Ryun in 67 would have had no drug testing at all. Steroids were legal and they only introduced a test at Olympic level in 68. We know that doping in US Collegiate scene in 60’s was rife.
Having said that, I am not suggesting Ryun was doping at all. No evidence and supremely talented. I’m just providing a reality to those who automatically believe all athletes from 60’s and before somehow competed in an age of innocence. It was far easier to take steroids then, because there were no tests and it wasn’t illegal!
In the late 70’s and early 80’s there was testing for steroids at championships, I believe all medalists had to be tested, and all world records had to be ratified with an accompanying drug test. The likes of Coe, Ovett and Cram, all extremely talented in their late teens, won dozens of medals and set dozens of world records between them, so on that basis alone, they would have been tested far more often than their predecessors in the 60’s.
Alongside this, there was a prevalent ideology at the time that steroids were only of benefit for women and men in power events. The predominant athletes that tested positive at the time were East European, sprinters and throwers. The only middle distance athletes (800/1500) i can recall testing positive, were East European women. Or, do people really believe that the half milers and milers of the time had a free pass to pass all tests? Of course not?
In addition, UK Athletics was randomly testing their athletes out of competition and out of season from 1983, some 6 years before the IAAF introduced similar levels of testing.
Moreover, Blood doping was considered of benefit for distance events, and all those who have admitted to it or who were caught, were 5 and 10k athletes. And those athletes associated with the practice have been either Finnish or Italian. There have been no cases of an 800 or 1500 runners from that era having used blood doping.
Coe was at the forfront of getting blood doping banned and more stringent testing introduced, as part of his role as Vice President of Sports Council. The practice was outlawed in 1985. Coe ran his fastest 1500m a year later. Surely if his times were down to blood doping, he would have run significantly faster over 1500 and Mile during the years it wasn’t illegal than he did when it was illegal? By his last decent season, at age 32, Coe would have been subject to OOS and OOC random testing by UKA and the IAAF. Yet he still managed to be 2nd fastest 800m runner that year, 1:43.3, and won silver in the 1500 World Cup. He had clearly aged and wasn’t as good as 8 years before, but his times and performances were in keeping with someone that supremely talented who was now almost 33.
Looking at the mid and late 90’s, we know that times dropped across the board from 1500, that EPO was rife in cycling and there was no test for detection until 2000 Olympics, and no reliable test until 2005.
EL G and Morceli were from countries where dozens of their compatriots were busted for doping and we don’t know how regular they were tested while training in hidden training camps in the African mountains. It was also at a time when Diack was president, and we now know that there was a lot of cover ups and leniency afforded to other African nations.
In summarising, I would suggest that the British athletes of the early 80’s would have had as many tests as those in the late 90’s, and had fewer opportunities to cheat than those that came before them (steroids legal), and after (undetectable EPO, which was far more effective than blood doping) them.