Seventy years ago today Sir Roger Bannister apparently became the first runner to break the mythical four-minute barrier for a mile. Here is the famous photograph as he breasted the finishing tape.
Three minutes 59.4 seconds was the official time. I’ve never heard that anyone queried whether or not that time was accurate. Look at the picture. It shows Bannister just as he breasts the tape. The nearest chap to the white post looks like he’s a timekeeper. Why is he looking at his watch rather than concentrating on the finishing tape? Could it be that he’s already stopped his watch and is now already looking at the time it shows? Maybe he had a side bet that the four minutes would be beaten.
I’ve no idea of the standards and protocols which were adhered to seventy years ago. Maybe they were similar to today but the chap in the photo can’t be following those protocols. Today, at any athletics meeting of a good standard, electronic timing is used. Invariably however, manual timekeepers are also present in case of mishap with the technology. A good, trained timekeeper is quite likely to come within 0.1sec of the electronic time in most cases – they can get pretty grumpy and annoyed if they don’t. Now, timekeepers are trained to start their stopwatches on seeing the smoke/flash from the starting pistol. Of course it takes time for that signal to reach the timekeeper, more time for the brain to register this and to send a signal down to the hand holding the watch, then a final delay as the button is pressed and the watch begins its timing.
This overall delay will typically be 0.2 – 0.3 seconds, which we call ‘reaction time’. To allow for this reaction time as the athlete finishes, the timekeeper must delay depressing the finish button by the same amount of time. The athlete can be well past the finish line by the time the watch stops and the time is registered. This takes a lot of practice.
Now tell me, does it look to you that the gentleman with the watch is interested in allowing for any reaction time? He’s not even looking at the athlete. If he’s stopped his watch at 3:59.4 the proper time will be pretty close to four minutes.
But wait, maybe he’s not the official timekeeper but a bloke who’s just wandered in. Who are all those people anyway? The bloke sitting down looks like he’s got a toothache, what’s he doing? I don’t know about 1954 but nowadays only officials will be allowed inside the track and there will be a bank of place judges in line with the finish. On the outside of the track will be the official timekeepers. Maybe the proper timekeepers are there, taking proper times. But for me I reckon the race ought to be re-run.
Assuming Sir Roger’s time stands, was it really the first four-minute mile anyway just because the cameras were there, it was Britain who ruled the world and the runners were a bunch of posh students from Oxford University? Wikipedia gives us other contenders:
James Parrott on 9th May 1770 ran a measured mile along Old Street, London finishing at Shoreditch Church inside four minutes.
A chap called Weller ran one mile along Banbury Road, Oxford in 3:58 on 10th October 1796.
Big Hawk Chief, a Pawnee tribesman, ran a mile in 3:58 in Wyoming in late 1876 or early 1877.
Glenn Cunningham was reckoned to have run a four-minute mile in training in the USA in the 1920s.
But I know from experience (being a club statistician) that old, dubious records can only ever be overturned if sufficient evidence comes to light. For example, the Jersey Island senior long jump record dates from 1949 when it was set by Harry Askew who taught for a year or two here at Victoria College and who had represented England in the 1948 Olympics. There are periodic calls for the record to be expunged, lack of a wind-speed reading being cited. But for now, Harry’s record stands firm as will Sir Roger’s.