Why did Peter Snell never break the 1500m world record?

not by a long way

that title wouda only been valid for 7y until Ryun annihilated his WRs

then arguments made for Keino because of epicness of mexico win, Bayi because of epic 1500WR, walker for taking 1.6s off mile wr, then morceli & now firmly hicham

elliott certainly shoud not be considered greatest 1500 runner of 20th century

impressive but other championships have been run faster, such as hicham's 3'27.65 !!!

because stakes are soo high nowdays that the races are invariably a crawl to the bell but with even 50+ laps !!! been recorded to win a global such as morceli in '91

then backs it up with 51+ in even faster 3'32+

how are morceli's 2 wins less impressive than elliot's ???

elliott only finished his 3'35.6 with a 55.6 !!!

how does that compare to a 50+ in a 3'34+ or 51+ in a 3'32+ ???

in an era of NO africans

where were calibre of Keino, Bayi, morceli, hicham, Bernie, Asbel, Silas, maloofi, etc he faced ???

yes

easily entitled to 1s/lap for a '70s track

& that has brought proper competition in, meaning africans

is this a joke ???

it was only strongest wr until Ryun annihilated them

elliott's initial 3'36.0 only took off 2.1s off jungwirth's 3'38.1wr

when he ran 3'35.6wr tthis brought difference to 2nd best of alltime to 2.5s, a differential Ryum matched but in a 3'33.1 race not a 3'35.6

no

no auto-time as mandatory from 1/1/81 & unknown track

hugely questionable circumstances & invalid for ratification

Cruz's 1'41.77 just 3y later on known track in widely televised meet with full auto-timing, off incredible runs of 2'14.0, virtually solo, & brace of 1'42-low/mids with wide running on bends in 1 in previous few days before was best 800 run of decade

The Overexplainer wrote:Ryun took a nice swing at it, but the WRs for 1500/Mile were never beaten by such big chunks again

no

Ryun also took 2.5s off wr but in 1 go NOT 2 & he ended up with far superior 3'33.1 to elliott's 3'35.6

Ryun took 2.3s off the mile wr but that was in much faster 3'51.3 v 3'54.5 & ended up with 3'51.1

Ryun's demolition of the 1500WR in 1 swoop to far quicker end time was far more impressive than elliott's 2 goes to make same differential

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:No Snell's 1962 800m on grass (and not a regular running track) of 1:44.3 is superior and equal to 3:33.56 for 1500m or 3:50.48 for the mile (actually this gap between 1500m & mile times is unrealistic more like 3:50.9) on official tables

no

you or no one knows how rock hard that grass track had been hammered to by repeated steam-rollering

even though it was illegal by nowdays rules of something like length of 385y !!!, the surface couda been waay harder than a '70s synthetic

energy return limit now for previous decades has been 65%

the hardness of that compacted grass couda been 70 or 80% making it hugely illegally hard by todays laws

& hardness = speed

Correction = | [2nd lap - 1st lap - 2] * (1/3) ↔a made up coefficient.

See ☞ 2nd lap⤴ - 1st lap ⤴ ↖ a minus two

Clearly ⤴your "correction" adjustment has the 2nd lap in front. But you are also using the following:

Correction = | [1st lap - 2nd lap - 2] * (1/3)

⤴notice the difference 😊

➡you need to clarify this 👍

⤴You conveniently forget that all Ryun's cinders tracks were rolled pre-race and were actually running tracks and who knows how hard the concrete base of those tracks were➡ hence Ryun never ran as fast a 1500m/mile on tartan tracks.

Interviewed by the Wanganui Chronicle after the unveiling, Snell said he was internationally known as a miler, but he had never reached his potential over the mile and the 800 metres was probably his best distance.[23] He said his greatest effort was the world 800m/880yard double record set on Lancaster Park a few days after his new mile record, with an 800m time that would have won the gold medal 46 years later at the Beijing Olympics.

Elliot's 3:35.6 is superior to Snell's mile WR of 3:54.1.

Elliot's 1500 was equivalent to a 3:52.5 or so mile.

Snell may not have been capable of a 3:35.6 or 3:52 mile

Elliott has always been above Ryun in any list or poll carried out by elite athletes, coaches, journalists, I've ever seen over past 40 years. In fact he's always been in the top 4 and in the IAAF one carried out in the late 80's, he was ranked NO. 1 all time. The reason being, apart from winning far more races than Ryun, he broke a WR in an Olympic gold winning performance. An Olympic gold is something Ryun failed to manage despite 3 attempts at doing so.

Ryun is never listed in top 5.

calculo wrote:

hugely questionable circumstances & invalid for ratification

Cruz's 1'41.77 just 3y later on known track in widely televised meet with full auto-timing, off incredible runs of 2'14.0, virtually solo, & brace of 1'42-low/mids with wide running on bends in 1 in previous few days before was best 800 run of decade

It clearly wasn't invalid for ratification because the IAAF ratified it. Duh!

The best run is the fastest. Cruz's 1:41.77 was run entirely on inside of lane 1, so no extra distance there, with pacing for an extra 100m+ than Coe had in his solo effort, and with Koskei right behind him until the finish.

The other slower efforts got him into the form to have that crack in Koln. You clearly don't understand how elite racers in athletics and cycling use build up races to reach a peak, do you? Try watching the TDF.

Coe had less pacing, no competition anywhere near him and ran a good 1.5 to 2m wide on 3rd bend. That makes it more like a 1:41.4/1:41.5 run without the extra distance. A time like that in early June with no competition is a superior performance to one run at the peak of season in late August with someone breathing down your neck all the way.

And as the poster of the race states, a very poor track with potholes on it.

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:Correction = | [2nd lap - 1st lap - 2] * (1/3) ↔a made up coefficient

is this a joke ???

can't you do basic math ???

it's simple enough to devise formula to offer 1st lap as 1st term but people always talk about -ve splits as exceptional runs, therfore 2nd lap was made 1st term

you are hugely outta your depth

Clearly ⤴your "correction" adjustment has the 2nd lap in front. But you are also using the following:

Correction = | [1st lap - 2nd lap - 2] * (1/3)

⤴notice the difference 😊

âž¡you need to clarify this

is this a joke ???

i never posted a formula with 1st lap as 1st term !!!

you clearly have no clue about modulus

you take the value not rearrange terms between the signs !

learn some basic math as this is embarrassing correcting your ignorance

so ?

who doesn't know that ???

i've watched decades of matches from there on satellite/regular tv

so ?

this was run in summer season when obviously significant enough period of dry weather

when ?

what has it to do with topic ?

is this a joke ???

you mention friction which is trivial as all non-synthetics have serious friction

what are you saying this guy offers on direct topic of energy return & kinetic energy ???

offer it

so ?

all running tracks have it

why waste my time ?

no

steam-rollered to death

flat track

friction is trivial concern

impress us with your energy return physics !

eh ?

dirt is cheap & easy to maintain that's why used worldwide for decades prior to '70s

if grass was to be used in olympics, it woud require every major track in the world at the time to have grass otherwide athletes woud complain about running on an alien surface

also heavy rain can turn grass into mulch when run on

do you do any basic thinking at all ?

is this a joke ???

grass surface can be rollered to death, far more than a meagre 65% energy return limit

have you never heard of cricket pitches ???

ever heard of WACA ???

ever heard of pitch pounded into virtual granite ???

laughable

you have demonstrated ridiculous lack of knowledge on sport, math & science

it's so bad you deserve an award !

if that is the case, i dread to think what -ve infinity yours has exceeded

yes, as were all serious meets, or do you think they ran on utter chewed up rubbish from get-go ?

however, Ryun was "highlight" guy of meets in '67/'68

if you knew anything about the sport, you woud know they put the draw-card's race at end of meet when track is chewed up & worst condition

with likely laws to hardness

no such limit to how hard a grass track couda been 'rollered to !

is this a joke ???

the base is huge number of inches below dirt

it can be as hard as you want, but if you got inches of dirt on top, it's hardness means nothing

let me explain basic physics to you

running on non-solid surface such as dirt means each step scatters dirt

that means the displaced dirt has acquired kinetic energy provided by runner

it means less potential energy returned to runner meaning less to convert to his kinetic energy

-> displaceable surface invariable slower than rolled grass or synthetic

is this a joke ???

you seem to know nothing about Ryun

the mononucleosis which finished him from '68 onwards

you are so ignorant not to know that he quit for a year after mexico & there was no reason to believe he was ever coming back

he did but although capable of occasional semi-brilliance, not anywhere near the coruscating incredibleness of '66/'67

here is brief clip of his 880y WR on hugely windy day as seen from pennants on infield, with lotta extra run on bends !!!, with prelim run coupla hours before !!!, all run when ill from bad tonsillitis that he shouda scratched !!!

Thanks for the clip! I was very familiar with Ryun's famously negative-splitting his 880 WR (53.3/51.6), but I had never seen footage. Much obliged!

NOTE for those who find Calculo's posts annoying: You don't have to read them, you know. (I usually don't.) You can just voop past them, the same way you do with the patronymics in a Russian novel.

like who ?

name specific serious guys

that looks good field of experts

offer yours ???

here is bannister acknowledging Ryun

offer counter opinion to bannister by one of that age/stature/intellect ???

that obviously joke

no one believed that when morceli came along, let alone hicham & even in '80s, Ryun had annihilated elliott's clockings for "proper" consideration as best miler ever

bannister thought so

this only shows how weak WRs generally were back then, albeit he broke his own

if he'd had pacers & likely run 3'32/3'33 on dirt in '58, he woudn't have broken it in '60

he only did so because of nonsense rules often enforced back then that pacers had to finish races or records not ratified

rules allowed him to run a WR in a games

is this a joke ???

- he was 17y in 1st go !!!

you call that serious chance ???

what finals did any other WR holders make at 17y ???

- ill in '68 but obliterated by a guy who put in a 2-lap solo 3'26/3'27 sea-level effort !!!

even faster reckoned by some :

- '72 tripped in prelim when in shape to annihilate even a finn who even with reindeer-piss fortification of 3'30/3'31 ability wouda been blown away in last lap on evidenced by Ryun's trials win

laughable

clearly by people who certainly aren't in bannister's league of analysis :

is this a joke ???

you have been told many times that full auto-timing required from 1/1/81

firenze run didn't, as expected mickey-mouse meet on mickey-mouse track bought/borrowed/begged crap auto-timing which was bust for coe's run

non-ratifibiable run

NO WR

travesty iaaf trashed their rules to ratify it !!!

utter disgrace iaaf !!!

is this a joke ???

it is not when auto-time required & coe's had none even on top of mickey-mouse unknown meet & track !!!

coe had to back it up on a known track in '81 & in numerous stand-alone 800s, he didn't even crack 1'45 !!!

firenze ratification was disgrace to the sport

on hugely known, 100% legit 8-lane track with full auto-timing

absolutely unimpeachable 1'41.77

is this a joke ???

absolute nonsense

what solo ???

coe drafted like a total limpet to the bell !!!

it was best drafting ever seen in a 800 until Wilson in zurich-'97, but that was in suicidal 48.3 !!! off even more suicidal 23.0 !!!!

Cruz never got anywhere close to the pacer to get drafting coe did

this was because absolutely destroyed by the 3 epic runs in the previous few days !!!

is this a joke ???

how was Sammy drafting him from behind ???

nothing on Cruz's face even indicated he knew what was happening behind !

is this a joke ???

his aim was to break it in zurich NOT brussels let alone koln !!!

the zurich promoter musta been wishing to smash Cruz in the mouth for running that virtually undrafted 2'14 just 2 days befor zurich !!!

it ruined Cruz's expected shot

i don't know how dumb Cruz was to have run that

he shouda skipped that french meet for fully rested for zurich

is this an utter total joke ???

explain to world when a targeted 800 or above WR was run with just 2 days rest from a huge effort ???

explain to universe that if coe had run virtually undrafted 2'14.0 then brace of 1'42.3/1'42.4 with wide running in 1 of those, in few days before firenze, that you believe he wouda run lot faster in firenze ???

how come coe never ran faster than 1'43.6 at culmination of not even quick prelims in a few days ???

explain to universe why coe quit edinburgh -'86 after running two 800s on same day ???

why did it make him quit instead of even faster than a fully rested run ???

is this a joke ???

what clocking they chasing ???

you know nothing about cycling

explain to universe why if guy is chasin 1 hour WR, they don't have 3 or 4 attempts in week before ???

how long had wiggins prepared for hour shot ???

how many goes did he have in week before ???

is this a joke ???

coe was stuck like a limpet to Billy to 400 !!!

Cruz was far too tired to get close, so got little drafting

is this a joke ???

what medal was Cruz risking losing ???

he was interested in running as quick as possible on those crumbled legs !!!

no interest in guy behind

is this a joke ???

it was ~ 0.75m from minor swerve around Billy

is this a joke ???

it was ~ 0.1s on unknown auto-timed run as no auto-timing present, all on an completely unknown mickey-mouse 6-lane track, all in era of full auto-time & "proper" meets like berlin/brussels/london/zurich/eugene/stockholm/helsinki, even oslo despite illegal 105/95 & 6 lanes, were known to even hardcore track fans back then

firenze wasn't

is this a joke ???

coe timed his 800 peak wrongly

it happened in june

he had numerous stand alone 800s after & never broke 1'45 !!!

any experienced observer back in '81 knew that coe had lost his 800 peak after firenze & was in better mile shape than 800 by end-season

coe peaked wrong for 800 in '81

it happened in june not july or august & never was going to happen in later months

is this a joke ???

it was a synthetic track NOT the chewed-up dirt track where Ryun ran his solo 3'51.1 stating he had to skip around avoiding potholes

coe's run in firenze certainly wasn't on pothole track

if that allusion is made, it is far more likely that track was mickey-mouse layed, probably only 398m length being the deficiency, not irregular surface...

Are you a joke?

When Coe run Firenze in early June, the season had only just started and there were no Championships that year. Nonetheless he was peaking, as almost every athlete does, every season, for a planned race against Ovett in late August and the European and World Cup 800. Suggesting he ran 3 fast races in lead up to Firenze is a moot point.

Cruz was training to peak in an Olympic final in August after 3 rounds. He would have been working on building the endurance to get through those rounds and be at a peak for the final. After that he had a good 2 weeks recovery, before taking on a similar set of 4 races but over a period twice as long. He would not have been competing on 'crumbling' legs in Koln, otherwise he would have been running faster in the earlier races when the pacing was spot on.

Coe's 1:43.6 at end of 4 hard races in LA included running 10m wide, which in itself brings the performance level down to 1:42.3, and that is not even taking into consideration the heat, smog, lack of drafting and clash of elbows with Jones twice in the home straight.

He was in 1:42 flat shape that day and if he could do that after 3 previous races in 3 days at age 27, having missed a large chunk of base training in winter, then there is no reason why a career peak Cruz at 21 couldn't manage to be at a peak in Koln after running 3 previous races in a longer time period.

Coe's WR in Firenze shows him wide of Konchellah, in outer lane 1 for 10 seconds from the bell. It wasn't a 'small swerve' and you don't just appear on inside of lane once you pass the athlete on the inside. Coe doesn't move in to inside of lane 1 until he is at least a stride past the pacer. 10sec represents 75m +, and between 1.5 and 2m extra run. As the previous poster correctly states, that is worth 0.2 sec +.

You clearly haven't run many competitive races if you think running solo from front with no competition in site is preferable to being in a race with other athletes breathing down your neck, in attempting a fast time. Of course Cruz would have been aware Koskei was 3m behind. He was pushed all the way, incentivised by knowing any let up may lead to him losing the race.

I've meet and talked to Cruz before and he is a great guy. In his mid forties he looked in better shape than 98% of westerners aged 25. However, his 1:41.77 was just about the perfect race in perfect conditions on a very fast track. The Kenyan that was 2nd (Kosgei ?) in that race never got close to that time ever again. There is not much extra fat to trim out of that performance.

There have only ever been three great 800m times in the last 55 years and what I would call true world records: Snell's 1:44.3 on grass (1962), Seb Coe's 1:42.33 (1979) pacing only until 400m (as should be the official rules) and a superb last lap, then Rudisha's monumental race in London 1:40.91 (2012).

Note: your equation is is still flawed.

I wonder how many times Snell ran a 1500m race in his career if he focused a lot more on the 800m and mile.

He didn't break it because he wasn't as good as Elliott never mind better.

Next question.

calculo wrote:

Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:Correction = | [2nd lap - 1st lap - 2] * (1/3) ↔a made up coefficient

is this a joke ???

can't you do basic math ???

it's simple enough to devise formula to offer 1st lap as 1st term but people always talk about -ve splits as exceptional runs, therfore 2nd lap was made 1st term

you are hugely outta your depth

Clearly ⤴your "correction" adjustment has the 2nd lap in front. But you are also using the following:

Correction = | [1st lap - 2nd lap - 2] * (1/3)

⤴notice the difference 😊

âž¡you need to clarify this

is this a joke ???

i never posted a formula with 1st lap as 1st term !!!

you clearly have no clue about modulus

you take the value not rearrange terms between the signs !

learn some basic math as this is embarrassing correcting your ignorance

Idiot on the first page you subtracted the -3.5 figure of Elliott's time, then later you also subtracted the positive figure off Kipketer's time off to get 140.36. Faulty math.

Letsrun needs a new, better mathematician, with better models with better reliability.