Coe's 1'41.73 shoud never have been ratified as an Auto-time !

I have seen practically all of Cram's races and have the vast majority of articles and interviews written on him since 1981. There is absolutely NO evidence whatsoever to support your previous claim he could run 400m in 46.5. Moreover, there is much to suggest he was a 47.high/48 man in his peak year of 1985. You can't run 1:41 mid without at least 46 mid/high 400 ability.

Please find me ONE example of an 800m race in which he ran sub 51.0 on the first lap? The only one was in the 4 x 800m WR he ran in 1982, when he covered the first lap in 50.7 off a rolling start, and ended up with 1:44.5.

In his 3 fastest ever 800m he went through 400m in 51 and bits.

1985- 1:42.88 - 51.2/51.7 (drafted to 700m by Cruz)

1986- 1:43.22 - 51.7/51.5 (led up to 600m by Peter Elliott)

1986- 1:43.19 - 51.6/51.6 (paced/drafted to 600m by Darren Clarke)

Here are some extracts from an interview with Mel Watman and published in Athletics Weekly over 2 weeks (5.10.85 & 12.10.85): -

WATMAN:- Referring to his Zurich win over Cruz. "Were you running close to your limits that night?"

CRAM: - I THINK SO. I'm never really going to set the world alight at 800m and I don’t think I’ll ever be capable of running a world record time. The day after I got back from Moscow (European Cup 1500m) I had a very good session of 150s and knew the speed was there so I went to Zurich feeling very confident.....I knew Cruz would be going out in his usual way and I was just determined to HANG ON TO HIM and if I could get past him in the last 200m fair enough. If I couldn't I would just be looking for quite a fast time"

So, contrary to what you say, Cram was not willing to go too fast, but rather use Cruz to drag him to a fast time!

WATMAN: - "On the subject of your basic speed you once said, many years ago before you had even broken 1:48 for 800, that 'There's no way I can ever run 47 secs for 400 like Seb and Steve...' How have you managed to improve in that area?

CRAM: - "Obviously I've worked a lot on speed, but I haven't done any weights or real speed technique. I think strength has a lot to do with it.....Because I've filled out a little bit and I've got a lot more strength, what speed I have I'm able to maintain over a longer distance. The most pleasing thing for me this year has been my actual sprinting speed. Even in training I've been running low 23s for 200 with a couple of yards rolling start, which isn't fantastic but is pretty good fom me, AND I'VE RUN A 48.1 400TIME TRIAL THIS SUMMER."

Cram's Edinburgh 800 Race was set up perfectly for him to run optimum race: - even splits, no obstructions, only ran 3m wide. He got c270m of drafting in the Commonwealth final.

His splits were: - 25.2, 26.5, 26.5, 25.0 (12.3/12.7)= 1:43.22.

In Edinburgh there were 3 days rest between his heat & semi (1:51.42, 1:48.71, run on the same day) and the final, so there is no "taking off time" for tired legs due to rounds, as it was no more than a 1 off circuit race with 2 training runs 3 days earlier!

The weather is something else which you always over-exaggerate and take time off because of it. It was not raining at the time, there were no visible wet patches on the parts of the track on which Cram ran on, and the cool temperature is going to have a negligible effect on running for less than 2 mins. It was also not excessively windy, and what wind there was would have benefitted him down the straight as much as hindering him down the back straight. There were 2 other finals taking part on the same day as the 800m final (July 31), the men's 200m, which had a wind reading of +2.15m/sec, and the women's 200m (+2.07m/sec). Hardly the strong winds that you pretend there to be.

Moreover, he stated in an interview afterwards that he was flat out over the last 200m.

"I hung back but once I was moving I just kept going. The crowd were making so much noise down the home straight that I thought Tom (McKean) must have been right there. I didn't dare look back!"

Cram .... still thinks Coe's world record is, "a little bit out of my reach."

Cram always advocated even splits for 800m. And that is because he didn't have super 400 ability. He was a 47 high/48 guy who managed to break 1:43 due to his incredible aerobic capability.

“I think a lot of 800m runners don’t run it correctly. They could run faster times…..All my fast times over 800 have been with even paced laps. I don’t see the point of running a 50 sec first lap….So if you’re aiming to do 1:42-1:43 you can go through in 51 ½ ..something like that.” (Steve Cram, AW)

So we have Cram stating he was a 48.1 man, that he couldn't break Coe's WR, that he was flat out in the last 100m in Edinburgh, that he preferred to run even splits and that he wasn't as fast as Coe or Ovett. There is enough evidence there to dismiss your ramblings as fanciful at best, ludicrous at worst.

We also have wind recording for the day which were no great shakes, and would have aided him down the straight as much as it may have hindered him down the back straight.

Cram was a 1:42 high guy who could possibly have run 1:42.5 in the perfect race with the likes of Cruz pacing and drafting him to 600m, a la Zurich 85.

ventolin^3 wrote:

true but that is side-issue

my feeling is that actually, cram's best distance was 800 but 1500 was glory event & so didn't bother much with 800

he even said he wished he'd run a few more 800s in '85 but wasted time on 1k & 2k when for his legacy he shouda gone for 800s

( 2k wr utterly worthless )

cram wouda been in trouble in a slow-paced 800 needing a fast last 200 or 100, but flat-out from the gun when just question of hanging on, he was an incredible talent !

Good point regarding Cram. He never reached his potential in the two-lapper.

I have one question for Mr. Jim Ryun is my God will tell my mom if you don't agree.

46 + 3.29 in your calculator, what you've got for Coe's 800m?

Fanatical loser.

eh ?

did you see see cram from '80 onwards live on tv as a grown-up fully able to appreciate his ability over the next few years ?

all your vids/articles are cudgelled years/decades after the era

i saw his big races & read the broadsheets/mags at the time as a working grown-up fully able to appreciate the era, living thru it, not from years later from accumulated materia;

no

he was capable of 1'41-mid/high at his peak off 1500 training which is not feasible of anything slower than 46+

it is poor analysis not to believe that at his magnificent peak, cram didn't have superb 400 speed

no

you can't run an intrinsic 1'41-mid/high without 46+ & seeing as that was cram's 800 ability in mid-'85/mid-'86, it is hugely likely 46+ was his 400 speed at the time

you finally learnt something

for cram to have this possible 800 at his peak indicates 46+ speed

no

learn to read

his 800 peak was brief, in mid-'85/mid-'86 & he only ran that zurich-800 as his only elite 800 in mid/late-'85

he lamented this later wishing he had run some more races in that time

more specifically, he shoudn't have been wasting his time on 2ks or even 1ks & run some serious 800 TTs

'86 was slow build up to heavy double-peak later in year & didn't want to chase clock seriously until after euros by which time he was already slightly injured

useless stat

you don't get a wr for a relay split

also you seem to have no idea about dates :

that was in '82 when he was a 1'44.4 runner

he was a quantum lap better over 800 in '85-mid, so he wouda made mincemeat of a 1'44.5 relay leg off 50.7 in '85-mid

learn to read

you clearly never saw cram live on tv as an experienced grown-up fan able to appreciate his ability

he had just 1 elite 800 race in mid-'85 & the pacer was pathetic in 50.6 when every grown-up before expected 49-mid

that was not cram's fault he didn't have a billy kochellah pacing him

no

it was more like 50.9+/51.9+ with huge amounts of wide-running negating any extra drafting cruz offered & it was a tactical race for cram only putting in his sole serious effort in last ~ 150m

no

more like 51.8 / 50.4 with 3+ extra distance run in terrible weather as even hard-man elliott has stated

incredible run given the conditions

poor pacing from a guy who was an elite 400 guy & ended up with 44.38pb & ran 44.75 at 19y !!

the end of a tiring season and after a couple of late nights"

no

of course cram wouda been close to his limit in a 1'42.8 with ~ 5m extra on bends, worth 1'42-low & his big effort was in only last ~ 150 !!!

no

you do not seem to have much idea about 800 nor how good cram was in '85 despite the vids being avalible for years

every grown-up watching race live on tv/stadium expected pacer to go thru in 49-mid, with cruz behind & cram at worst 50-flat, more likely 49-high

clearly you never saw this race live or if you did, definitely not as a grown-up

what can't you comprehend about the pacer ruining the clockings with 50.6 opener ???

cruz ran 1'42.5 & 1'42.4 very soon after & only 1'43.2 in zurich

try & learn : the times were ruined by slow pacing

how many times do you have to be told :

there is no date specified or how much rest he had for that 400 ?!

cram was in crap racing shape in late june-'85 when he lost a 800 to coe in 1'46.4 !!!

obviously taken virtually no break from training from it

if that 400 was even run fully rested at the time, it offers nothing for when cram was clocking 1'42.8 the next month

when in '85 does cram state that 400 ???

at time of his crap 1'46.4 ???

then no specification if it was a fully rested 400 which is only acceptable TT

he maya run it after a hard 10 mile in morning & then a brutal track session in afternoon finished off with a 400TT

nothing offered about date or amount of rest for that 400

no

terrible cold weather which even hard man elliott says it was

we have guy on T&F board who was there for race & describes the weather as "freezing"

no

it works out as 3rd race in 4 days with 2 races on same day which wouda knocked the stuffing out of them

it finished coe who dropped out before the final !!!

no

no one has ever said it was raining

the comments have always been the appalling weather in terms of temperature & wind, making wind-chill : freezing

even hard-man elliott called the weather poor

you have to have no clue about 800 to believe that there woudn't be ~ 1s difference between that run & if repeated on 75 - 80F day with 0 wind

no

you have no idea about basic physics

equal wind does not cancel each other out

do you think a guy with a 45.00pb on 0 wind day woud run 45.00 if there was a constant 5m/s wind thruout ???

i'll do the physics for you later as you seem to have no idea

no

2+m/s winds are huge in a 800

they do not cancel out thruout race & winds of that magnitude woud slow clocking in my observational experience, by ~ 0.25 - 0.5s

a small wind to ignore woud be 0.5m/s NOT 2+m/s !!!

on top of that, the wind woud lower effective temperature by wind-chill by 5 - 10F

cram got whammied double by wind

- 0.25 to 0.5s from slowing/speeding effect, always overall slower from physics

- drop in effective temperature by 5 - 10F from wind-chill

cram was really screwed by the weather that race

off course he woud expect to be

& result was that he utterly destroyed the field

cram's opinions are way-off :

how far behind was mckean at the finish !!!

once again, his opinion is way off as was mckean threat above

cram was capable of breaking 800m wr if he'd got the perfect race/weather at his peak

which is nonsense as huge amounts of elite clockings have shown

those huge number of clockings show elites run their fastest possible 800 of ~ 2s +ve splits

does cram or you think he had a different physiology to every other human ???

his own claim is nonsense as he split ~ 50.9 / 51.9 in his 1'42.8pb

please explain how those are even ???

no

ridiculous argument

your 400 speed does not dictate how you run your fastest possible 800

it doesn't matter if your speed is 44 or 50, you still will get your fastest possible 800 off ~ 2s +ve splits

no

he was more like 46-mid at his peak

plenty of elite 1500 runners have run 3'29.6 & most of them have got at least 47-high/48-speed & they didn't run 1'42.8 with ~ 5m extra on bends in a tactical race for them

hicham's coach himself claimed "about 48"

with far superior endurance than cram, his 800 wouda been into 1'40s if we followed your nonsense argument !!!

the conclusion is that cram's speed had to be way faster than 47-high

a wrong opinion

cram is no rocket-scientist, but a degree in sports-science

find how many of the top-10 fastest 800 guys of all time didn't run their pb of ~ 2s +ve splits or bigger differential ???

cram was a great runner, but history shows his opinion on this matter is nonsense

the basic logical premise is that to run your fastest possible 800, it has to hurt the whole way round, from gun to tape & increasingly

if you run even-pace, then you have not hurt yourself on 1st lap & turning it into a very exaggerated 400m, you have not run your best possible 800m

cram was expecting to be hurt like no other time in his life in zurich-'85 as were all grown-ups watching, but crap 50.6 from pacer didn't hurt anyone

as from historical stats : only the 2 greatest 800 runners of all time on synthetic, Kip & Rudy have ever run 1'42+ off even-pace or -ve splits :

Kip in monaco-'97 when too tired after his epic zurich wr with 52.0 / 50.7 & Rudy in his 1'42+ in nairobi

cram is stating a clocking in a manner only those 2 ever have

if he feels he couda replicate it, then he was likely in close to their 800 ability, which is a reasonable argument

no details

whether it was in june-'85 when he was running crap 1'46.4 or even worse, 1'47.6 at end of june !!!

no details of how much rest for it : fully rested as it has to be, or after hard run in morning over many miles & then brutal workout on track in afternoon finished off with a 400 ???

he was wrong

a race in which he absolutely destroyed a quality field

which historical stats show will never get you your fastest possible 800

every elite 800 guy who ever lived woud love to run even-splits but that gets you no awesome clockings

to run your fastest possible 800 it has to hurt every millisecond of the race & even pace does NOT hurt you on 1st lap

cram's assertion is already nonsense as he ran ~ 50.9 / 51.9 in his pb

NOT even splits

no

he outran ovett from the front in a slow paced mile to the bell & ovett had just broken the 1500wr

you have offered nonsense with no logical thought applied

no

2+m/s wind woud wreck a 800

no

you have no idea about basic physics

the same wind on each straight does not cancel itself out

the fastest possible 800 is run with 0 wind & any constant wind, of 1 or 2 or 5m/s... just wrecks the clocking increasingly

no

he ran ~ 5m extra there worth a route-1 of ~ 1'42-low & this was a tactical race where he only put in his serious effort in last 150

that was worth ~ 1'41-mid/high in a perfect race, fast to bell with ~ 2s +ve splits

similarly, in his 1'43.2 in edinburgh after rounds, which killed off coe, he ran ~ 3m extra, worth ~ 1'42.8 for route-1, still with serious -ve splits in big winds costing :

~ 0.25 - 0.5s from non-cancellation effect of winds on straights & ~ 5 - 10F drop in temperature from wind-chill

a double whammy

that race, if fully rested, with warm day, 0 wind & again 2s +ve splits was worth at worst 1'41-mid

eh ?

now you are disagreeing with one of your other handles !!!

no

hicham's coach didn't seem to have much idea of his 400 speed & according to another poster here, james li had no idea of bernie's 400 !!!

no

it's claimed james li had no idea of bernie's 400 ability

i reckon 46-low

eh ?

whatever "peers" nonsense is ?!

all you claimed is that cram ran 48.1tt in summer-'85

his summer-'85 800s included rubbish such as 1'46.4 on 21st june losing to coe & even more rubbish 1'47.6 losing to mckean on 29th june

those are summer runs & 1'46+ is rubbish maybe somewhere not inconsistent with a rubbish 48.1tt

certainly not anywhere consistent with his awesome 1'42.8 peak with ~ 5m extra on bends & crushing cruz in a slow race to bell & tactical affair for cram

then there is no specification if that 48.1tt was fully rested for best part of a week as your best 400 shoud be

did he run that 48.1 fully rested ???

or last race of day after hard 10 mile run in morning & a brutal track-workout during the afternoon with multiple reps of fast 800s then finished with a 400tt ???

you offer nothing as usual

something concrete required

after years of pondering, comparison to likes of souleiman/maths/etc, imo :

cram was in best 400/800 shape for edinburgh-'86 :

~ 46-low/mid / 1'41-low

hicham in 3'26.00 shape :

~ 46-mid/high / 1'41-mid / 1'42-flat

no

claim of 48.1 in training

nothing about exact date of run such as losing 1'47.6 shape end-june or how rested he was for it

he equally couda run it :

last race of day after hard 10 mile run in morning & a brutal track-workout during the afternoon with multiple reps of fast 800s or 1ks then finished with a 400tt ???

no

he did lotta mileage, but a composite solo 2'14-mid, worth more like 2'13-mid if paced to 600, in a 1500 !!!, shows he had plenty of speed

helluva lot of speed

does anyone in this universe seriously think it is possible to run 3'26.00 with a 53.2 finish off 47+++/48-low ??? or 1'43+ ???

this is irrelevant

even if he was on epo, was he some kind of unique physiological abnormality that the epo woud give him superfast 1500 ability but rubbish 800 of your suggested 1'43+ ???

can epo give 3'26.00 with 53.2 finish but only rubbish 1'43+ ???

no

your argument is saying that NO 800 runner shoud ever take epo as it gives "marginal" benefit !!!???

where is your proof that epo does not help 800 hugely ???

no

natural or not

in his 3'26.00 with 53.2, he was likely

~ 1'41-mid / 1'42-high

no

back to your

"epo doesn't offer anything but marginal benefit for 800"

try more like :

if epo offers 3s improvement for 1500, then, if it offered same proportional benefit for 800, it woud be

~ (8/15) * 3 = 1.6s benefit for 800

however, seeing as 800 is slightly more aerobic event than 1500 & slightly lesser epo effect, that 1.6s shoud be reduced slightly

a reasonable ballpark figure woud be

~ 1.2 / 1.3s

improvement for an an already elite 800 guy with epo

learn to think

no

he was most tested middle-distance runner of the era & all the way into '04 when epo test was good

he was just a brutal trainer & trained with weights which beat the kenyans

kenyans still not training with weights & end result is still those stick-insect Asbel's et al

no

he was running until '04-late which was 4y into better epo test & obviously most tested middle-distance runner of all-time upto then

what drugs apart from epo ???

Deanouk wrote:We also have wind recording for the day which were no great shakes, and would have aided him down the straight as much as it may have hindered him down the back straight

here is the maths for the physics, which is just basic algebra & just simple manifestation of chaos theory/thermodynamics, meaning that the least disturbance to an equilibrium is most efficient system :

for any even-lap race : 400 / 800 / 1600 / 10k :

if time for 0 wind race is

T

then, with constant wind thruout, aiding on 1/2 of race & equally hindering on other 1/2 by say :

W

where W is % help/hinderance :

W = 1% or 2% or 3% or 10%... = 1 + 1/100 or 1 + 2/100 or 1 + 3/100 or 1 + 10/100...

help/hinderance is

1 + W/100

& i'll point it out for you :

1 + 1/100 = 1.01

1 + 2/100 = 1.02

1 + 3/100 = 1.03

1 + 10/100 = 1.10

for race with wind hindering :

wind hindering on 1/2 of race will be

(1/2) * T ( 1 + W/100 )

wind helping on 1/2 of race will be

(1/2) * T / ( 1 + W/100 )

your non-analytical assertion is that 0 wind time of T is matched by

(1/2) * T ( 1 + W/100 )

+

(1/2) * T / ( 1 + W/100 ) ?

is completely wrong

i doubt you'll manage basic algebra, so i'll do it for you :

(1/2) * T ( 1 + W/100 ) + (1/2) * T / ( 1 + W/100 )

=

T + T * (W^2 / ( 20000 + 200W) )

learn :

the algebra says any time with wind is :

T+

the

+

in this case is

T * (W^2 / ( 20000 + 200W)

meaning any run with any sustained consistent wind is always SLOWER than with 0 wind be it 0.1m/s to 10m/s

never ever again claim wind equally helps/hinders the time :

it is completely wrong

Sweet bejaysus!

What a load of unreadable craaaaap!

Help me out here Vent.

On the 31st of July, Cram was at worst in WR 800M shape, and then 4 weeks later he gets smashed by Coe at the EC? Then comes back a week or two later to run SB over 800/1500m (1:43.19/3:30.15)!

What shape was Coe in at the EC then (basically running in lane 2 the whole race) so approx 1:42.70 converted for the extra distance.

JR

anytime

~ 1'41-low

in a 1-off, fully rested low-key TT in 72F with 0 wind

eh ?

no smashing

he also got beat by mckean who he crushed in edinburgh

never heard of injury ?

cram came into stuttgart injured

i am starting to wonder if you have coached a 1'44+ as you shoud be more circumspect in language / opinion / knowledge

i assume you were no very experienced, grown-up fan in '86 to understand

cram says he was shocked at his 1'43.19 in rieti at "end of tiring long season with some late nights"

=

he was hugely past his peak for rieti & running it with lotta hangovers included

nonsense

he ran ~ 8m extra, mostly hugely drafted by an injured/sub-par cram

it really was pathetic how hugely better he "knew" Cram was in '86, based on edinburgh-shape, where coe got finished off in prelims, that coe had to limpet the hugely sub-par 800 cram around & kicked off him, slightly beating mckean who Cram crushed in edinburgh !!!

coe was so desperate in limpeting cram in stuttgart it was shockingly & totally embarrassing !!!

no

1'43-mid for route-1 with huge drafting

likely

1'43-high++ without extra drafting

no doubt

~ 1'43-flat

for 1-off, ideal weather, paced only to bell

i am starting to wonder if you have other handles...

Vent, unlike you I post on here with my real name and never hide behind other synonyms...nor have posts deleted that prove what I'm saying is wrong. Until you start putting your real name on your posts, I'll assume you have something to hide...which would explain a lot I guess.

So now you are claiming that Cram was injured between the 31st of July and the EC? Mind you he did run 2:15.86 on Aug 11th, so it must have been after that! Amazing that he managed to run 5 races in 6 days with that injury. Must have super recovery powers.

Cram was found wanting in the last 800m of that race, beaten by two athletes with far superior 400m speed than he possessed (athletes that can't break 23 sec for 200m cannot run sub 47 for 400m).

Can you show me your math for drafting effects with an athlete is not directly behind the runner in from of them (i.e running wide on their shoulder)

It still staggers me that every athlete you prostitute can ran a far faster 800m time than they have actually run apart from Coe is is slower (you sight that hand times can be well off, but still use Jim's 46 point hand times relay legs that no one can really confirm as prof that he coulda run 1:39+) .

I'm starting to wonder if you once asked Coe for his autograph and got rejected, so you carry this chip on your shoulder like a little kid that was slapped by his Mum for eating too many cookies before dinner. Bad boy Vent, bad boy.

JR (I put this at the bottom of all my work emails, so sometimes I put it here out of habit)

pathetic

i ask for fully auto-time as required by iaaf rules from 1/1/81

fiirenze-'81 failed

from

1/1/81

only fully-auto-times acceptable for iaaf from 100 - 10k

firenze was unacceptable wr for submission

Ventolin, do you masturbate while watching satellite TV or while reading your own posts? This is a serious question...

Post the IAAF rule that was violated then.

That's right. You don't have any proof of IAAF timing requirements.

And you can't delete your own silly ramblings or middle schoolers' posts that clearly make you out to be a fool.

I bet he does it while writing his posts. Climaxes every time he types "utter drivel" or "nonsense."

Lawdy wrote:

I bet he does it while writing his posts. Climaxes every time he types "utter drivel" or "nonsense."

or wouda, couda, shouda, maya

Whats "maya?" Asking for a friend..

Thinker wrote:Post the IAAF rule that was violated then.

learn to read :

read kondrateyeva's non-submitted 10.87 & reasons why & then read part where it says coe's record was accepted despite also lacking fully auto-time

from 1/1/81, all track wrs required fully auto-timing for ratification

photo-electric timing unacceptable