All-time Time Machine Championship Results - Women's 400m

what is this and in what world is SRR better than Perec?

blasphemy wrote:

what is this and in what world is SRR better than Perec?

A case can me made for Perec to beat SRR, and even sneak into the medals. Remeber, these results take EVERYTHING into account - speed, endurance, start, big race mentality, heart, potential drug use, equipment, etc. When it came down to it in this race, SRR got 4th with all things considered. I could definitely see Perec sometimes also getting out of the time machine and winning a medal, but in this case, with EVERYTHING considered, she got 5th. Remember, these are the best 400m women of all time - 5th is VERY elite!

formerbosox9yo wrote:

If all athletes in history took a time machine to compete in one championship track meet, these would be the results (limited to 3 athletes per country):

Women's 400m Final:

1 Marita Koch GDR 48.08

2 Jarmila Kratochvilova CZE 48.54

3 Olga Bryzgnina UKR 48.69

4 Sanya Richards-Ross USA 48.87

5 Marie-Jose Perec FRA 48.91

6 Tatana Kocembova CZE 49.01

7 Ana Guevara MEX 49.15

8 Cathy Freeman AUS 49.21

Previous Event Medalists:

Mens:

100m: G - Usain Bolt JAM; S - Tyson Gay USA; B - Yohan Blake JAM

200m: G - Usain Bolt JAM; S - Yohan Blake JAM; B - Michael Johnson USA

400m: G - Michael Johnson USA; S - Wayde van Niekerk RSA; B - Jeremy Wariner USA

Womens:

100m: G - Florence Griffith-Joyner USA; S - Marion Jones USA; B - Carmelita Jeter USA

200m: G - Florence Griffith-Joyner USA; S - Merlene Ottey JAM; B - Marita Koch GDR

I saw your other thread like this also and ivet just one question, why are the times so slow?

Van Niekerk ran his world record in a major champs, as did Johnson, Rudisha, Bolt and others.

Why do you think all the best women all time would turn up in peak shape to a competition and run slower than the ability they actually showed they are capable of despite being pushed by the best that ever existed?

Perec ran 48.2 against Freeman who ran 48.6 in the 1996 world champs final but you think they'd run 48.9 and 49.2 if they had a rematch, adding in all the other best women of all time?

I just don't get it

I'm taking EVERYTHING into account, including weighing factors that may slow their time relative to their PR - potential drug use, what track was their PR on (did EVERYONE run fast on it?), how much would they be effected by a lot more competitive quarterfinals, semifinals etc. I'm not expecting everyone to be at peak form when everything is treated equally, some may be real close to their pr (or even better depending on track, wind, altitude) and some further from it.

If you are taking into account drug use, none of these women would be in the top 50.

OKOKKOKOKOKOK wrote:

If you are taking into account drug use, none of these women would be in the top 50.

Just because the best runner in history used PEDs doesn't mean they aren't still the best runner in the world. Sometimes it just means 2nd would have been closer to them, all things being equal.

formerbosox9yo wrote:

OKOKKOKOKOKOK wrote:

If you are taking into account drug use, none of these women would be in the top 50.

Just because the best runner in history used PEDs doesn't mean they aren't still the best runner in the world. Sometimes it just means 2nd would have been closer to them, all things being equal.

I'm not talking about the lead doper, but about the whole lot. No drugs, they disappear entirely.

OKOKKOKOKOKOK wrote:

formerbosox9yo wrote:

Just because the best runner in history used PEDs doesn't mean they aren't still the best runner in the world. Sometimes it just means 2nd would have been closer to them, all things being equal.

I'm not talking about the lead doper, but about the whole lot. No drugs, they disappear entirely.

No they don't. Their performances may be not as good but they wouldn't vanish.

formerbosox9yo wrote:

OKOKKOKOKOKOK wrote:

I'm not talking about the lead doper, but about the whole lot. No drugs, they disappear entirely.

No they don't. Their performances may be not as good but they wouldn't vanish.

You are assuming they all doped the same or even responded to the PED the same. The steroid abusers are painfully obvious. They would be many seconds slower.

Alan

Koch 47.6 in 1985

https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/koch-marita

"Koch's best times at 400 meters dropped from 60.3 seconds when she was 15 to 51.60 seconds at 18 and to 50.19 seconds the following year."

1985 47.60

1984 48.16

1982 48.16

1981 49.27

1980 48.88

1979 48.60

1978 48.94

1977 49.53

1976 50.19

1975 51.60

Jarmila 400m:

1983 47.99

1982 48.85

1981 48.61

1980 49.46

1979 52.31

1978 51.09

1976 53.39

I'm going to stay there are both 50+ without PED.

Alan