• jama211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Hey, but if you had his shoes, he’d only have run a 5k 1.9x as fast as your best times!

        • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 days ago

          How does that happen? Wouldnt the 1st place person get the world record since they won??

          How can the winner of the race have a worse time than someone who didnt get first place/win the race?

          • Pommes_für_dein_Balg@feddit.orgOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            The first three runners were all faster than the previous world record.
            So the third place finisher broke the previous world record, but the other two in front of him broke it even harder.

            • cheese_greater@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 days ago

              But how could he have made history if the other front runners already smashed that? This seems a little weird phrasing

              • jama211@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 days ago

                You’re taking this a little too literally. The point is you run a sub 2 marathon and only don’t get the record because someone broke the record literally 20 something seconds before you reached the line. That’s gotta hurt somehow