ATHLETIC RECORDS

New Zealand Listener, Volume 2, Issue 37, 8 March 1940, Page 12

ATHLETIC RECORDS

The Editor, "The Listener." Sir,-I would like to take issue with your writer on athletics. (1) In this week’s article on records he states that the. world’s mile record is held by

Glen Cunningham at 4.04.4. He also lists this as an indoor record. Since when have indoor records been credited by the international authorities as world’s records? Running indoors (confined almost entirely to the United States), is a vastly different proposition from outdoor running. (2) Your writer, in his concluding paragraph, remarks that "four New Zealanders last Saturday strained themselves to attack mile times close to 4.20, while a dozen or more runners in other countries regularly beat 4.10. This statement is hardly fair. These four runners, to all intents and purposes, competed against the hands of the clock — not against athletes of world class .... the oye condition for fast mile times. (3) When matched against capone opposition, each of these runners had produced sterling efforts. At the time of the Empire Games only one other runner in the world could have beaten Matthews over the six mile distance — only two or three, possibly, could have beaten Boot over the half-mile. These men are great runners -- when the conditions for fast times are there, (4) And to make comparisons absolutely fair, would you be kind enough to publish the names of the "dozen or more runners in other countries who regularly beat 4.10 "’-outdoors? Yours. etc..

MARATHON

Wellington, February 22, 1940. (The author of the articles on athletics replies: (1) As ‘a purist, "‘ Marathon" is undeniably right. But it must be admitted that no one else in this world has run a faster mile than. Cunningham's on the indoor track. Officially, the record goes to Wooderson for his 4.06.6. (2) In the issues preceding and following The Listener of February 23, ‘* Marathon"’ will see that proper allowance was made for the special conditions of relay running. He may find that we have laboured this point enough to persuade him to excuse an hyperbole intended to lend point to the preceding paragraph. (3) In this case he is agreeing with The Listener, so The Listener does not need to agree with him. (4) For **a dozen or more,"’ read "‘ eight’’ whose names were published on the offending page. Eighteen times in four seasons indicated some regularity. The correspondent’s interest is appreciated).