Snell beat everyone over the mile in his era and lowered the wr twice. You don't grasp that he was likely even better than that, since he was never pushed - as contemporaries like Halberg said.
As for "Jakob being slow over the 800 since he rarely races it" - how many times did Jazy and Walker race the 2k before breaking the wr in that event?
Snell looked half dead after his mile WR and felt it too. He was all out and close to his limit.
When he first broke the record in '62 he did it with a sustained sprint from 250 out, putting 5 secs between him and the second place-getter. He said he felt fresh as a daisy. He was at peak fitness and showed it by destroying the 800/half records a week later.
His second mile record - which was only 0.3 faster, cam at the end of '64 after the Olympics. He was coming down in form and wasn't in the shape he was when he broke the record in '62, when virtually the same time was effortless for him.
Deano was probably thinking of me, but I didn't say Snell would be 10 seconds faster either. I said Snell would run 3:31, which is actually slower than Deano himself says he might run (today).
Oooohh.
Armstronglivs wrote:
I don't think it was me, btw, who suggested Snell was possibly 10secs faster in modern competitive conditions
Coevett wrote:
In todays DL with supershoes, I'd say Snell 1:41/3:28 Elliott 1:43/3:26 Walker 1:43/3:29 Jakob, unlike them a 1500/5000 runner, is probably 1:45/3:27
You also have never said, the natural limit for Kenyans is 3:35?
No, I said no clean Kenyan may have run under 3:35.
Top runners will exploit every technological advantage - such as new shoes and superior tracks - and advances in training and nutrition to beat their competitors. For many, their sport is their life - everything revolves around it. One can even see the same obsessive determination to succeed in so-called recreational runners. Yet, for some strange reason, running fans cannot believe that the ambitious athlete will not do the one thing that will take his performances to yet another level and enable him to be a winner rather than an also-ran. And this, even though that he knows many of his competitors will be doing it - and getting away with it. All of a sudden his enormous competitive drive disappears at the very mention of it. It appears no more tempting to him than offering him hemlock - even though he is aware it will have the effect of the elixir of youth.
As true as your statement, you have had Snell at 3:31
He is incapable of refraining from lying. His word is mud.
LOL Coevett. Now not only you keep the (horrible) impersonation of spade detector, you also copy his usual post! He really lives rent-free in your head!
Top runners will exploit every technological advantage - such as new shoes and superior tracks - and advances in training and nutrition to beat their competitors. For many, their sport is their life - everything revolves around it. One can even see the same obsessive determination to succeed in so-called recreational runners. Yet, for some strange reason, running fans cannot believe that the ambitious athlete will not do the one thing that will take his performances to yet another level and enable him to be a winner rather than an also-ran. And this, even though that he knows many of his competitors will be doing it - and getting away with it. All of a sudden his enormous competitive drive disappears at the very mention of it. It appears no more tempting to him than offering him hemlock - even though he is aware it will have the effect of the elixir of youth.
I have been a coach for 24 years. For 22 of those years I have worked with professional athletes. Despite your beliefs, some have integrity and I would bet all I own they never doped during their professional careers.
There are others that you just don't know, and there was more than one instance where I stopped working with an athlete because of some sketchy people they associated with.
Just because you would dope to stay on top or to get there, don't think everyone else is as insecure and devoid of principles like you are.
Top runners will exploit every technological advantage - such as new shoes and superior tracks - and advances in training and nutrition to beat their competitors. For many, their sport is their life - everything revolves around it. One can even see the same obsessive determination to succeed in so-called recreational runners. Yet, for some strange reason, running fans cannot believe that the ambitious athlete will not do the one thing that will take his performances to yet another level and enable him to be a winner rather than an also-ran. And this, even though that he knows many of his competitors will be doing it - and getting away with it. All of a sudden his enormous competitive drive disappears at the very mention of it. It appears no more tempting to him than offering him hemlock - even though he is aware it will have the effect of the elixir of youth.
I have been a coach for 24 years. For 22 of those years I have worked with professional athletes. Despite your beliefs, some have integrity and I would bet all I own they never doped during their professional careers.
There are others that you just don't know, and there was more than one instance where I stopped working with an athlete because of some sketchy people they associated with.
Just because you would dope to stay on top or to get there, don't think everyone else is as insecure and devoid of principles like you are.
It isn't what I would choose - I am not and never have been an elite athlete. But why do you think athletes driven to succeed would balk at the one thing that could take them to another level beyond training and technology? The various estimates of the likely incidence of doping (including athlete surveys) suggest it is far from a rarity in sports.
I read with amusement the case of a Bulgarian weight lifter who was elevated to the bronze medal from the 2012 Olympics. He had finished 9th. However 6 competitors in front of him subsequently tested positive. The irony is that he was also serving a ban at the time he was awarded the medal.
Now tell me runners would not be like that. Winning is so much less important to them.
Except most fans do. Some are vehement in their denial. Some also go to extraordinary lengths to argue it is either not prevalent or is simply not effective - as we see on these threads.
But if you believe "many athletes dope" what does that say about the athletes at the top of the sport?
I read with amusement the case of a Bulgarian weight lifter who was elevated to the bronze medal from the 2012 Olympics. He had finished 9th. However 6 competitors in front of him subsequently tested positive. The irony is that he was also serving a ban at the time he was awarded the medal.
Now tell me runners would not be like that. Winning is so much less important to them.
But what you dont under understand is that GB, USA etc isnt Bulgaria. (And who you are talking about is not a Bulgarian btw, you are not that good with details).
And what your story really is about is that people who dope get caught. You are saying that retesting of 201e olympics led to many being caught for doping. Thats great! Then we can celebrate the winners and let the dopers eventually get caught.
And what your story really is about is that people who dope get caught. You are saying that retesting of 201e olympics led to many being caught for doping. Thats great! Then we can celebrate the winners and let the dopers eventually get caught.
Except that isn't correct. The numbers of positive tests against the officially estimated numbers who are doping show only a fraction are caught.
I read with amusement the case of a Bulgarian weight lifter who was elevated to the bronze medal from the 2012 Olympics. He had finished 9th. However 6 competitors in front of him subsequently tested positive. The irony is that he was also serving a ban at the time he was awarded the medal.
Now tell me runners would not be like that. Winning is so much less important to them.
But what you dont under understand is that GB, USA etc isnt Bulgaria. (And who you are talking about is not a Bulgarian btw, you are not that good with details).
I mentioned the story because I read it a few years back. Yes - the athlete wasn't Bulgarian but Polish. But their nationality isn't the issue; it is a demonstration of how deep the problem of doping can go at the top of sports. It is established fact that it is in all sports and in all countries. Only the naive would imagine running - whatever the nationality - is immune from these problems, even if it doesn't - yet - show the brazen excesses of weightlifting.
I have been a coach for 24 years. For 22 of those years I have worked with professional athletes. Despite your beliefs, some have integrity and I would bet all I own they never doped during their professional careers.
There are others that you just don't know, and there was more than one instance where I stopped working with an athlete because of some sketchy people they associated with.
Just because you would dope to stay on top or to get there, don't think everyone else is as insecure and devoid of principles like you are.
I believe this is true. Looking at the sport of MMA (or rather the UFC in particular), when they introduced USADA testing a few years ago it quickly became manifestly obvious who had been doping and who hadn't. There are individuals such as Jimmy Hendricks, who changed overnight from a knock out artist with ludicrous power, to somebody who had pillows for fists. Then there were people like Michael Bisping, who had been vocal about the problem of doping in the UFC for years, and who turned overnight from perennial journeyman into a UFC champion. Ironically, he did this with literally one eye, his other eye being amputated after a kick from one of the most notorious juicers Vitor Belfort (who like Hendricks, was like a deflated balloon without his roids).
If a sport such as the UFC can have individuals that don't dope, even when there was little or no testing, I'm sure there must be a few top names in athletics who don't dope.
Except most fans do. Some are vehement in their denial. Some also go to extraordinary lengths to argue it is either not prevalent or is simply not effective - as we see on these threads.
But if you believe "many athletes dope" what does that say about the athletes at the top of the sport?
Depends on the understanding of "many".
Nobody doubts doping is involved in top level sport.
The more doping the closer to the top we get? Not necessary. I wouldn't be too much surprised, if in fact the group who so far was not successfull in reaching the top dopes more.
