Who are the top 100 distance runners of all time?

no YOURE hilarious wrote:

Uhhhhhh wrote:

1. Lower Mo, he’s a doper. 2. Raise Lagat, he’s been a top teir runner for longer than anyone. 3. I should be number one on the list. 4. Jager?

LOL, lower a guy who has never failed a test for being a doper. Raise a guy who has.

Letsrun logic at it's finest.

Lagat never failed a test for being a doper, dumb-dumb.

Coevett wrote:

But if that's the case, what the hell is an 800m specialist David Rushida doing at number 7 above the likes of Coe??? Do you think Rushida would have been running 1:41 back in 1981 on crap tracks and in flimsy plimsoles if he'd been spending the majority of the season trying to outdo Ovett over 1500 and Mile?

Bahahaha. Rudisha is the greatest 800m runner of all time. Coe splitting his focus doesn't get him bonus points. And yes, I think Rudisha would have been running 1:41 on crap tracks in flimsy plimsoles.

Interesting that the first person under 4:00 is listed as an "also ran". And on a cinder track with limited training no less.

I am curious about your opinion. I wanted to include at least one of Sydney Wooderson and Rudolf Harbig, and I was slightly more impressed with Wooderson and went with him on this list. But Rudolf Harbig's name seems to come up frequently when discussing historical runners, and you have a high opinion of him. But, beyond his world record in the 800m (there are many world record setters not on the list), I didn't see much in his accomplishments that demanded inclusion on this list. I understand that Olympic medals would not be a good measure for him because there were no 1940/44 games. That said, what did Harbig accomplish that makes him an all-time great?

your bias is showing wrote:

Coevett wrote:

But if that's the case, what the hell is an 800m specialist David Rushida doing at number 7 above the likes of Coe??? Do you think Rushida would have been running 1:41 back in 1981 on crap tracks and in flimsy plimsoles if he'd been spending the majority of the season trying to outdo Ovett over 1500 and Mile?

Bahahaha. Rudisha is the greatest 800m runner of all time. Coe splitting his focus doesn't get him bonus points. And yes, I think Rudisha would have been running 1:41 on crap tracks in flimsy plimsoles.

Bull. Bias has nothing to do with it. Most great distance runner lists would have Coe ahead of Rushida, especially if as the OP is taking into account range (otherwise, why the hell is Aouita 4th?).

I'd take your point if it was Rushida against, say Cram, but Coe won double 1500m Gold as well as well as the world records in every middle-distance event. Don't forget that Rushida has only shaved 2/10th of a second off of Kipketer's records. Coe ran nearly two seconds faster than any man in history. If Rushida could have done what Coe did in 81 then he ought to have run well under 1:41 with all the opportunities he's had.

Was Skah clean?

mrom wrote:

I am curious about your opinion. I wanted to include at least one of Sydney Wooderson and Rudolf Harbig, and I was slightly more impressed with Wooderson and went with him on this list. But Rudolf Harbig's name seems to come up frequently when discussing historical runners, and you have a high opinion of him. But, beyond his world record in the 800m (there are many world record setters not on the list), I didn't see much in his accomplishments that demanded inclusion on this list. I understand that Olympic medals would not be a good measure for him because there were no 1940/44 games. That said, what did Harbig accomplish that makes him an all-time great?

Is this a joke???

Setting an 800m WR that lasted 16 years? He also broke the 1000m WR. He also ran crazy fast times for 100,200 and 400 (WR and European record for 15 years). Granted, this is a distance runners list but it's still remarkable that a distance runner could have such raw speed. Also, he did win an Olympic medal, unlike Wooderson - a bronze in the 4x400 relay in 36.

Agreed!

The OP’s list has lots of the right names but the order is more like his choice of favourite athletes, as there is clearly no criteria being used to rank them.

Firstly, it’s not a good idea to lump middle distance runners (800 - 3000m) with distance runners (5k - Marathon).

Secondly, it is a nonsense ranking Rudisha and Kipketer above Snell on any list. Snell’s record over 800m is as good as either of the Kenyan two lap specialists; like Rudisha he has 2 Olympic golds, and like both he has broken the WR, by a much bigger margin than either of the other two! But then on top of that, he broke the 1000m WR, the Mile WR and an Olympic gold over 1500m. His achievements far out class those of either Kenyan.

Thirdly, how can Herb Elliott and Ovett be ranked behind Cruz? Elliott won titles at 800 and 1500, while Ovett won golds over 8, 15 and 5k! Cruz only won a title over 800m.

Cruz failed to break any world records, while Elliott set world records over 2 distances and Ovett over 3 different events. There is no comparison.

Consistency is what makes Rudisha the greatest 800m runner ever. Coe isn’t the greatest at anything, ever.

your bias is showing wrote:

Coevett wrote:

Bull. Bias has nothing to do with it. Most great distance runner lists would have Coe ahead of Rushida, especially if as the OP is taking into account range (otherwise, why the hell is Aouita 4th?).

I'd take your point if it was Rushida against, say Cram, but Coe won double 1500m Gold as well as well as the world records in every middle-distance event. Don't forget that Rushida has only shaved 2/10th of a second off of Kipketer's records. Coe ran nearly two seconds faster than any man in history. If Rushida could have done what Coe did in 81 then he ought to have run well under 1:41 with all the opportunities he's had.

Consistency is what makes Rudisha the greatest 800m runner ever. Coe isn’t the greatest at anything, ever.

Consistency?

Coe has held the world record at 800mts, 1000mts and 1500mts - the 800 record lasting 16 years.

Would have had 3 gold medals at 1500mts rather than 2 had the selectors not been such bone-headed idiots in 1988.

Coevett wrote:

Why do you rank Cruz above Ovett? Cruz 1 Olympic gold and one bronze at 800m.

Ovett, Olympic gold 800m, bronze 1500, 5 Olympic finals, Multiple WRs 1500 to two miles. National records 800 to two miles. World cup wins, European golds, and even a Commonwealth Gold at 5000m when GB was best 5K nation in world. Suck on that. Ovett should be top 10 if you are considering 'range'.

Cruz's Olympic haul for 800 meters was 1 Olympic Gold (LA, 1984) and 1 Olympic Silver (Seoul, 1988). You mentioned an 800 meters bronze for him and I add that that came in Helsinki, 1983. I have no favorite among these two greats, Cruz and Ovett, but let's get that part straight.

I stopped reading at 10. No Viren or Coe in there? Not a very good list.

In all seriousness, I felt really sad when I realized Alan Webb and Dathan Ritzenhein weren't here. I spent my youth idolizing two guys who arent even top 100 of all time.

I think the list needs to be cut down to 25 at least

What's that filthy doper, Dieter Baumann, doing in 60th place? Even juiced to the gills he wasn't very impressive.

At the same time Juantorena is only 66th!

HRH wrote:

your bias is showing wrote:

Consistency is what makes Rudisha the greatest 800m runner ever. Coe isn’t the greatest at anything, ever.

Consistency?

Coe has held the world record at 800mts, 1000mts and 1500mts - the 800 record lasting 16 years.

Would have had 3 gold medals at 1500mts rather than 2 had the selectors not been such bone-headed idiots in 1988.

Is Rudisha the greatest 800m runner ever?

Fair points... and getting feedback was the main goal in posting the list, to see how my impressions and analysis compare to the broader consensus.

As for the method, the basic approach was to first see who had won enough big races to prove their competitive ability, then look for fast times and favorable head-to-head match-ups with other top runners. A lot of this data is readily available at sites like

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/

, which provides pretty thorough coverage for at least the past 40 years. I spent a lot of time combing through the data, looking at individual races and best times for a given year/decade. There's a bit of a preference for more recent runners, but I think this is fair--I'd like to think that we collectively have gotten better at training and racing over time, and it's fine for the rankings to reflect this.

The 800m runners have been getting the most discussion, so let's use that as an example. I think it's agreed that David Rudisha has established himself as the best pure 800m of all time, so it's natural to rank him very high. After all, we have the best 10,000m runner at #1, the best 1,500m runner at #3, the best marathoner at #5. So #7 felt right--I would certainly rank him higher than a runner like Mo Farah who has been very good across multiple events but not at "greatest ever" level. Wilson Kipketer and Sebastian Coe are probably numbers 2 and 3 as pure 800m runners. In this case, Coe's versatility over other distances gives him an edge, so I placed him first. Peter Snell would be the next in line. From here--I don't know if this is running consensus or not--but it seems to me an easy argument that Joaquim Cruz is the fifth best pure 800m runner ever: he has the 13th fastest 800m time ever recorded (slower than only Rudisha, Kipketer, Coe, Amos), he has an impressive six times on the all-time top 100 list, he won Olympic gold over Coe, who's ranked higher, along with an Olympic silver. Maybe I'm a bit optimistic on Cruz, but in any case that was my line of thinking. And so on down the list.

A similar exercise can be done with the 1,500 runners on the list, the 5,000-10,000 meter runners, the marathon runners, and so forth. For example, the pure marathoners would go (Kipchoge, Kipsang, Kimetto, Wanjiru, Makau, G. Mutai, Bikila, Khannouchi, E. Mutai, Biwott, etc.)--this is based on fast times for the given year and their head-to-head record with their peers. Obviously runners that were successful over many distances would be ranked somewhat higher.

That's the intention. But I'm also very interested in seeing where my analysis might be off, which is why I appreciate the feedback. Based on the response from the forum, it looks like Steve Ovett is a bit too low, probably Rudolf Harbig should be on the list, etc.

Tyrone Green wrote:

This is hilarious, Roger Bannister is only Honorable mention.

Also Billy Mills. Olympic Gold and so many others ahead of him?

The title reads top distance runners of all-time, the 800 is a mid. D event, get rid of the pure 800 guys, they are not distance runners.