2d2

menoscemo wrote: »

In terms of fame, money and Publicity, it has to be the 100m

It's the only one I remember getting excited watching as a kid.

Is that because you had the hots for Carl Lewis?

RayCun

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I have seen several sprint finishes in the marathon.

Tergat/Ramallah in NYC 2005, Martin Lel on a couple of occasions (London, NYC), Salazar and Beardsley's duel in then sun in Boston 1982 (ok, didn't see that live), Wanjiru/Kebede Chicago 2010, Radcliffe/Wami NYC 2008 quite a few more.

Sure, but that's over how many races? In most races, there's quite a gap between first and second. There is drama in the marathon all right, people making breaks, people falling back, but spread out over two hours.

The 100m is too short for drama. They start, they finish, it's done. You can't get an early leader who falls off the pace but then claws their way back but is it too late? because the race is finished faster than this sentence.

So something like 1500/mile - long enough for race tactics to be important (and visible to the spectators), and short enough for the result to be in doubt to the end in most races.

ss43

RayCun wrote: »

The 100m is too short for drama. They start, they finish, it's done. You can't get an early leader who falls off the pace but then claws their way back but is it too late? because the race is finished faster than this sentence.

There's no room for error which is another great thing about the 100m. In the 1500m world championships in Daegu Asbel Kiprop got himself into a terrible position but got very lucky when Silas Kiplagat left a gap for him. A mistake such as that in the 100m would never be recovered from.

belcarra

This was pretty good to say the least!!

RayCun

ss43 wrote: »

There's no room for error which is another great thing about the 100m. In the 1500m world championships in Daegu Asbel Kiprop got himself into a terrible position but got very lucky when Silas Kiplagat left a gap for him. A mistake such as that in the 100m would never be recovered from.

Yeah, but we differ over whether that's a good or bad thing

TFBubendorfer

RayCun wrote: »

The 100m is too short for drama. They start, they finish, it's done

The drama comes in the drugs testing room

wgtomblin

For me , it's the mile, 'the perfect distance'... but these days I'll settle for the 1500m.

I enjoy watching marathons on TV, but they rarely provide the kind of drama that a mile race can.

Clearlier

There's rarely one worth watching but a good 4*400m relay can be fascinating. Start with the fact that the 400m is so tough and then throw in the extra tactical element that a relay brings and you can see some spectacular racing.

smmoore79

From a viewing point of view its got to be the 10km for me. Ya really get yer monies worth and its not too long! And if ya get a finish like this, nothing beats it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxuqiM7eW8Q

Joeface

Clearlier ,you are kinda on to something there, but 4x100m really should have it all. its biggest let down is the change over in most cases is awful. It doesn't even look properly rehearsed . An average time with good change overs can always compete.

so I'm left with 100m or 1500m events as been the best.
Haven't liked the 100m since Donavan bailey's time(damn I'm getting old) . while bolt is impressive to watch there just seems to be no challenge and it takes from the event.

so 1500m for me . always love it with 300m left to go. The change up in stride and speed some of these guys/ladies have would put most sprinters to shame. awesome

Marathon Just to long . epic for the athlete not for a viewer

Brianderunner

Clearlier wrote: »

There's rarely one worth watching but a good 4*400m relay can be fascinating. Start with the fact that the 400m is so tough and then throw in the extra tactical element that a relay brings and you can see some spectacular racing.

+1, nothing in athletics compares to the 4 x 400m relays when you're in the stadium. The USA vs France duel in 2003 in Paris was simply amazing.

but to be fair the answer to the OP's question has to be the 100m in the olympics. Its the one event that makes the whole world sit up and take notice. It's right up there with the world cup final in that regard. It may be over in less than 10 secs, fair enough, but the title of the fastest man in the world is something everyone appreciates and understands.

menoscemo

digger2d2 wrote: »

Is that because you had the hots for Carl Lewis?

I was more of a Merlene Ottey fan

jester1980

Have to go with the marathon myself, only got into running last year but one of the reasons was to eventually be able to conquer a marathon.

After reading Amadeus's first post i wanted to stick the runners on and go out and run a marathon today.

Condo131

gerard65 wrote: »

The mile - the perfect distance. Four laps, easy to calculate times. Short enough to maintain spectator interest, long enough to challange physically. Speed, strenght, endurance - it has it all.

Correction: Four laps and 9.344 metres. Easy to calculate - rule of thumb: take off 1.5 to 2 secs and then divide by 4. :rolleyes::D

As to the original question: They're all up there, but, for me, the Championship 1500m is the supreme.

Disclaimer I was NEVER a (real) 1500m runner, though I have done several.

shels4ever

800m for me, used to love and hate running these races, I don't think any event I've done hurts as bad while feeling so good.

walshb

I think the ultimate distance event that combines speed and speed endurance must be the mile or metric mile. It is also the blue riband event.

hunnymonster

I've married one man for life, chosen a singular career path etc but please don't ask me to commit to just one distance :-)


My personal soft spot as a spectator is the 1500 m, sentimental reasons as I remember being allowed stay up late to watch the grand prix races with my dad as a young kid.

As a runner, I love the marathon of an ironman or any marathon really, One distance that can be anything from the razzmatazz of Boston to the beauty/camaraderie of Connemara. so versatile, so much fun.

ManFromAtlantis

think the 1500m. prob cos of the good races and rivalry in the 80's.

KentuckyPete

Always been the 1,500m for me - with the 5,000 /10,000 as second/ third faves

Since I got into running a few years ago it's the marathon from a participation point of view.

However, ask me which athletics gold I'd like to see Ireland win in London and again it's definitely the 1,500m.

Go on Len.