Rudisha vs. Kaki - Who Breaks 800 WR First?

What a great thread.

eh ???

drivel is all you offer

moron

you expect me to take your HT splits seriously ???

there's 0.2 error in each, making gap a potential 1.2s

1'44 didn't register considering he'd run 1'42.3 before

you implied it was before his mile record, it wasn't

his only fast lower distance time after florence was 2'12.1, which seemed great considering his previous record was 2'13.4

however, seeing as the previous record was 2'13.9 by wohl a 1'43.5 guy, his 2'13.4 was still piss-weak for a guy who was 1.3s faster over 800

cram put it further into perspective 4y later when as a 1.1s slower 800 guy he coud get within 0.7s of it

he probably ran 0.5s better over 1k in '81 compared to '79 off 1'42.3/3'32.1

finally some mathematical input

however, nonsense is offering him 45.7 open, same as his relay leg, no matter what dreams you have about a stumble -it's 0.7 - 1.1s differential if he had a guy 1-2m ahead of him for any period in the relay, that's another 1s/400m advantage

being generous, i doubt it was better than 46.25 - 46.50 open, which with 3'27.16 -> 1'41.93 - 1'42.17

significantly inferior to his florence run

( i think i'll send an e-mail to that jundo guy suggesting he incorporate this split-method as an additional function )

i'll go off his his under-performing 1k

noah 1'44.62/27.34 ->2'11.72

coe 1'44.56/27.62 ->2'12.10

coe shoudn't have been giving away 0.38s to a guy likely 0.75s slower than him over 800

no

moron

i post objectively

i have maintained steadfastly that the ryun who ran an evened out 3'30.7 on shitty dirt track in 95F in LA smog woud have been worth time-transported to zurich '70 synthetic :

high-3'24/low-3'25

& 1'42.0 - that aged 19y, off a prelim a few hours before & ill, necessitating -ve splits & much inferior to his ability the following year when much stronger/healthier

correction

coe 1'44.56/27.62 ->2'11.80

point still stands - slower intrinsically than a guy likey 0.75s slower than him over 800

ventolin^2 wrote:

i read all the broadsheets/mags at the time & NO one mentioned 1'40

if anything, they never expected him to ever break his 1'42.3wr as that already faster than any of the pundits had ever expected of him

find walker's quote

AW July 14th 1979, P.10:- 'A fellow world record holder, John Walker, watched Coe's race. "The way he ran was just unbelievable", he enthused. "He looked like he could run under 1:40; he never tied up at all" '

Same quote also appears in US publication, "The Milers" (published by T&FN) on P.435.

ventolin^2 wrote:

no

moron

i post objectively

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

I said:-"It takes a few attempts at running in fast races before an athlete reaches peak form. That's why there was a noticeable improvement between Coe's 2 Mile records. He'd run a solo 1:44.0 the week before his record, then didn't run any other fast 800s for the rest of the season."We were talking about his 800m record and I used it in the singular as opposed to the plural for the two Mile records he had set. It's pretty clear to me. And besides, if you were there watching and following the scene so avidly at the time then you should know when he ran a solo 1:44.0.

I've used 50.2 for his 400 split several times and you've run with it. NOW you chose to say it's wrong to try and divert from the fact that you can't judge what a gap of 10m looks like!? Anyone with eyes can tell that gap was no way 10m.

I implied no such thing. Learn to read properly. I mentioned it in the context that he already recorded two 800m times faster than anyone else was to run that year by June 10, and never ran any fast ones after. Didn't need to, job done. Remained unbeaten and won Europa and World Cup which he was obligated to run.

finally some mathematical input

however, nonsense is offering him 45.7 open, same as his relay leg, no matter what dreams you have about a stumble -it's 0.7 - 1.1s differential if he had a guy 1-2m ahead of him for any period in the relay, that's another 1s/400m advantage

[/quote]

I saw the race and remember it old man. He was over 4m down from the change over up to 200m (in your own words that means no drafting!) He only closed on him round the bend.

A relay leg does not have a differential of 1.1! Now you're just clutching at numbers. If so, then the fastest leg ever- MJ's 42.91 is worth only 44.0. I'm certain that of all the sub 44 guys in history at least one would have broken 44 secs. Where do you get these from?

Relay differentials I've read on here are between 0.5-0.7.

Anyway, you said yourself in the last week (possibly on this thread itself) that Coe must have been capable of running 45 secs flat to run 1:41. The relay leg was a week before Florence, so 45.7 is just the sort of time you yourself said he was running. Are you going to back track again?

See point above. You've said on here Coe was worth 45 when he set the WR, now you say 46.25 to give weight to your unfounded argument.

The bit in brackets is laughable! (WE ALL KNOW THAT YOU, AKA ELDRICK, OWN THE JUNDO PREDICTOR, SO DON'T PRETEND IT'S SOMEONE ELSE'S)

The point stands. His Stockholm run was comparable with his 800 WR. Your Predictor reinforces it.

Not that comparable. Ngeny's was his 2nd WR attempt at the distance, in September in Rieti, with drafting up to 750m +

Coe's was his only effort at the distance in July on the old Oslo track (not as fast as mondo) and he had drafting up to 600m. Even if the tracks were the same, Ngeny has a 0.38 advantage through drafting.

Then you have to work in the fact that Coe's run was 4 days after his 3:31 (worth 3:27) solo effort in Stockholm off a first lap of 52.4. He wouldn't exactly be at his freshest for the 1000 attempt. He also had a blister burst during the 1k record and ran wide on the curve to overtake the first rabbit at about 450m. Irrespective of the blister and close proximity of the 1500 run, the drafting (or lack of) and running wide on the curve would have cost Coe between 0.5 - 0.6 on Ngeny.

Nonsense!

Even if the 1.0 sec a lap for cinders applies, that brings it down to 3:27.

Have you got a formula for temperature and smog now that we can apply?

His 1:44.3 was on a synthetic track, he was paced beyond 400m and it was hand timed, giving a residual error of 0.2. So how can 1:44.5 come down by 2.5 (or about 20m) secs? Running a 1:51 a few hours before would have been equivalent to a warm up for someone of that standard.