As great as his range was, and as great as he was at 1500, it likely has to be one or the other (either he could make a run at Coe’s 800 mark, or he could make a run at 13:00). We’ve seen guys with great range who could run 1:43 and elite 5k times, but never a 1:41/sub-13 guy, not even close.
At his best, he probably could have run 1:43.x and sub-13:10 in the same year. He may have had 1:42.9 and 12:59 potential, but (for his era, anyway) that’s becoming quite speculative and it would have had to have been one or the other—he couldn’t train for both.
This may not be popular but I feel Ovett's performance in Los Angeles was the finest of his career. Clearly sick as a dog and still makes two finals.
What you do when under the weather is far more telling of your running ability than when you are fit & feisty.
I do remember Ovett getting press in the Boston Globe prior to the 800 in Montreal. Disappointment followed. Still, he owned John Walker, Oly Champ, over the mile and 1500 in '77, bashing out a 25 second last 200 at the season culmination World Cup meeting--and looking like he was in a completely different event than the other competitors.
I do remember Ovett getting press in the Boston Globe prior to the 800 in Montreal. Disappointment followed. Still, he owned John Walker, Oly Champ, over the mile and 1500 in '77, bashing out a 25 second last 200 at the season culmination World Cup meeting--and looking like he was in a completely different event than the other competitors.
One race early in his career. I recall him getting owned by Coe and Cram and pulling out of the '84 Olympic final. Each career has its high and its low points.
He never chased fast times for the 800m. Even when he was doing so for the 1,500m / Mile, it seemed he was not focused on running fast but rather winning.
To suggest he couldn't have run much faster than his 1:44.09 at the 800m is demonstrating little knowledge about his career and races. It was not only the final lap in Moscow, but the ~24.5 last 200m at the European, even this race 1:44.09 does not make any sense as his first lap was sub-50s.
I don't think he was better than Coe for the distance but ~1:42.5 is very reasonable for him and there should be little debate about it. Ovett was clearly faster than Cram over 200m and 400m.
I'd argue he could run 1:42 low and perhaps dip under 1:42 if he ran a perfect paced time trial race.
He never chased fast times for the 800m. Even when he was doing so for the 1,500m / Mile, it seemed he was not focused on running fast but rather winning.
To suggest he couldn't have run much faster than his 1:44.09 at the 800m is demonstrating little knowledge about his career and races. It was not only the final lap in Moscow, but the ~24.5 last 200m at the European, even this race 1:44.09 does not make any sense as his first lap was sub-50s.
I don't think he was better than Coe for the distance but ~1:42.5 is very reasonable for him and there should be little debate about it. Ovett was clearly faster than Cram over 200m and 400m.
I'd argue he could run 1:42 low and perhaps dip under 1:42 if he ran a perfect paced time trial race.
Two seconds difference at that distance is pure fancy. It's like saying Coe could have run 1:39x with better pacing.
Juantorena was way faster than Ovett over the 200 and 400 and ran 1:43.5. So Ovett being faster than Cram over the sprints doesn't necessarily mean he would have been faster over the 800. Cram's superior endurance over the 1500/mile may have enabled his superior 800 time.
This post was edited 5 minutes after it was posted.
He never chased fast times for the 800m. Even when he was doing so for the 1,500m / Mile, it seemed he was not focused on running fast but rather winning.
To suggest he couldn't have run much faster than his 1:44.09 at the 800m is demonstrating little knowledge about his career and races. It was not only the final lap in Moscow, but the ~24.5 last 200m at the European, even this race 1:44.09 does not make any sense as his first lap was sub-50s.
I don't think he was better than Coe for the distance but ~1:42.5 is very reasonable for him and there should be little debate about it. Ovett was clearly faster than Cram over 200m and 400m.
I'd argue he could run 1:42 low and perhaps dip under 1:42 if he ran a perfect paced time trial race.
Two seconds difference at that distance is pure fancy. It's like saying Coe could have run 1:39x with better pacing.
Juantorena was way faster than Ovett over the 200 and 400 and ran 1:43.5. So Ovett being faster than Cram over the sprints doesn't necessarily mean he would have been faster over the 800. Cram's superior endurance over the 1500/mile may have enabled his superior 800 time.
Juantorena had nowhere near the strength (stamina) of any of the top Brits of the 80s. Ovett likely could have run at least as fast as Cram, likely faster, for the 800 if that would have been a goal of his, which it wasn’t. On a side note, obviously Cram was capable of faster than 49 for the 400. To say that was his limit is silly for a man who could 1:42 - never mind negative split races in 1:43
Ovett could never have run 1:40 though. Coe with today’s conditions probably could run sub 1:41.
Out of Coe, Ovett, Cram and Elliot, I've always thought that Ovett was the one that was 'better' than his best times. He was capable of 1.42 / 3.28 / 3.45 / 7.35 / 13.10 - imho.
To suggest he couldn't have run much faster than his 1:44.09 at the 800m is demonstrating little knowledge about his career and races. It was not only the final lap in Moscow, but the ~24.5 last 200m at the European, even this race 1:44.09 does not make any sense as his first lap was sub-50s.
No. For the millionth time, no. You can't infer what someone's potential is from a split in a race of a different distance. You just can't. There's so many things wrong with this thinking. Lots of splits from that time are of dubious accuracy.
Every good 800 that you run involves a decision about 500 yards into the race. Every single time. There's no coasting or free rides. It's an extremely difficult race to master and not everyone is able to do it. Perhaps there's a reason why many amazing 1500 runners have comparitively 800 PRs. A world class 1500 runner who is used to opening in 54-56 is going to experience something totally new when hitting the quarter at 50-51. It is not a good feeling.
He never chased fast times for the 800m. Even when he was doing so for the 1,500m / Mile, it seemed he was not focused on running fast but rather winning.
To suggest he couldn't have run much faster than his 1:44.09 at the 800m is demonstrating little knowledge about his career and races. It was not only the final lap in Moscow, but the ~24.5 last 200m at the European, even this race 1:44.09 does not make any sense as his first lap was sub-50s.
I don't think he was better than Coe for the distance but ~1:42.5 is very reasonable for him and there should be little debate about it. Ovett was clearly faster than Cram over 200m and 400m.
I'd argue he could run 1:42 low and perhaps dip under 1:42 if he ran a perfect paced time trial race.
Two seconds difference at that distance is pure fancy. It's like saying Coe could have run 1:39x with better pacing.
Juantorena was way faster than Ovett over the 200 and 400 and ran 1:43.5. So Ovett being faster than Cram over the sprints doesn't necessarily mean he would have been faster over the 800. Cram's superior endurance over the 1500/mile may have enabled his superior 800 time.
That's just silly. In the years 1979-1982, Coe only ran faster than 1:44.4 twice - his two world record attempts. He only ran under 1:45 on two other occasions in those years other than the two WRs (a 1:44.3 and a 1:44.7). Yet (obviously) he was capable of 1:41.7 (and that might not have been his peak potential in 1981). Ovett did not race a single time trial at 800m EVER. That's surely simple to understand?
Many people think Ovett was at his peak in 77 and 78. He absolutely dominated everybody both years. He finished the 1977 European cup final with a 52.5 last lap despite being blocked in and running almost all of it in lane 2. And I'm sure you've seen what he did to John Walker at the World Cup in 77. Yet at the end of 78 his pb was still only 3:34.45. There is no way he was better in 1983 than in 1977 or 78, and yet he ran 3:30.77 in windy conditions.
I do remember Ovett getting press in the Boston Globe prior to the 800 in Montreal. Disappointment followed. Still, he owned John Walker, Oly Champ, over the mile and 1500 in '77, bashing out a 25 second last 200 at the season culmination World Cup meeting--and looking like he was in a completely different event than the other competitors.
It's hard to find, but Ovett's races at the AAA/GB Olympic trials in 76 are both on YouTube, and the way he won both makes it easy to see why he would have been seen as a medal certainty in the 800m, and a dark horse in the 1500. Especially as Juantoreana was a complete unknown at 800m, and Ovett had always handled Ivo Van Damme, despite being a year younger.
He had the basic speed and 1500 strength to expect to run 1:42-43, yet never did it in a long career, and this in an event where it's really not hard at all to arrange for some guy to lead you out in 50-52 and maybe even hang on to 500+.
Despite Ovett winning 800m gold in Moscow, we never really got to see his full potential at 800m.
He underperformed in the 800 at Montreal, and he and his coach Harry Wilson decided to focus on the 1500m after that (not sure if that was the plan before Montreal, or a response to Montreal).
For the next five or six years or so, Coe would realistically have been his only challenger at 800m had he focused on it (leaving aside Beyer's dodgy performance in Prague 78), with Ivo Van Damme dying, Juantoreno getting injured, and Rick Wolhuter getting old.
1:40 is obviously not realistic, but given the 50 second last lap in Moscow when he was blocked in at the start of it, you'd have to say he was in minimum 1:43 flat shape that day, and so perhaps he could have run a high 1:41 time like Coe had he focused on it, or even like Coe, kept it as his primary event. People forget he was still only 20 at the 76 Olympics. He was also younger than Ivo Van Damme and had always beaten him until Montreal.
I can't post the link, but it was posted recently in 'The Story of Steve Ovett' Facebook group.
He was great,but not that great. And there is no way he would have ever challenged,or beaten juantorena in the montreal olympics.
He had the basic speed and 1500 strength to expect to run 1:42-43, yet never did it in a long career, and this in an event where it's really not hard at all to arrange for some guy to lead you out in 50-52 and maybe even hang on to 500+.
Ues, but he never did it. Ovett was Mr. Sit and Kick until he decided to go after 1500/mile records because of the rise of Coe. We’ll never really know what he could have done unless someone clones himand thwn trains the offspring with modern methods. The bit I’ve seen of Wison’s training methods seem a bit slow to train a runner to produce super fast 800s.
Watched S OVE compete in person. No way he could match Coe at 800. After Coes 1979 800WR Ovett disengaged from even the thought of going after his 800 time. 1:43.5 at best. S Ove was much further away from his potential at 5k than 800.
However S OVE was mentally strong and did not allow Coes time superiority to erode confidence. He stated in his autobio that if he had lost the OG 800 in a close duel to Coe he would not have been bothered "after all he was several seconds faster than me at the distance" Instead S OVE gave a tactical masterclass in Moscow shoving others out of his space handling the surging and uneven pace not getting trapped in a slow and rough race and then striking decisively and immediately at the key moment. Great tactics all around. Unlike Coe obv.
S OVE did take pride in this because as UK residents know he paid for the then-unusual privilege of a custom vehicle license plate... "SJO 800'...
Two seconds difference at that distance is pure fancy. It's like saying Coe could have run 1:39x with better pacing.
Juantorena was way faster than Ovett over the 200 and 400 and ran 1:43.5. So Ovett being faster than Cram over the sprints doesn't necessarily mean he would have been faster over the 800. Cram's superior endurance over the 1500/mile may have enabled his superior 800 time.
That's just silly. In the years 1979-1982, Coe only ran faster than 1:44.4 twice - his two world record attempts. He only ran under 1:45 on two other occasions in those years other than the two WRs (a 1:44.3 and a 1:44.7). Yet (obviously) he was capable of 1:41.7 (and that might not have been his peak potential in 1981). Ovett did not race a single time trial at 800m EVER. That's surely simple to understand?
Many people think Ovett was at his peak in 77 and 78. He absolutely dominated everybody both years. He finished the 1977 European cup final with a 52.5 last lap despite being blocked in and running almost all of it in lane 2. And I'm sure you've seen what he did to John Walker at the World Cup in 77. Yet at the end of 78 his pb was still only 3:34.45. There is no way he was better in 1983 than in 1977 or 78, and yet he ran 3:30.77 in windy conditions.
Covett said it
these debates are always polar
whenever a guy opens in 148 or even 150 so so conditions'
at the grand slam, all the 1500 guys came back three weeks later and ran 145 144.
which of course any elite 1500 guy can do bar none.
openers and seldom run for zero basis for analysis,
the category of 200 m sprinter and huge aerobic ability is a very rare breed.
these guys could have been 400m runners as well, though of course not 43 but 44 high i would not put that past them.
at the up vote and down vote stage, nay sayers are going to ignore what a 21 200m without specific training at a young age really means. and a back in the day 145 flat 800 on those tracks at age 17 .... thinking he plateaued at 144...