Current AR: Jim Spivey '97 @ 4:52.44
Who you got?
Current AR: Jim Spivey '97 @ 4:52.44
Who you got?
Webb obviously. He was better than both of those guys at any distance.
simple answer wrote:
Webb obviously. He was better than both of those guys at any distance.
No he wasn't. Jim Ryun would beat Steve Scott & Alan Webb at any race less than or equal to 1 mile.
I do agree that Alan was better than Steve Scott over every distance at their respective peaks.
As far as 2000m goes, I don't know. Jim ran an 8:25 2 mile on a dirt track as a 19 year old. Alan I think ran 8:11 or thereabouts, but on a synthetic track.
I think Jim would be able to sit on Alan and outkick him.
Komen '98
simple answer wrote:
Webb obviously. He was better than both of those guys at any distance.
"v." implies a race. Scott and Ryun were both much better racers than Webb.
reader of the forums 2.0 wrote:
No he wasn't. Jim Ryun would beat Steve Scott & Alan Webb at any race less than or equal to 1 mile.
This may or may not be true. From a PR perspective, Webb split 47.x in HS, 1:43, 3:30, 3:46, 8:11, 13:10, 27:34.
Objectively, Webb was faster than Ryun at every distance except maybe 400m. Better, is subjective and up for debate.
I have had the privilege of seeing all three of them race and raced against Scott, although I was only an average mid-pack college miler and way past my college best when I raced against Scott. I would put Ryun in a class with El G as the greatest milers I have ever seen, and I don't think El G was clean. Ryun would beat Scott 8 out of 10 races if they had raced and Scott would beat Webb 9 out of 10 races. Webb had a couple of fabulous races, but Ryun and Scott were consistent over long stretches.
Spivey has the American record, the others don't.
Slow pace, Ryun. Fast pace, Scott. With three people like that in the race it would be tactical -- no one would want to lead till the last lap.
reader of the forums 2.0 wrote:
I do agree that Alan was better than Steve Scott over every distance at their respective peaks
maybe no
Scott was in worst in 3'46-flat shape in '83, if not for huge kick-into-wide-lane at start & wide-bend running + jog to bell :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEwMeRek8b4Ryun did not win in Mexico City, but he did not run like a clown either. He was never the same after that.
Scott did not use good tactics in LA but was a great racer. Look at the number of sub 3:50s he did, and number of major wins (Oslo etc.). His best 2K is 2 sec slower than Spivey's.
Webb ran some great times but did not have that many great races against the best.
Scott. I feel like Ryun is consistently over estimated. Liquori beat him and no one says Marty was invincible
Flo'da boy wrote:
Scott. I feel like Ryun is consistently over estimated. Liquori beat him and no one says Marty was invincible
No one says Liquori is invincible because he beat a '71 Ryun, not a '67 Ryun.
Woah chill now! wrote:
Ryun did not win in Mexico City, but he did not run like a clown either. He was never the same after that.
Scott did not use good tactics in LA but was a great racer. Look at the number of sub 3:50s he did, and number of major wins (Oslo etc.). His best 2K is 2 sec slower than Spivey's.
Webb ran some great times but did not have that many great races against the best.
Multiple national champion, including over a prime Lagat. Beat Ritz at 10K his only time racing Ritz that distance & same with beating N.Symmonds at 800M his only time racing him that distance. Won GP's- winning means he wasn't time-trialing.
reader of the forums 2.0 wrote:
Flo'da boy wrote:Scott. I feel like Ryun is consistently over estimated. Liquori beat him and no one says Marty was invincible
No one says Liquori is invincible because he beat a '71 Ryun, not a '67 Ryun.
Liquori also beat Ryun at the 1969 NCAA.
Les wrote:
reader of the forums 2.0 wrote:No one says Liquori is invincible because he beat a '71 Ryun, not a '67 Ryun.
Liquori also beat Ryun at the 1969 NCAA.
Which again, is not a '67 Ryun.
ttc wrote:
Woah chill now! wrote:Ryun did not win in Mexico City, but he did not run like a clown either. He was never the same after that.
Scott did not use good tactics in LA but was a great racer. Look at the number of sub 3:50s he did, and number of major wins (Oslo etc.). His best 2K is 2 sec slower than Spivey's.
Webb ran some great times but did not have that many great races against the best.
Multiple national champion, including over a prime Lagat. Beat Ritz at 10K his only time racing Ritz that distance & same with beating N.Symmonds at 800M his only time racing him that distance. Won GP's- winning means he wasn't time-trialing.
Scott had several top 10s at USA XCs. Lagat has a bunch of medals and faster at 1500, 3K, 5K than Webb.
Look back at what Scott and Ryun, and Liquori (plus Spivey and Lagat) did compared to Webb over say the peak three or four years of their career (need not be consecutive). Major meets (e.g., Diamond League or equivalent), national championships, WC/Olys, fast times, and world rankings.
Plus look at their bests for 2K.
Don't know, but it would be a helluva' race.
Galen Rupp
The answer is obvious:
Webb would be so amped for that kind of race that he'd throw in an insane 80m turbo sprint burst starting at about 600m, ...then be gassed and outkicked by both. Scott FTW.