Blah blah Kipketer blah blah Rudisha
Nigel Amos is in his 10th year of running 1:42 or faster. No other top 800 runner has ever been near that durable.
Blah blah Kipketer blah blah Rudisha
Nigel Amos is in his 10th year of running 1:42 or faster. No other top 800 runner has ever been near that durable.
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
I fully agree.
It's the greatest vs best scenario. You can't go over Rudishas body of work and not give him the title of the greatest.
But best? Hmm, I would take Kipketer head to head in their primes. At his best, Kipketer was and still is the best 800m runner the world has ever seen. Races like the above I believe contribute to that point of view.
Okay but who is the most goodest of all time? Coe?
Bad Wigins wrote:
Blah blah Kipketer blah blah Rudisha
Nigel Amos is in his 10th year of running 1:42 or faster. No other top 800 runner has ever been near that durable.
Definitely, Amos ahead of Rudisha and Kipketer. You are the only one who sees it like that, but that's your only intention, so it's OK.
+1 that strongly believes Rudisha is the greatest, but Kipketer the best. Two different concepts.
In my mind the comparison is similar in the 5000m. Haile or Kenenisa the greatest. Komen the best.
a regular guy wrote:
+1 that strongly believes Rudisha is the greatest, but Kipketer the best. Two different concepts.
In my mind the comparison is similar in the 5000m. Haile or Kenenisa the greatest. Komen the best.
That is actually a great parallel and I'm with that too.
Of course the biggest sports debate related to his of recent years is around Lebron and "GOAT" status. Is Lebron James, when weighing up all the elements of the game of basketball (shooting, passing, rebounding, blocks, steals, IQ) the best player ever? Probably. Is he the greatest? Not even close. You can't be the greatest when you have lost 6 finals, played in a vastly inferior conference that allowed you to get to so many in the first place and 3 of your 4 chips came on manufactured super teams you created with your "boys". The greatest is Michael Jordan and then you have a list that includes Magic, Larry, Kareem, Tim Duncan before you even look at Lebron.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Blah blah Kipketer blah blah Rudisha
Nigel Amos is in his 10th year of running 1:42 or faster. No other top 800 runner has ever been near that durable.
The best part about this is that not even the statement is factually accurate, haha
2021 1:42.91 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 09 JUL 2021
2020 1:49.23 Portland, OR (USA) 08 AUG 2020
2019 1:41.89 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 12 JUL 2019
2018 1:42.14 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 20 JUL 2018
2017 1:43.18 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 09 JUL 2017
2016 1:44.66 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 22 JUL 2016
2015 1:42.66 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 17 JUL 2015
2014 1:42.45 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 18 JUL 2014
2013 1:44.71 Stade Olympique de la Pontaise, Lausanne (SUI) 04 JUL 2013
2012 1:41.73 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 09 AUG 2012
But I guess being 60% right is enough in todays world right - you should be a politician or a social media opinionist.
Nice thread Sal.
You must’ve also been a suave 800m runner yourself?
Walmart Superstore wrote:
Kicked at 100m to go wrote:
Rudisha is the greatest given his achievements, but line up the best of all time and Kipketer wins - regardless of how the race is run.
I get the sentiment - but Rudisha ran 1:40 essentially solo so he'd probably win in a head to head matchup
rudisha didn't run solo. He has his tame lead out guy in all his great races.
Beautiful runner, but if they were all in their prime at the same time, I'd go with Kipketer.
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
a regular guy wrote:
+1 that strongly believes Rudisha is the greatest, but Kipketer the best. Two different concepts.
In my mind the comparison is similar in the 5000m. Haile or Kenenisa the greatest. Komen the best.
That is actually a great parallel and I'm with that too.
Of course the biggest sports debate related to his of recent years is around Lebron and "GOAT" status. Is Lebron James, when weighing up all the elements of the game of basketball (shooting, passing, rebounding, blocks, steals, IQ) the best player ever? Probably. Is he the greatest? Not even close. You can't be the greatest when you have lost 6 finals, played in a vastly inferior conference that allowed you to get to so many in the first place and 3 of your 4 chips came on manufactured super teams you created with your "boys". The greatest is Michael Jordan and then you have a list that includes Magic, Larry, Kareem, Tim Duncan before you even look at Lebron.
Don't be silly
mybro wrote:
Walmart Superstore wrote:
I get the sentiment - but Rudisha ran 1:40 essentially solo so he'd probably win in a head to head matchup
rudisha didn't run solo. He has his tame lead out guy in all his great races.
Beautiful runner, but if they were all in their prime at the same time, I'd go with Kipketer.
Really? Apparently you have never seen his world record in the London Olympics. Rudisha was better than Kipketer but they were very close.
Centro has 3 hours to back out of this. I hope he does. He's not going to get the AR and what does a PR do for him over a good workout.
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
Troothsayer wrote:
Neither of you is making much sense. Kpketer is the best of all time? Rudisha is the greatest of all time? These are nonsensical and inconsistent assertions.
Dependent on ones interpretation of "best" and "greatest" which it appears the majority here comprehend and you don't. But that's fine - I'll give you some examples and maybe you will take it on - it's a very helpful perspective to have especially in all the "greatest of all time" debates that happen across sports.
"Greatness" transcends era's and is a measure of all things to do with the athlete such as their career body of work, their reputation, their aura, their impact on the game at the time, and yes of course their pure ability at the sport/event (because without a really high level of ability none of the aforementioned probably amounts to anything).
"Best" is a measure of straight up ability at just the sport/event and is purely momentary. It doesn't cover an intangibles, titles/races won, duration of career or dominance - it's just how good the athlete was at their absolute best for the moment of the event.
This concept helps in these discussion across all sports. For example in the NBA there are some (not many but some) that argue in a team sport, there is a guy with 11 rings, who dominated an era and was as revered as any player in history. That player is Bill Russell and there are people that make a claim he is the greatest NBA player ever, which, all things considered is valid point of view. But it's hard to make the case that based on pure basketball ability he's even close to the best player ever - there are multiple centers that have played the game that were better at the sport than he was (Olajuwon, O'Neal, Chamberlain etc) - but as a total package, hard to say they were greater.
Since we are talking 800m running let's use a better example - Peter Snell. Peter Snell ran 1.44.3 on an oddly measured grass track back in 1962, but also ran 1.45.1 to win the second of his 2 Olympic titles (the first man to do it and still only the second man to do so along with Rudisha). But even if we transport Snell across era's (giving him the benefits of modern track and footwear etc) is he really beating Rudisha, Kipketer, Coe, Cruz and even guys like Borzakovskiy, Bungei etc etc? I'm not so sure. But if he isn't the greatest 800m runner ever (I think Rudisha is) he is most certainly #2 on that list because of his career body of work, dominance, aura etc.
Greatest and Best are connected but are slightly different things, I hope that explains the train of thought and glad you could enjoy the clip of the great Kipketer running a race that nobody on earth before or since could run.
The issue is not that I don’t comprehend. It is that you are playing semantics games. You are using the language in a manner which is not typical and therefore it is misleading and inaccurate. NONE of you who have ever posted here is capable of teaching me about the language, so check yourself. If you want to say peak Kipketer was better than peak Rudisha, you may have that argument. But please do not change the meaning of words to serve an opinion which is not clearly very sound anyway.
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
a regular guy wrote:
+1 that strongly believes Rudisha is the greatest, but Kipketer the best. Two different concepts.
In my mind the comparison is similar in the 5000m. Haile or Kenenisa the greatest. Komen the best.
That is actually a great parallel and I'm with that too.
Of course the biggest sports debate related to his of recent years is around Lebron and "GOAT" status. Is Lebron James, when weighing up all the elements of the game of basketball (shooting, passing, rebounding, blocks, steals, IQ) the best player ever? Probably. Is he the greatest? Not even close. You can't be the greatest when you have lost 6 finals, played in a vastly inferior conference that allowed you to get to so many in the first place and 3 of your 4 chips came on manufactured super teams you created with your "boys". The greatest is Michael Jordan and then you have a list that includes Magic, Larry, Kareem, Tim Duncan before you even look at Lebron.
Dude stop talking about basketball if you think Duncan is anywhere close to Lebron in terms of being “great” or “the best” or any other semantic crap you want to spew.
And I hate lebrons guts, but it’s absolutely indisputable that him and MJ are a cut above anyone else.
Troothsayer wrote:
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
Dependent on ones interpretation of "best" and "greatest" which it appears the majority here comprehend and you don't. But that's fine - I'll give you some examples and maybe you will take it on - it's a very helpful perspective to have especially in all the "greatest of all time" debates that happen across sports.
"Greatness" transcends era's and is a measure of all things to do with the athlete such as their career body of work, their reputation, their aura, their impact on the game at the time, and yes of course their pure ability at the sport/event (because without a really high level of ability none of the aforementioned probably amounts to anything).
"Best" is a measure of straight up ability at just the sport/event and is purely momentary. It doesn't cover an intangibles, titles/races won, duration of career or dominance - it's just how good the athlete was at their absolute best for the moment of the event.
This concept helps in these discussion across all sports. For example in the NBA there are some (not many but some) that argue in a team sport, there is a guy with 11 rings, who dominated an era and was as revered as any player in history. That player is Bill Russell and there are people that make a claim he is the greatest NBA player ever, which, all things considered is valid point of view. But it's hard to make the case that based on pure basketball ability he's even close to the best player ever - there are multiple centers that have played the game that were better at the sport than he was (Olajuwon, O'Neal, Chamberlain etc) - but as a total package, hard to say they were greater.
Since we are talking 800m running let's use a better example - Peter Snell. Peter Snell ran 1.44.3 on an oddly measured grass track back in 1962, but also ran 1.45.1 to win the second of his 2 Olympic titles (the first man to do it and still only the second man to do so along with Rudisha). But even if we transport Snell across era's (giving him the benefits of modern track and footwear etc) is he really beating Rudisha, Kipketer, Coe, Cruz and even guys like Borzakovskiy, Bungei etc etc? I'm not so sure. But if he isn't the greatest 800m runner ever (I think Rudisha is) he is most certainly #2 on that list because of his career body of work, dominance, aura etc.
Greatest and Best are connected but are slightly different things, I hope that explains the train of thought and glad you could enjoy the clip of the great Kipketer running a race that nobody on earth before or since could run.
The issue is not that I don’t comprehend. It is that you are playing semantics games. You are using the language in a manner which is not typical and therefore it is misleading and inaccurate. NONE of you who have ever posted here is capable of teaching me about the language, so check yourself. If you want to say peak Kipketer was better than peak Rudisha, you may have that argument. But please do not change the meaning of words to serve an opinion which is not clearly very sound anyway.
I think I get what is being said here regarding greatest vs the best. Its like some people say Jack Nicklaus is the greatest golfer all time because he won 18 majors. Still others like me will say Tiger Woods is best player in golf hisory in terms of raw talent and peak perfomances. Like, yes Jack won 18 majors but could never win 4 pro majors in a row like Tiger or by such huge margins. So one could say arguably say Tiger is the best to ever live but Jack is the greatest golf champion of all time purely by numbers and such. Ts two different things.
TheSummerSoldier wrote:
Troothsayer wrote:
The issue is not that I don’t comprehend. It is that you are playing semantics games. You are using the language in a manner which is not typical and therefore it is misleading and inaccurate. NONE of you who have ever posted here is capable of teaching me about the language, so check yourself. If you want to say peak Kipketer was better than peak Rudisha, you may have that argument. But please do not change the meaning of words to serve an opinion which is not clearly very sound anyway.
I think I get what is being said here regarding greatest vs the best. Its like some people say Jack Nicklaus is the greatest golfer all time because he won 18 majors. Still others like me will say Tiger Woods is best player in golf hisory in terms of raw talent and peak perfomances. Like, yes Jack won 18 majors but could never win 4 pro majors in a row like Tiger or by such huge margins. So one could say arguably say Tiger is the best to ever live but Jack is the greatest golf champion of all time purely by numbers and such. Ts two different things.
Even if one wanted to use the language this way it does NOT apply to Rudisha and Kipketer. It might apply to maybe Paavo Nurmi and Kenenisa Bekele, as Nurmi won 9 Olympic gold medals and set 22 world records, but even then it is misleading to say Nurmi was greater than Bekele. One could say that Nurmi was more dominant in his time than Bekele but that Bekele was better than Nurmi. But to say that Nurmi was the greatest and Bekele was the best does not make sense if one understand the meaning of the words.
Rudisha was faster than Kipketer and so it is a bit odd to say Kipketer was the best and Rudisha was the greatest.
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:
Blah blah Kipketer blah blah Rudisha
Nigel Amos is in his 10th year of running 1:42 or faster. No other top 800 runner has ever been near that durable.
The best part about this is that not even the statement is factually accurate, haha
2021 1:42.91 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 09 JUL 2021
2020 1:49.23 Portland, OR (USA) 08 AUG 2020
2019 1:41.89 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 12 JUL 2019
2018 1:42.14 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 20 JUL 2018
2017 1:43.18 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 09 JUL 2017
2016 1:44.66 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 22 JUL 2016
2015 1:42.66 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 17 JUL 2015
2014 1:42.45 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 18 JUL 2014
2013 1:44.71 Stade Olympique de la Pontaise, Lausanne (SUI) 04 JUL 2013
2012 1:41.73 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 09 AUG 2012
But I guess being 60% right is enough in todays world right - you should be a politician or a social media opinionist.
And the best part about THAT is I new someone would be GEEK enough to go look up all those stats as if proving Amos didn't run 1:42 or better every single year makes a bit of difference. You walked right into it, congrats.
Now please explain for the thread which 800 runner has ever come anywhere NEAR running 1:42 a full 9 years after doing it the first time. If you fail, then admit he is the most durable of the top elites.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
The best part about this is that not even the statement is factually accurate, haha
2021 1:42.91 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 09 JUL 2021
2020 1:49.23 Portland, OR (USA) 08 AUG 2020
2019 1:41.89 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 12 JUL 2019
2018 1:42.14 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 20 JUL 2018
2017 1:43.18 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 09 JUL 2017
2016 1:44.66 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 22 JUL 2016
2015 1:42.66 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 17 JUL 2015
2014 1:42.45 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 18 JUL 2014
2013 1:44.71 Stade Olympique de la Pontaise, Lausanne (SUI) 04 JUL 2013
2012 1:41.73 Olympic Stadium, London (GBR) 09 AUG 2012
But I guess being 60% right is enough in todays world right - you should be a politician or a social media opinionist.
And the best part about THAT is I new someone would be GEEK enough to go look up all those stats as if proving Amos didn't run 1:42 or better every single year makes a bit of difference. You walked right into it, congrats.
Now please explain for the thread which 800 runner has ever come anywhere NEAR running 1:42 a full 9 years after doing it the first time. If you fail, then admit he is the most durable of the top elites.
Johnny Gray
1982 1:45.41
1999 1:45.38
1984 1:42.96
1992 1:42.80
Troothsayer wrote:
The issue is not that I don’t comprehend. It is that you are playing semantics games. You are using the language in a manner which is not typical and therefore it is misleading and inaccurate. NONE of you who have ever posted here is capable of teaching me about the language, so check yourself. If you want to say peak Kipketer was better than peak Rudisha, you may have that argument. But please do not change the meaning of words to serve an opinion which is not clearly very sound anyway.
Well clearly you don't because you are basically the only one here that doesn't appear to understand the concept of great vs best (go through and read these posts). There are no semantic games because there doesn't need to be so nice try sounding smart but that wasn't the right way to describe it.
But that's okay because I know you don't really get the language and I know that because you wrote this,
"NONE of you who have ever posted here is capable of teaching me about the language, so check yourself"
Which is full of grammatical errors (I hate being the grammar guy but it's so ironic and funny you spoke "language" in a sentence where you got it all messed up).
If you could read, a number of us actually said/agreed/implied/had the opinion that peak Kipketer was better than peak Rudisha which is the entire concept of saying someone is "best" - and when you are talking about the top two guys in the event ever, that means best as in best of everyone that ever ran the event.
Mate, just give this up. You're not smart enough to have this argument. I mean the mere fact you had a tantrum about "knowing the language" and in the midst of communicating it you f-ed your language up, gives you zero credibility now so do yourself a favor and just stay quiet. Cheers.
jordanddonnelly1 wrote:
Nice thread Sal.
You must’ve also been a suave 800m runner yourself?
I have been known to run a few "double-lappers" back in the day eh :)
Bad Wigins wrote:
And the best part about THAT is I new someone would be GEEK enough to go look up all those stats as if proving Amos didn't run 1:42 or better every single year makes a bit of difference. You walked right into it, congrats.
Now please explain for the thread which 800 runner has ever come anywhere NEAR running 1:42 a full 9 years after doing it the first time. If you fail, then admit he is the most durable of the top elites.
So what are you excited about bro - getting called out as full of $hit? "I walked right into it" - I love this train of thought...
1) I'll make a point as fact that I didn't bother to even check because I'm too stupid/lazy.
2) Someone checks it in like 15 seconds of research and calls me out on it
3) I will flip the situation and claim it was all part of some "devious plan" and that someone unwittingly "walked right into it".
This is Kipketer over his best 10 seasons.
2004 1:43.88 Stadio Olimpico, Roma (ITA) 02 JUL 2004
2003 1:43.28 Boudewijnstadion, Bruxelles (BEL) 05 SEP 2003
2002 1:42.32 Rieti (ITA) 08 SEP 2002
2000 1:43.35 Bruxelles (BEL) 25 AUG 2000
1999 1:42.27 Bruxelles (BEL) 03 SEP 1999
1998 1:43.18 Zürich (SUI) 12 AUG 1998
1997 1:41.11 Köln (GER) 24 AUG 1997
1996 1:41.83 Rieti (ITA) 01 SEP 1996
1995 1:42.87 Stade Louis II, Monaco (MON) 25 JUL 1995
1994 1:43.29 Bislett Stadion, Oslo (NOR) 22 JUL 1994
Took me another 15 seconds of "geek" research to find that and copy paste it. So let's see - 10 seasons not running slower than 1.43.88 and averaging 1.42.74. I'm going to do you a favor and omit Amos's 1.49 performance in 2020 so he was 9 seasons, slowest time 1.44.71 and an average of 1.42.92
So there you go - you lose. Kipketer better over a longer period of time and far more consistent. You want some more on this topic you chump?