Thanks Bill for explaining.whp4 wrote:I suspect the point Tom is making is that contrary to the impression you might get if you didn't know otherwise, John didn't row his 1:22 when he was 60, but back when he was 56. I'd be surprised if he could accomplish it again in any sort of a verifiable fashion, but I doubt he'll try. If John did manage to do so after years of declining performance despite plenty of meters, I'd be impressed! - and would applaud him for finally adopting a more reasonable training planjohnnybike wrote:Much as I hate to support Johntomhz wrote: John's HM PB of 1:22:48.9 was done 3.5 years ago. He never did faster than 1:25 after that. Still respectable times ofcourse, but it is worth noting.
TomI really do not see what the point is you are making Tom. How current does a time have to be before you can mention it.
I did a 2K on Saturday in 7:12 which is 6 seconds slower than my PB set in Boston. Am I not allowed to mention that time?
If John did a 1:22 then very well done to him. I have not heard him say anything that means he should have qualified that with the year it was done

I think it is reasonable to mention when a PB is more than 1-2 years old. You post your PB to inform others about yourself. Mentioning the age of this PB adds some more information.
Tom