Did Coe Really Only Run 60 miles A Week

1:47.18 - 3:26.00 - 3:43.13

Six seconds slower at 800 metres and no Olympic Gold medals ... yes, indeed, far superior.

Martin

Look, you always bring that Snell comment up but the fact of the matter is, yes, Peter Snell and Irv Ray are credible sources, but no, it is not more credible than written and Spoken truth from the Coe's and Marius on this board. That's just the way it is. I don't see how you can dispute Marius, who had the ACTUAL TRAINING LOG from 1987, and calculating warmups/cooldowns, etc. still found there is no way he couldve been at 90-100 mpw at any time. Yes, Irv and Snell know alot, but I don't see how they can be seen as credible sources on this subject when theres proof from the Coe's themself that say otherwise.

Sorry, but Coe was a much better runner than Snell was. Coe ran two world records that lasted for 16+ years, and still is the second fastest man ever at 800 and 1000m. Snells times were eclipsed in less than half that time.

flamboyant wrote:

"I do know my sport. The number of rounds these days has been reduced in almost every event compared to Coe's days. Learn your history, kid."

Errrr, sorry to say but... nope!!!

1) you claim "Anyway, it's all partly irrelevant since Coe's approach could not work nowadays, with the number of qualifying heats runners have to go through in major championships..." is incorrect. Rounds have been reduced or remained the same. Certainly not increased

2) The quality of the rounds has not changed appreciably. In fact, they were very intense in Coe's day.

The fastest non-qualifiers at championship meets were:

800 1:44.87 Omar Khalifa OG 84

1500 3:34.84 A. Chékhémani (Fra) OG 96

St 8:17.75 Luis Martín (Spa) WC 99

5000 13:23.43 Lasse Orimus (Fi OG 76

10,000 28:12.79 Steve Binns (GB) WC 83

tracks became faster, times became faster, but Snell and Coe were very similar in terms of talent.

As I see it there are five Great Unsolved Problems confronting humanity that must be solved before moving forward to our full potential:

1. Is there life elsewhere in the Universe?

2. What is the nature of the Dark Matter that pervades the Galaxies?

3. Can we develop a Grand Unified Field Theory of Physics?

4. Can we continue to progress without destroying the Earth's Ecosystem?

5.. What exactly was Coe's Mileage?

lycrgus,

good post.

bottom line, coe was/is the greatest middle distance runner to ever live.

individual training methods vary.

Lycurgus wrote:

As I see it there are five Great Unsolved Problems confronting humanity that must be solved before moving forward to our full potential:

1. Is there life elsewhere in the Universe?

2. What is the nature of the Dark Matter that pervades the Galaxies?

3. Can we develop a Grand Unified Field Theory of Physics?

4. Can we continue to progress without destroying the Earth's Ecosystem?

5.. What exactly was Coe's Mileage?

6. Who is better, Ritz or Webb?

As far as I can tell both of these runners are very good almost on the same level. Web all and all has run a better time 3:53. But Ritz is very very tuff and at world cross he made a pritty good arguement that he can run with the best. The bottom line is that if they both stay healthy, train hard, and keep the drive to race with the best then they are both able to run at the top levels of the sport. Nither of the two is really better, there both buy any figure damm good.

First the Coes have told Snell and Ray that the volume (counting everything) was more towards 90mi on the highest weeks.And as seen on the tail end of my post, I've left myself open to the possibility that he did less than I belive -- all I ask is that others leave themselves open to the possiblity that he did more than they think.Finally, very interesting comparisons can be drawn between Coe and Snell. With respect to their 400m PBs, their performances are virtually identical:

Many have sighted the inferiority of Snell's mile PB as compared to his 800m best, however I would conjecture that given more time and a longer career he would have been the first man under 3:50.

Martin wrote:

1:47.18 - 3:26.00 - 3:43.13

Six seconds slower at 800 metres and no Olympic Gold medals ... yes, indeed, far superior.

Martin

Yes but El Guerrouj went 11 times under Coe's best time for the 1500m, and 8 times under his best mile mark!

Note also that El Guerrouj's best 800m time dates from 1995, some 4 years before his best performances.

El Guerrouj has also the second best 3000m mark ever (7:23.09), Coe never went under 7:30; and he has run 12:50.24 for 5000m (did Coe ever go under 14:00?)

I know who his the better runner in my book, and if -as you do- you can prove the efficiency of a training method on the strength of ONE individual's performance, then it seems that El Guerrouj has the upper hand...

Here's some facts for you:

1500m All Time

WR 3:26.00 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR Roma, 14 07 1998

Updated as at: 24/11/2003

Mark Wind Athlete Nat Birth Pos Venue Date

3:26.00 Hicham El Guerrouj MAR 14 09 1974 1 Roma 14 07 1998

3:26.12 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Bruxelles

3:26.34 Bernard Lagat KEN 12 12 1974 2 Bruxelles 24 08 2001

3:26.45 Hicham El Guerrouj 1r1 Zürich 12 08 1998

3:26.89 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Zürich 16 08 2002

3:26.96 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Rieti 08 09 2002

3:27.21 Hicham El Guerrouj 1r1 Zürich 11 08 2000

3:27.34 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Monaco 19 07 2002

3:27.37 Noureddine Morceli ALG 28 02 1970 1 Nice 12 07 1995

3:27.52 Noureddine Morceli 1 Monaco 25 07 1995

3:27.65 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Sevilla 24 08 1999

3:27.91 Bernard Lagat 2 Monaco 19 07 2002

3:28.12 Noah Ngeny KEN 02 11 1978 2r1 Zürich 11 08 2000

3:28.37 Noureddine Morceli 1 Monaco 09 09 1995

3:28.37 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Monaco 08 08 1998

3:28.38 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Paris 06 07 2001

3:28.40 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Bruxelles 05 09 2003

3:28.51 Bernard Lagat 3r1 Zürich 11 08 2000

3:28.57 Hicham El Guerrouj 1r1 Zürich 11 08 1999

3:28.73 Noah Ngeny 2 Sevilla 24 08 1999

3:28.84 Noah Ngeny 1 Paris 21 07 1999

3:28.86 Noureddine Morceli 1 Rieti 06 09 1992

3:28.91 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Zürich 13 08 1997

3:28.92 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Bruxelles 22 08 1997

3:28.93 Noah Ngeny 1 München 11 09 1999

3:28.95 Fermín Cacho ESP 16 02 1969 2 Zürich 13 08 1997

3:28.98 Mehdi Baala FRA 17 08 1978 2 Bruxelles 05 09 2003

3:29.05 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Bruxelles 23 08 1996

3:29.06 Hicham El Guerrouj 1r1 Zürich 17 08 2001

3:29.08 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Rieti 02 09 2001

3:29.12 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Oslo 09 07 1998

3:29.13 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Zürich 15 08 2003

3:29.18 Vénuste Niyongabo BDI 09 12 1973 2 Bruxelles 22 08 1997

3:29.19 Noah Ngeny 1 Bruxelles 03 09 1999

3:29.20 Noureddine Morceli 1 Narbonne 20 06 1993

3:29.27 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Paris 14 09 2002

3:29.29 William Chirchir KEN 06 02 1979 3 Bruxelles 24 08 2001

3:29.30 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Stockholm 07 07 1997

3:29.43 Vénuste Niyongabo 3 Zürich 13 08 1997

3:29.46 Saïd Aouita MAR 02 11 1959 1 Berlin 23 08 1985

3:29.46 Daniel Komen KEN 17 05 1976 1 Monaco 16 08 1997

3:29.50 Noureddine Morceli 1 Paris 28 06 1996

3:29.51 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Hengelo 31 05 1997

3:29.51 Ali Saïdi-Sief ALG 15 03 1978 1 Lausanne 04 07 2001

3:29.57 Noureddine Morceli 1+ Rieti 05 09 1993

3:29.59 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Stockholm 08 07 1996

3:29.67 Steve Cram GBR 14 10 1960 1 Nice 16 07 1985

3:29.67 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Bruxelles 28 08 1998

3:29.71 Saïd Aouita 2 Nice 16 07 1985

3:29.72 Hicham El Guerrouj 1+ Oslo 04 07 1997

3:29.76 Hicham El Guerrouj 1 Roma 11 07 2003

3:29.77 Sydney Maree USA 09 09 1956 1 Köln 25 08 1985

3:29.77 Sebastian Coe GBR 29 09 1956 1 Rieti 07 09 1986

And of course it's not 11, but a whoopin' 25 times that El Guerrouj ran under 3:29.77!!!

Finally Martin, another question for you...

Can you tell me what is Coe's next best mark for the 1500m???

On paper, el Guerrouj is the superior miler. However, in this imaginery land of thoery we create, if a primed Coe were to race the modern day el Guerrouj, I would have great difficulty predicting a winner. Coe was a racer -- especially over 1500m/mile. And Coe spent infitely more time devloping his ability at shorter distances than el Guerrouj has.

That's why el Guerrouj is not an Olympic champion. Ngeny was of similar ability (2s slower at 1500m, 0.3s slower at one mile) but raced at 800m/1000m and ran his WR 1000m one year earlier, while el Guerrouj still has not raced below 1500m since 1995. That is a huge mistake for him. If you're going to maximize your ability and racing potential you need to race both above and below your primary distance(s). Seb Coe was a perfect example of this, racing 400m and 3000m in either the indoor season or in second tier meetings. This is also why el Guerrouj has not broken his PBs in nearly five years, whereas Coe was setting PBs even late into his career (3:29.77 days before his 30th birthday).

But in today's athletics scene, a guy like el Guerrouj won't want to race 800m/1000m because he probably won't win and because the meet promoter isn't going to pay him to run shorter because they have the idea that fans want to see el Guerrouj race the 1500m and not something he can't destroy the world at. Renato relayed a very interesting story from the Ostrava meeting this past summer, where Cherono was offered a large appearance fee to enter the 3000mSC but declined the money and instead ran the 5000m for free against el Guerrouj, because Renato is a very smart coach and knows the value of racing his athletes above and below race distance. Focusing on the SC, he also entered Cherono in 1500s midway through the season.

So, in a hypothetical, track geek dream race over 1500m between Sebastian Coe and el Guerrouj, if it's sub3:30 pace, el Guerrouj would more than likely pull away to victory. But if it was slower, as in Sydney (3:32.0) then Coe has a very good chance of sticking right on el Guerrouj's back and blasting past him in the final straight.

Nice reasoning trackhead, but to come back to Martin's point: on the strength of Coe's best times for 800m, 1500m and the mile (and his championship record) he deduces that modern runners have a lot to learn from the 'short mileage school'. My contention is: looking at someone who doesn't have Coe's championship success record, nor his raw speed, higher mileage has consistently produced much faster times on many more occasions (25 times under Coe's best time!!).

I just do not see how you can argue with that??

At least give me el Guerrouj is the better rounded runner (and to be fair, he was a bit unlucky not to get a medal in Sidney!).

You could of course take numerous other examples...

Martin, how can you be so presomptuous as to assume a professional distance runner would not dabble with a variety of approaches, then chose the one that seems best for him? If such is the case, higher mileage seems the preferred method (probably simply because IT DOES YIELD BETTER RESULTS)

Why exactly are Snell and Irv Ray less credible than Marius? And I realize that Marius had a copy of the ACTUAL LOG, but as has been stated a million times, they didn't log easy runs and warm ups and cool downs! And Coe is not infinitely better than Snell... how long your records last is not necessarily an indication of talent. I read somewhere that someone ran a 4:10 or so mile in 1850 or so that wasn't broken for like 60 years. That doesn't make that guy better than Coe or El G or whoever. Snell ran 1:44 on a grass undersized track and completed the 800 and 1500 double, something Coe attempted twice and could not do. They are definitely comparable!

As for El G vs. Coe... I have stated my opinion on this in another thread, but El G would crush Coe in an honest race. El G can run 3:28 in his sleep. Heck, he can practically run 3:26 in his sleep, he's done it at least three times that I know of. Plus the 3:43. In an honest race, El G would win easily.

El G has run 6 times under 3:27, 9 times under 3:28, and 15 times under 3:29

ok so El G is a faster 1500/3000/5000m runner than Coe, but Coe was faster over 800, hence the difference in training.

Nice reasoning trackhead, but to come back to Martin's point: on the strength of Coe's best times for 800m, 1500m and the mile (and his championship record) he deduces that modern runners have a lot to learn from the 'short mileage school'.

flamboyant - Martin didn't say that at all. What he said was that Coe's training worked for Coe. Martin also said that Coe would still be able to reach the finals of the 800m and 1500m at modern Championships. You disagreed with this and also stated that the quaifying at modern major games is harder than 20 years ago. That statistics do not bear this out. One easy example is at the 84 OG there were four rounds in the 800m while in the 2000 OG there were only three rounds in the 800m. The 800m at LA was quicker than at Sydney while the 1500m was only marginally slower. It is clear to 99% of those with any knowledge of the sport that the Coe of 84 would be extremely competitive in the modern era.

If you want to argue that EIG is a better 1500m runner than Coe, then you can make a pretty good case. In fact, I would agree with you. If you want to measure on just that distance, I'd give EIG the edge over Coe, despite EIG's lack of Olympic gold. However, IMHO Coe is the best middle distance (800/1500) runner of all time. (and Geb is the best long distance runner of all time.)

And back to your original point. It is is surely obvious by now that we can all agree Coe may or may not have done more or less than 60mpw.