On Track #1: Bill Bowerman (and Frank Shorter, Too)

Bill Bowerman, the man who deserves much credit for America's elite track success in the 1960s and '70s, is also responsible for its subsequent decline in the 1980s and later. Yes, I am putting some blame on the single most legendary American track coach. Here me out:

If you're reading this blog, I'm assuming you're coming in with some basic knowledge about the legacy of Bowerman and his storied U. of Oregon Ducks teams. (And if you want more info, Bowerman and the Men of Oregon is a great read) But there's more to his story than track and field.

In the 1960s, he visited New Zealand coach Arthur Lydiard (proponent of high-mileage training and coach to several world record holders), where they showed him this new craze called jogging. Basically, Lydiard took the principles of training for elite athletes and applied it to everyday people, establishing jogging clubs as a means to general physical fitness for anyone. After stumbling through several run with the clubs in New Zealand, Bowerman brought the idea back to the States, publishing the aptly-titled book, Jogging, which sold more than a million copies.

This book, published in 1966, is widely accepted as helping to kick-start the jogging boom in America...and it's still booming.

Of course, it took more than one book to get the masses out running. Enter Frank Shorter.

Prior to the 1970s, runners were viewed as masochistic nutjobs. People didn't run for fun or for exercise like they do today. Recreational running did not exist, and athletes who ran were seen as just...odd. That is, until Shorter won the 1972 Olympic marathon...and then came in 2nd four years later (to a guy that was doping...but that's another issue).

The marathon's different from your typical track race in that it's a) on the road, and b) not all that fast. Well, relatively not all that fast - a 2:10 is blazing for 26.2 miles, but just seeing one of those miles in 5 minutes really doesn't seem that fast.

There are many who have argued that an American winning these glamorous races prompted something in the popular consciousness to say, Hey, I can do that too. Of course, very few actually could...but many (many many) tried.

Frank Shorter became the ideal for these new rec runners cropping up throughout America. In a sense, he validated Bowerman's jogging ideas. In this following years, exercise scientists around the country expounded the health benefits of running, even going so far as to claim that regular jogging could reverse heart disease and was guaranteed to ward off heart attacks. (Alberto Salazar talks a lot about this - among other stuff - in his memoir 14 Minutes, another interesting read.)

Frank Shorter

So what's all this stuff about the creation of jogging and rec running culture got to do with the decline in popularity of elite running?

Well, here's my argument: running isn't popular precisely because it's so popular.

Wait...what?

Part of the reason that competitive running isn't popular like other sports is the fact that everyone runs - or, at least jogs. If everyone can do it, what makes those athletes so special? Football is exciting because the masses can't catch a Peyton Manning pass or tackle Adrien Peterson. What those athletes do on the football is unique, and we watch in awe of their physical gift. Likewise for any other sport, really.

The same doesn't hold true for running, though. Because, well, anyone can do it. And everyone does. So what makes these supposed "athletes" any more unique than the rest of us? We're all doing the same thing. (Which leads us to the problem of perception...but again, that's a later story)

Recently, UnderArmour adopted an "Athletes Run" ad campaign. This is the sort of thing that diminishes the efforts of elite runners. Athletes run...but is a runner an athlete? It seems not; if everyone does it then there's nothing unique about it, nothing that makes it it's own sport.

Take a look at the major marathons: Chicago has 45,000+ people, but maybe a few hundred are actually racing. The rest are just jogging. The problem is, those who are racing and those who are jogging share the same starting line. In another sport, that'd be like your after-work softball league trying to join the MLB.

When everyone gets lumped in together, it diminishes the efforts and accomplishments of the elite runners. I'm not trying to say that jogging is a bad thing; just that there has to be separation - both physical and cultural - between those who are rec running and those who are competitively running. It's that separation between the two that is lacking, and is part of the reason elite track and field isn't popular.

Because running is so popular - because anyone and everyone can do it - then it is not viewed on the same athletic level as any other sport that only the talented can do.

Coming Next Week: Girls and Boys Together