OrvilleAtkins wrote:
Jim Ryun's 3:37.8 in Mexico City in 1968 was a great run considering that he was not a "child of altitude".
Who knows which of Ryun's great races was not on a dirt or cinder track?
Ryun actually did a short stint at altitude before Mexico City which probably hurt him more than helped. Also, "trained too hard" is a relative term, every elite athletes should train as hard as needed and as much as their body will allow.
Kevin3310 wrote:
is it true hes done workouts like 40x400?
yes. ive had the chance to speak to him and he he said that was one of his toughest workouts. they would them in around 68-69. and broke them up into sets of 10. he said it was an all day workout
victory omole wrote:
YO I AM NOT CRITIZING HIM. i look up to mr ryun hes my hero. am just saying that he ran too much that he didn't need 80 miles at a fast pace would have been great and 110 was awesome its just that.. i think that he was overtrained
YO NO PROBLEMO AMIGO.
Those were pioneering days, when runners were experimenting with more miles at faster paces. There was also less physiotherapy back up.
The thing is, running 3:46 in your mind is pretty worthless. It's much more likely that he would not have run 3:51.1 had he not done what he did.
Ok, Keino ran 40-50 mpw. He beat Ryun one time in races where Ryun didn't fall down. Ryun owned him until he had to race Keino in a setting which clearly favored athletes who were born at altitude.
HRE wrote:
The thing is, running 3:46 in your mind is pretty worthless.
Ryun's performances at the age of 17 were very similar to those of Alan Webb and Steve Cram at that age. Cram and Webb both went on to run 3:46. Cram was 25 years old. Webb was 24. Ryun's best came at the age of 20. And he ran the mile faster at 17 than at 22.
Better to be a has-been by 25 than a never-was at any age.
No one was going to run a mile in 3:46 in 1968 or for years afterward. For Ryun to have done that would have meant taking the record seven seconds under what it had been before he broke it. Going back to WWII, the record improved by increments as small as .2 seconds (Andersson to Haag) and as large as 2.3 seconds (Jazy to Ryun.) When Elliott and Snell went under 3:55 people began discussing the possibility of a sub 3:50 mile but it was more than a decade before that happened.
If Ryun's time at his peak had lasted a bit longer he MIGHT have gotten under 3:50. The same has been said of Elliott and Snell. Webb has the advantage of living and running at a time when many people have been under 3:50. It was not going to happen in Ryun's day.
HRE wrote:No one was going to run a mile in 3:46 in 1968 or for years afterward
eh ???
depends if you are talking dirt or synthetic
on a '70s synthetic at ~1s/lap quicker, then his '60s time is 3'47 - a time not approached 'til '81 - & off course, ryun's 3'51 was completely solo, never headed for 1mm & off a derisory amble for 880
apart from a synthetic track, give him wabbits to 1320 & tell him to follow them, he wouda made mincemeat of this 3'47
blah blah
you are not subtracting a conversion factor to compare dirt times pre-'70s to synthetic
both elliot & snell wouda been close to 3'50 on a synthetic track
you are also making puerile mistake of assigning similar abilities/talent to elliot/snell as ryun
ryun was a hugely better talent than either of those 2 despite his misfortune of not having any golds ( bad luck & illness )
his ability in '67 against those 2 or any immediate post-war miler woud be the same as a '09 usain v any other sprinter in history
in likelihood, in all history, only hicham wouda run him close in '67 form & he'd still get slaughtered in the last lap
It is not worthless, and 3:51 was amazing, but I will say that Jim Ryun did overtrain. Before his time, people were being under trained and times were a bit lacking because of it. What did Jim did was went out and trained a huge amount and he became good because of it. By saying he could run 3:46 is more of a compliment than a criticism as you are suggesting. I firmly believe that distance training is much better and more specific than it was in his day. Had he grown up now with the knowledge of running that we have, I believe he would be running eye popping times.
And yes, he was truly amazing early in his career. I can only think that if he ran good consistent training from the time he was 20 and up, he would have won a gold medal and would have beaten his WR by a good 3 seconds. Obviously my opinions have been affected by the whole "development" idea, and I will receive a ton of criticism from the 50 year old LetsRun guys who were growing up with Ryun. My answer to the question remains that Jim Ryun did overtrain.
Interesting one this, Ryun was my big hero at the time cos
we were about the same age, you have to remember he was
doing these incredible times at 19 20 yrs of age.
But if you look at another great miler it would appear
he overtrained.
Sebastian Coe-1500m Final, 1984 Los Angeles Olympics
Never ran more than 90km a week
Trained extensively with weights during winter
Focussed on aerobic capacity training at 5000m pace to build aerobic endurance
Example 1:
Sunday A.M. 5 miles easy; P.M. 30 x 100m on slight hill
Monday 7 miles easy
Tuesday 7 x 800m
Wednesday 11 miles easy
Thursday A.M. 1 x (400m + 300m + 200m + 150) P.M. 3 miles easy
Friday 4 x 1200m, 10 x 150m
Saturday A.M. 30 x 100m on slight hill. P.M.4 miles easy
Sunday 7 x 400m
Monday 7 miles easy
And my answer to your question is that he needed to do what he did to get to 3:51.1. Given professional rabbits, synthetic tracks, a fat shoe deal that would have allowed him to continue running after college without needing a job to support his family, and a WR of under 3:50 when he started his career I think 3:46 for him was very possible as it was for Snell and Elliott ( I shortchanged Elliott in my last post, he took the record down by 2.6 seconds) and quite possibly for Ovett and Coe.
But no one is going to take the mile WR record down by seven seconds. It's never been done in the modern era and won't be.
eh ???
you are joking ?!
he wouda run 3'47 if his 3'51 had been on a synthetic, with no other adjustments
add in wabbits which can provide 1s/lap advantage thru drafting to the bell ( the reason why they are used ) & even out ridiculous 1'59/1'52 splits for an even pace gun to tape, & you think these 2 factors provide only a further 1s improvement ???
try
3'51
-4s for synthetic
-3s for wabbits to the bell
-2s for the wildly disparate splits
= ~ 3'42
if he'd run his 3'51 on a '70s synthetic with modern tt set up on the circuit - NO TRAINING ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED - JUST TIME-TRAVELLED FROM '67 TO '70s
do you think elliot/snell/coe/ovett wouda run that at their peak ???
Different surfaces require different training. Last night I was struggling with the pace on the track but ran better on grass. Saying that Ryun's 3.51 was worth 3.46-7 is pure speculation not absolute fact.
ventolin you live in a fantasy world of stats.
yours sincerely
another moron.
wellnow wrote:
Different surfaces require different training. Last night I was struggling with the pace on the track but ran better on grass. Saying that Ryun's 3.51 was worth 3.46-7 is pure speculation not absolute fact.
ventolin you live in a fantasy world of stats.
yours sincerely
another moron.
You're right. Ventolin is fixated on their being a 1 sec variable between cinders and synthetic, which isn't a universally agreed figure, and has no scientific proof.
How can you compare the variable needed to convert 1 surface to another, when the condition of cinders varied wildly itself?
A cinder track at White City after a downpour is going to be very different to a hard smooth one in the sun of California. Maybe the constant pounding on a torn up cinder track in a 10,000m race might be worth an average of 1 second a lap for the duration of 25, but not for 4 laps in good weather conditions.
I've read in several publications that 0.5 secs per lap is a more sensible "estimate" for a half decent cinder track or grass one. That's the opinion of some experts and again, is not a fact either.
I have no doubt Ryun could have run 3:30 for 1500 and a 3:47 Mile in 67 on a synthetic track with reasonable rabbiting up to the bell, perhaps slightly faster. But the 3:24 and 3:42 Ventolin reckons, 2 and 1 second ahead of the current WRs (set at a time when advances in middle & long distance times were at their greatest), are a nonsense.
No one else from the late 60's (Beamon at altitude apart; being No. 2 on all time list) in any other event, set a mark which would still put them such a large margin in front of all others.
Ryun had an 800m pb (hand timed) of 1:44.3 on a synthetic track and a 2 Mile pb of 8:25. Even if we take 8 secs off that time for a synthetic performance (too generous in many expert's opinions), that gives 8:18. His speed looks as good as Ovett (1:44.09, probably capable of 1:43.5 in 78) or Aouita (1:43.86), but his endurance doesn't look to be as good. Both Ovett & Aouita ran c. 8:13 for the 2 Miles. Yet somehow in an intermediate distance of 1500m and 1 Mile, we're expected to believe Ryun was 4 to 5 secs better than either Ovett or Aouita!
I think at their peak Ovett and Aouita could have run around the 3:28 low - 3:29 low mark ( or about 3:45 for the Mile) in near perfect conditions (perfect ones don't exist). Apart from Ventolin's unproven conversion amounts, there is no evidence to suppose that Ryun would have been any faster at 1500/Mile than those two.
Of course you can take this amount off for surfaces, that amount for weather, another for uneven distribution of pace to "jack" a time up. But then you have to do the same for everyone else whose set a fast time.
Ventolin is entitled to his opinion but to ridicule others for not agreeing with him, and stating his opinions as facts not to be questioned, just makes him look slightly mad.
Ryun had a great coach, Bob Timmons, #1, period.
Besides that he had a good physiology, trained and developed by Bob Timmons.
He had a great network of support, developed by Bob Timmons at Wichita East.
He did run on all weather tracks and ran no faster than he did on cinders. He was used to training and racing on cinders. Had he run all of his races on rubberized tracks then he would not have run any faster than he did.
Also he had plenty of competition. He was beat many times. He only got one Olympic medal, a silver and almost died after that. Kip Keino got 2 Olympic gold medals and 2 silvers. Ryun was lucky to finish second to him at Mexico City. He was a very good runner but, though American, he did what he did, and that's what he did. Saying he would run 3:24 is like saying Kip Keino would run 3:21 and El G would run 3:17.
deanouk wrote:You're right. Ventolin is fixated on their being a 1 sec variable between cinders and synthetic, which isn't a universally agreed figure, and has no scientific proof
it's what i've seen 1st hand running significant numbers of races on both well kept dirt & synthetic in my youth & proportioning my modest times to elites
how many dirt & then synthetic races you run ???
it's also the figure used by plenty of ole timers here who also ran on both
How can you compare the variable needed to convert 1 surface to another, when the condition of cinders varied wildly itself?
we are talking well kept, undishevelled dirt
it woud be helluva lot more than 1s/lap on late-in-the-meet chewed up dirt - see bob hayes
A cinder track at White City after a downpour is going to be very different to a hard smooth one in the sun of California
moron
we are not talking quagmires
where's the 3'33.1 in white city ???
i'm not posting the dyestat photo of ryun's 1500 for the 10th time as you've seen it enough times idiot & your numbskull can't comprehend how chewed up looking the lane 1 was
Maybe the constant pounding on a torn up cinder track in a 10,000m race might be worth an average of 1 second a lap for the duration of 25, but not for 4 laps in good weather conditions
no moron
it's for any race, 100m & above appropriately proportioned
it's personal experience analysed scientifically & experience of plenty of guys who also ran on both in same form
I've read in several publications that 0.5 secs per lap is a more sensible "estimate" for a half decent cinder track or grass one. That's the opinion of some experts and again, is not a fact either
name 1
& that idiot mel watman who left school at 15 isn't intellectually qualified as one
I have no doubt Ryun could have run 3:30 for 1500 and a 3:47 Mile in 67 on a synthetic track with reasonable rabbiting up to the bell, perhaps slightly faster
i'm surprised how much of an idiot you are
you can't do simple arithmetic & your day job is a schoolteacher in maths !
you must teach 5y ole retards arithmetic
3'51 - 4 - 3 - 2 = 3'42
NOT
3'47
are you too stoopid to do this sum ???
But the 3:24 and 3:42 Ventolin reckons, 2 and 1 second ahead of the current WRs (set at a time when advances in middle & long distance times were at their greatest), are a nonsense
moron
you were 10y+ from being born when they were running fantastic times in the '60s
kid
f*** off & don't tell us guys who were around in those days what was possible or not
you clearly are too dumb to understand that talent transcends eras - secretariat still holds the wr & it's now 37y ole & not one horse has come close
elliot was worth 3'28/3'29 off his near or actual solo 3'35
snell probably slightly inferior at 3'29/3'30 but he was a better 800 guy & his wr possibly a mid/high 1'42 on a '70s track
ron, likely a 13'00/27'10 guy off his wrs
the key is, training for events upto a mile has not significantly improved in 40+y & why guys like hayes, tommie smith, lee evans woud be running 9.8/19.6/43.8 if teleported to '70s along with elliot/snell/ryun as stated but ron woud suffer as longer distance training seems to have been inefficient compared to today - because they incorporate more aerobic work & weight-training
No one else from the late 60's (Beamon at altitude apart; being No. 2 on all time list) in any other event, set a mark which would still put them such a large margin in front of all others
see above idiot
running on dirt handicapped their times HUGELY
Ryun had an 800m pb (hand timed) of 1:44.3 on a synthetic track and a 2 Mile pb of 8:25
they were ALL hand timed in that era outside of games
& his 800 was on grasstex - a SEMI-synthetic track, not a true synthetic track
& he ran that in '66 when he was clearly inferior to '67 when at his peak, not to mention i'll when he ran 1'44.3 explaining the -ve splits & fatigue of a 1'51 prelim 3 hours earlier in his legs
Even if we take 8 secs off that time for a synthetic performance (too generous in many expert's opinions)
name them moron
& i want ones with quality scientific degrees from reputable universities, not tradesmen who left school at 15y
that gives 8:18. His speed looks as good as Ovett (1:44.09, probably capable of 1:43.5 in 78) or Aouita (1:43.86)
moron
see above
ryun actually held 800 wr, those 2 didn't
& if a juvenile tied wr on a semi-synthetic off -ve splits when ill with a prelim earlier, i'd guestimate, he'd have run 0.5s/lap quicker on '70s track for semi-synthetic, yielding low-1'43
then factor in illness ( reason he ran -ve splits - see his interview ), adjust for -ve splits, adjust for fatigue of a prelim 3 hours earlier ( & moron, NO ONE chooses to run a 800 few hours before if they want to attempt a 800 wr - show where rudy/kip/coe/cruz ran an 800 three hours before their wrs/pbs ??? )
thus his '66 run is easily close to 1'42-flat in '70s
& he was helluva stronger/faster in '67...
but his endurance doesn't look to be as good. Both Ovett & Aouita ran c. 8:13 for the 2 Miles. Yet somehow in an intermediate distance of 1500m and 1 Mile, we're expected to believe Ryun was 4 to 5 secs better than either Ovett or Aouita!
moron
ryun likely had 1'41 speed in '67
you don't need any wr calibre over-distance endurance for 1500 if you bring this much speed to the table - moderate over-distance ability is more than enough
noah ran 3'43 with 7'35 endurance
kip had no 1500 ability whatsoever, didn't stop him running 1'41.1
moorcroft ran 13'00wr - what the f*** was his 10k pb ???
I think at their peak Ovett and Aouita could have run around the 3:28 low - 3:29 low mark ( or about 3:45 for the Mile) in near perfect conditions (perfect ones don't exist). Apart from Ventolin's unproven conversion amounts, there is no evidence to suppose that Ryun would have been any faster at 1500/Mile than those two
you are too stoopid or biased to read/comprehend what i've posted 1/2 dozen times before
ryun was a quantum level above these guys for 800/1500
is the concept "secretariat" too difficult to understand moron ???
Of course you can take this amount off for surfaces, that amount for weather, another for uneven distribution of pace to "jack" a time up. But then you have to do the same for everyone else whose set a fast time
moron
see above for elliot/snell/ron
i'd add keino was probably in 3'30 shape in mexico
Ventolin is entitled to his opinion but to ridicule others for not agreeing with him, and stating his opinions as facts not to be questioned, just makes him look slightly mad.
i'm offering unbiased logic based analysis based on 40y experience primarily based on maths AFTER observation of races - americans/ozzies/kiwis/kenyans all included above
you offer low-level, kindergarden teacher nonsense - incapable of any lateral thinking or acceptance of precedence - see secretariat
wellnow wrote:
Different surfaces require different training. Last night I was struggling with the pace on the track but ran better on grass. Saying that Ryun's 3.51 was worth 3.46-7 is pure speculation not absolute fact.
ventolin you live in a fantasy world of stats.
yours sincerely
another moron.
no offence intended, but this sounds like the meanderings of a low-level high schooler
i do not take seriously the opinion of someone who still has no choice but to run on grass - i went thru that era nearly 40y ago, when there was little choice - i can afford access to a synthetic track 365 if i so choose - i prefer the concept2 & a "warm down" with a few lengths in a 25m pool for my fitness requirements
sorry for you, but that's evolution...
J.R. wrote:
Ryun had a great coach, Bob Timmons, #1, period.
So great that Ryun dropped out of the 800 meter finals at the Olympic Trials in 1968 (a race he should have won in Mexico City). So great that Ryun dropped out of the AAU championship mile in 1969.
Ryun was mentally stale in his outdoor season as a senior at KU in 1969, when he should have been annihilating everyone, but he struggled to beat 4:05 milers. He got beat by a sophomore at the NCAA mile championship. Then he dropped out during the three mile at the same meet, even though KU needed the points to win the team championship.
Ryun's performances were wildly erratic in 1971 and 1972. He would win the mile one week in under four minutes and then finish last the next week in 4:12. This pattern went on for two years.
So yeah, Timmons was a great coach, except that he didn't understand recovery or the need for a break every once in awhile.
Ha, ha, ha!
Such a lengthy, waffling response to a so called moron!
Everything you said is conjecture and an opinion, none of it is FACT. Certainly not worthy of wasting my time to respond in any depth.
You are a sad, ridiculous person. LOL.
ventolin^3 wrote:
it's what i've seen 1st hand running significant numbers of races on both well kept dirt & synthetic in my youth & proportioning my modest times to elites
how many dirt & then synthetic races you run ???
it's also the figure used by plenty of ole timers here who also ran on both
OK then, show me some dirt and synthetic pr's for elite runners from the 60's & 70's who ran on both. If what you're saying is true, we should see about a 1 sec/lap difference for everyone.
Let's not base it on your youth times since (1) that's a case study of 1, (2) you weren't elite, (3) we have no hard evidence that can be seen by all.