Greatest Season of All Time (800m up since 1980)

Yes, that was intentional. I didn't want to put 800-1500 runners at a disadvantage, though if I do a subjective assessment I'll take that and other factors like race record,all time great opponents beaten, and non-global champs races (world cup etc.). I did include major championships even though many of these seasons were not champ years(a potentially flawed/unfair inclusion), but I think that was offset by greater capability to chase records and compete at difference distances without having to worry about a championship.

I didn't want to put 800-1500 runners at a disadvantage, [/quote]

But middle distance runners also have a lot more opportunities to race. Marathoners are also at a disadvantage because it is hard to accumulate points only running a few times a year, whereas someone can set records in the 800m within a very short time interval.

But no system is perfect. And thanks for an interesting thread.

viewfromlane9.blogspot.com wrote:

Yes, that was intentional. I didn't want to put 800-1500 runners at a disadvantage, though if I do a subjective assessment I'll take that and other factors like race record,all time great opponents beaten, and non-global champs races (world cup etc.). I did include major championships even though many of these seasons were not champ years(a potentially flawed/unfair inclusion), but I think that was offset by greater capability to chase records and compete at difference distances without having to worry about a championship.

I appreciate that no criteria is full proof and is somewhat subjective, but surely if you include points for Olympic & World medals, then you have to give at least some points for medals in other Champs, e.g European, World Cup, etc. The World Cups prior to 83, for example, were as high in quality as the Olympics and World Champs, and in some cases more so.

Also, is it fair to give equal weight to World Champs medals compared to Olympics, when the Worlds occur every 2 years. Those athletes from 91 onwards are going to be at an advantage in that the chances of them winning a medal at the Worlds is far greater than those from the early 80's, because before 91 they were held every 4 years. And the first World Champs only occured in 83.

Perhaps World Rankings for events in a given year should also be given some sort of points system, as should an "unbeaten" season.

Great points, there is definitely some room for some tweaking. For example, I was somewhat dissatisfied with giving no credit to David Rudisha for his African title, and Coe won the World Cup in 1981? An idea for world rank, is in a non-championship year perhaps awarding 3 points for 1'st, and 1 for 2'nd(worth less than a medal because chasing times will help guarantee world rank, but not guarantee a medal). For guys who only ran in one event at the championships but ranked in another, they can receive points for that too, to make it fair. Unbeaten seasons are hard because I don't want to punish a guy for going out of his specialty event(e.g. David Rudisha in the 400, or Cram in the 800 and Aouita in the 1500). Thanks for the ideas, and I'll try to enrich the scoring system a bit more soon.

viewfromlane9.blogspot.com wrote:

Great points, there is definitely some room for some tweaking. For example, I was somewhat dissatisfied with giving no credit to David Rudisha for his African title, and Coe won the World Cup in 1981? An idea for world rank, is in a non-championship year perhaps awarding 3 points for 1'st, and 1 for 2'nd(worth less than a medal because chasing times will help guarantee world rank, but not guarantee a medal). For guys who only ran in one event at the championships but ranked in another, they can receive points for that too, to make it fair. Unbeaten seasons are hard because I don't want to punish a guy for going out of his specialty event(e.g. David Rudisha in the 400, or Cram in the 800 and Aouita in the 1500). Thanks for the ideas, and I'll try to enrich the scoring system a bit more soon.

I agree with Rudisha at 400m, though not sure he lost at that distance anyway, but the 1500m was hardly out of Aouita's specialist range! He was the world record holder at that event for 7 years! And Cram was the Commonwealth 800m champion and ran the fastest time in the world in 82, 83 & 86!

It's going to be very difficult to compare a World Cup gold pre 1983 (when they were practically World Champs) to a Pan Am or African Champion. The quality of each depends very much on the event (distance) and the year.

The points system is also weighted to more recent eras.

I also think it's more impressive to rank number 1 for a season in 2 events than say win a single Olympic bronze or silver. That needs to be reflected in the points.

Also, didn't Coe break the Mile WR twice in 81? Shouldn't he get 2 lots of 10 points for that? Surely it's just as impressive as breaking the 1500m and 1 Mile in the same season, like Cram did in 85 gaining 2 x 10 points?

Also, Coe broke the indoor 800m world record in 81 and doesn't get any points for it. Kipketer got points for his later WR indoors in 97. There needs to be some parity.

-Rudisha was 3'rd in his 400m race. I like the idea of an undefeated season more as a subjective measure than as one in a points system. Take Noah Ngeny for instance. Not his fault that his best season coincided with El G's best and it being a championship year he was on a collision course with him. If 1981 had been an Olympic year perhaps Coe would not end undefeated as he has to take on Steve Ovett instead of having them trade world records and not race.

-For another one of your concerns, any world #1 rank will be better or equal to a silver if/when I add that in. Not as good as a gold medal, but better or at least equal to a silver(argument against making it better than a silver: KB 2004 probably would have been world #1 had he not doubled at the Olympics, but he got a silver- you can't assume a title).

-Coe did break the WR twice in 1981, but he also got the 1500 record, and I made it a rule to give only 1 WR bonus. I think that only makes sense and I'll still reward a stellar time (like Kipketer/Rudisha's 1:41s) if it stands up as a great mark.

-Coe set the indoor record in 1983 according to:

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_800ok.htm#2

Thanks for the continuing discussion, I don't know if I'd really change the order much at all the more I think about it.

viewfromlane9.blogspot.com wrote:

-Coe set the indoor record in 1983 according to:

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_800ok.htm#2

Yes he did, but he also broke the indoor world record in 1981 (1:46.00 at Cosford) when indoor records were known as "world best" times. They only became known as "World Indoor Records" by the IAAF from 1st January 1987. (see Page 377 of the IAAF publication, "Progression of IAAF World Records- 2007 Edition").

Regardless, when he set the time in Feb 81 it was reported as a world indoor record in AW and was the fastest time ever run indoors.

Interesting...hard to give too much credit to a 1:46.0 even if it was indoors, though I understand a consistency argument (even if my discretionary instinct is to say no)