Jim Ryun - The Greatest M-Distance Runner

ventolin, do you have any thoughts on what Bannister or Kip Keino could have run?

T&F Analyst wrote:

Taking all things into consideration - track facilities, equipment, training sophistication, and nutrition/supplementation modalities, I have to beleive Jim Ryun has been the greatest middle distance runner in the sport to date.

I welcome your thoughts.

When you say "taking all things into consideration" you actually mean " disregarding the fact that many people have run faster and he never won a global title"

someone had to do it wrote:

idiot

Roger Bannister wrote in his book that Seb Coe, an athlete who ran on both cinder and synthetic tracks found about a 1 second per lap difference in times. This is consistent with what many other athletes have found.

3:51.1-4= 3:47.1, faster than Seb Coe ever ran. Additionally, this is changing nothing but the surface. He led every step of the way and ran a huge negative split at the end.

It's Ventolin in disguise. The use of idiot gave it away.

The exact quote from Bannister's book on page 209 is, "In the 1960s they were replaced by fast synthetic tracks that gave an advantage of "perhaps" one second per lap in the mile, as Sebastian Coe, who ran on both types told me"

The key word is "perhaps". Not a given but a possibility.

Bannister was basically comparing what he did on a cinders track in 1954 Britain to modern tracks, saying it would now be worth 3:56.

What Ryun would have run on in warm California in 1967 would have been different again from what Bannister experienced on a modest track at Iffley road.

1/10 wrote:

T&F Analyst wrote:

Taking all things into consideration - track facilities, equipment, training sophistication, and nutrition/supplementation modalities, I have to beleive Jim Ryun has been the greatest middle distance runner in the sport to date.

I welcome your thoughts.

When you say "taking all things into consideration" you actually mean " disregarding the fact that many people have run faster and he never won a global title"

But would they have won more titles and run faster with the same overall conditions that Ryun faced? I seriously doubt it. A fatal lack of understanding on your part 1/10.

Taking Issue wrote:

1/10 wrote:

When you say "taking all things into consideration" you actually mean " disregarding the fact that many people have run faster and he never won a global title"

But would they have won more titles and run faster with the same overall conditions that Ryun faced? I seriously doubt it. A fatal lack of understanding on your part 1/10.

Elliott and Snell ran in the same conditions as Ryun, yet they won more medals competing in fewer games.

Ryun ran his 800 WR on synthetic and only matched what Snell had run on grass.

Those that have followed have run considerably faster than Ryun and there's no reason to believe they still wouldn't have won on cinders as synthetic, as everyone in the race would experience the same conditions.

Overrated wrote:

Taking Issue wrote:

But would they have won more titles and run faster with the same overall conditions that Ryun faced? I seriously doubt it. A fatal lack of understanding on your part 1/10.

Elliott and Snell ran in the same conditions as Ryun, yet they won more medals competing in fewer games.

Ryun ran his 800 WR on synthetic and only matched what Snell had run on grass.

Those that have followed have run considerably faster than Ryun and there's no reason to believe they still wouldn't have won on cinders as synthetic, as everyone in the race would experience the same conditions.

Those that followed = drug enhanced performances.

someone had to do it wrote:

No. If el g and lagat did the type of training Jim did, THEY would have been injured. Jim could withstand a tremendous workload. Take away the drugs lagat and el g were on and they don't stand a chance of doing half of what Jim did in training.

This doesn't make any sense.

If Jim could withstand such a "tremendous workload" then why did he have such a short career?

His top-level performances only ranged from approximately 1966-1972, and for select portions of that period, he was out of commission (i.e. mono in 1968). Furthermore, within that period, he did not consistently maintain his status as "the best in the world".

For someone you claim was extremely durable, longevity of career certainly wasn't his strong suit.

LetsBeHonest wrote:

Those that followed = drug enhanced performances.

LOL. What, all of them? So no one that came after Ryun 45 years ago was capable of running faster unless they were using drugs?

Is that the case for all events?

The fact is that there were drugs being used on University campuses in the 1960's when there was no testing for steroids or any of them. So it's just as likely that Ryun was using drugs when no testing took place as it is that those that followed did when testing did take place.

The idea that one person from 40+ years ago is so much better than anyone else since is not realistic. It is not the case in any other athletic event or sport, so why should it be the case with Ryun.

Taking Issue wrote:

1/10 wrote:

When you say "taking all things into consideration" you actually mean " disregarding the fact that many people have run faster and he never won a global title"

But would they have won more titles and run faster with the same overall conditions that Ryun faced? I seriously doubt it. A fatal lack of understanding on your part 1/10.

Coulda shoulda woulda . Blah blah blah.

Fact is, Jim was really, really talented but his track record in global champs was poor. COULD he have won Olympics? Sure. DID he? Nope. He cannot possibly be considered the best just because some fanboys out there have fond memories of what he MIGHT have done. This thread is stupid

Taking Issue wrote:

1/10 wrote:

When you say "taking all things into consideration" you actually mean " disregarding the fact that many people have run faster and he never won a global title"

But would they have won more titles and run faster with the same overall conditions that Ryun faced? I seriously doubt it. A fatal lack of understanding on your part 1/10.

Are you actually serious? I'd say the fatal lack of understanding is that your idea of supporting evidence is what you wish had happened . Mine is actually what did happen. I sincerely hope you aren't an attorney for a living.

Ryun had plenty of chances to run on synthetic tracks. Are people adding a second per lap to all his synthetic times to make them a more realistic comparison to how far he slipped?

Was his Mexico time only worth 3:41?

SMJO wrote:

Ryun had plenty of chances to run on synthetic tracks.

Not in his prime wiseguy.

Jim, are you posting about yourself again?

Misquote wrote:

It's Ventolin in disguise. The use of idiot gave it away.

The exact quote from Bannister's book on page 209 is, "In the 1960s they were replaced by fast synthetic tracks that gave an advantage of "perhaps" one second per lap in the mile, as Sebastian Coe, who ran on both types told me"

The key word is "perhaps". Not a given but a possibility.

Bannister was basically comparing what he did on a cinders track in 1954 Britain to modern tracks, saying it would now be worth 3:56.

What Ryun would have run on in warm California in 1967 would have been different again from what Bannister experienced on a modest track at Iffley road.

moron

go find a picture from the night of the track. there is nothing good about it. it was all chewed up from a night of racing

additionally, i forgot to add, that jim had to run a race the day before that as a qualifying heat. and no, don't tell me it didn't make a difference. nobody runs a race the day before trying to set a world record.

Overrated wrote:

Elliott and Snell ran in the same conditions as Ryun, yet they won more medals competing in fewer games.

Ryun ran his 800 WR on synthetic and only matched what Snell had run on grass.

Those that have followed have run considerably faster than Ryun and there's no reason to believe they still wouldn't have won on cinders as synthetic, as everyone in the race would experience the same conditions.

moron, ryun set his 880y WR on a semi synthetic track. it was also his second race of the day. it was also a negative split.

Seyta wrote:

This doesn't make any sense.

If Jim could withstand such a "tremendous workload" then why did he have such a short career?

His top-level performances only ranged from approximately 1966-1972, and for select portions of that period, he was out of commission (i.e. mono in 1968). Furthermore, within that period, he did not consistently maintain his status as "the best in the world".

For someone you claim was extremely durable, longevity of career certainly wasn't his strong suit.

idiot

ryun ran in an amateur era. He had to work a job while trying to be the best in the world. his short career had nothing to do with durability. he got mono, which is something that afflicted him for the rest of his career. he also suffered from allergies and had a bad year in 71 because of it. he also didn't race at for 19 months because he was tired of the stress the press put on him and wanted to spend time with his wife.

Concerned Citizen wrote:ventolin, do you have any thoughts on what Bannister or Kip Keino could have run?

bannister was long before my time - obviously knock off 4s for dirt track & maybe another 1 - 2 for non-ideal pacing

i'd say as fast as 3'53 in the '70s

keino, obviously had race of his life in mexico

people may laugh, but using NCAA altitude tables + wind/altitude calculator give his 3'34 as ~ 3'27 !?

if you use some logic & assume my suggested 3'24/3'25 for ryun in '67 had slipped to 3'30 ( sea-level ) by mexico because of the chronic fatigue syndrome following his mononucleosis ( 3'30 shape being good enough to win most of following games but still huge drop from his '67 shape - remember, he coudn't even make top 3 of the 800 trials going in as wr holder ! ), then keino beating him by ~ 3's again comes out at 3'27/3'28 - he reminds me a lot of silas kiplagat nowdays, albeit slightly superior on that day

someone had to do it wrote:moron, ryun set his 880y WR on a semi synthetic track. it was also his second race of the day. it was also a negative split.

it was on something called grasstex

last post here gives some info about it ( apparently from '69 t&f ) :

The previous surface most used was a harder substance called "Grasstex," costing about 1/4 of the Tartan surface, but giving no where near the energy return

the price pretty much sums it up : 1/4 the price of a full synthetic track - unlikely to be anywhere as good as a full synthetic ( grasstex was a mulch of rubber/asphalt ) & the energy return aspect means speed ( iaaf current rules restrict energy return to 65% - that is how they limit speed of tracks )

likely a quicker surface to run on than dirt, but probably not by much & very unlikely to be as quick as a full synthetic

Moron.

3:30 was "good enough" to win most of the following Games?

You think?

The transitional era from dirt to synthetic encompassed the careers of a number of notable athletes.

Make a list that shows how many of them dropped huge chunks of time from their bests just by switching surfaces.

It should be really easy.