If Ryun's in his prime I would bet on him against anyone else who is in their prime. Elliott is the only guy I might consider betting on instead of Ryun but I think I'd still go with JR. I've just never seen any distance runner dominate his event like Ryun did the 1500/mile.
Didn't Ryun take PEDs ???????????????????????????????????????
clearing the bs up wrote:
not hard wrote:ryun = 3:33.1
ovett = 3:30.7
think about that for a bit and get back to me
You're not too bright, are you?
Really, the ignorance of some of these kids not realizing what a difference there is in track surfaces, shoe technology, training methods, etc.
If Ryun were around today, in his prime, he could be running sub 3:30 especially considering he'd be a full time pro.
The differences between the 60's/70's and 70's/80's is amazing just in terms of diet and track and shoe technology.
Would the winner take on the Grizzly Bear?
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2595482&page=0
HRE wrote:
If Ryun's in his prime I would bet on him against anyone else who is in their prime. Elliott is the only guy I might consider betting on instead of Ryun but I think I'd still go with JR. I've just never seen any distance runner dominate his event like Ryun did the 1500/mile.
^^^^^^ This, Ryun in his prime beats anyone, only problem with Ryun was that his prime was severly undercut by all his health and later personal problems. But really, his 880 WR was SICK, his 3:33.1, closing in what 2:46 was sick, and his 3:51 was ridiculous. No one could have beat him on those days, not even Rudisha or El G.
thanks vent
i actually find that i agree with you quite a bit. i don't read your time analysis just your ideas. you know what your're on about.
i agree regarding peter rono - but landy had to trip on someone.
Are they using 1967 drugs or 1978 drugs?
Was Ryuns 2 years of domination much different than Snells? Ryun has those crazy miles and Snell has that 800m on a grass track. It is hard to compare runners. A guy like Morceli was incredibly dominate for ~6 years (he lost in Barcelona and that was about it). El G lost like 4 1500m in 8 years (however 2 were in olympics). Are they better than a guy like Coe (missed a lot of seasons and World Championships but he does have 2 olympic golds).?
HRE wrote:
If Ryun's in his prime I would bet on him against anyone else who is in their prime. Elliott is the only guy I might consider betting on instead of Ryun but I think I'd still go with JR. I've just never seen any distance runner dominate his event like Ryun did the 1500/mile.
HRE wrote:
I've just never seen any distance runner dominate his event like Ryun did the 1500/mile.
What about Bekele over 10000m? He has never lost, has 2 olympic golds and 4 world titles. He DOMINATES the event.
El G also DOMINATED the 1500 by winning 4 straight world titles and then an olympic title, but then he probably wasn't as dominant as Bekele....
Seriously though, I would like to hear you defend your statement against Bekele.
There is NO proof that the difference between cinders and synthetic is worth 1 sec per lap. That's an opinion. Many in the sport suggest it to be no more than 0.5, and even then it depends on the quality of tracks and the weather. What about the changes in tracks from late 70's to today?
Some NZ poster commented on the fact that some of the grass tracks there are so flat and well kept that they are just as fast as synthetic ones.
Even synthetic ones in the 70's varied greatly in quality.
The improvements in shoes from late 60's to late 70's wouldn't have been any greater than the corresponding improvements from late 70's to late 90's.
Are you going to take time off Ovett's pbs?
If you can put a blanket 1 sec difference per lap from cinders to synthetic, then we should have seen the 400m WR improve by 1.0 sec, the 200m by 0.5sec and the 100m by 0.25 seconds practically over night in the late 60's, taking any altitude runs into consideration. Did they? NO!
Don't tell me!,..... all the great athletes were from the late 60's and those that followed them were so far inferior that the expected time improvements didn't occur!?
That's convenient isn't it. ;0).
Or perhaps they were so good in the 60's because the American collegiate system was rife with steroid use which was not illegal at the time. No drug tests. By Ovett's era they were illegal and they tested for them after world records and at major champs.
Ryun's 800m WR was on synthetic and it's pretty lame to say that it was worth 2 secs faster due to an earlier heat or he was feeling a bit under the weather. It was what it was, an excellent 1:44.3 hand timed 800m. If he was going to run sub 1:42 (ridiculous) then he had ample opportunities in 67 had he so wished.
If it was a 1500 outside 3:38 I'd go for Ovett. But it very much depends on how the pace started. If first lap was very quick, then again I'd go for Ovett. If the first 3 laps were steady at around 60 secs and Ryun was in front with a lap to go, then I'd say Ryun.
If they ran 10 times, I'd say it would be about 5 apiece.
Is the phrase "I've never seen" puzzling you? You likely have seen something other than what I have.
Red Arrow wrote:Many in the sport suggest it to be no more than 0.5, and even then it depends on the quality of tracks and the weather
& that's just another opinion
without scientifically controlled trials between dirt & synthetics of the '70s, their opinion ( whoever they are ? ) is no more valid than anyone else's
What about the changes in tracks from late 70's to today?
not interested
i'm interested between '60s & '70s
Some NZ poster commented on the fact that some of the grass tracks there are so flat and well kept that they are just as fast as synthetic ones
& i'm sure he was there in '62 to testify to the energy return of that grass track & noted it to compare to a '70s synthetic
Are you going to take time off Ovett's pbs?
why ??
i'm interested between '60s & '70s guys NOT '70s to '90s
If you can put a blanket 1 sec difference per lap from cinders to synthetic, then we should have seen the 400m WR improve by 1.0 sec, the 200m by 0.5sec and the 100m by 0.25 seconds practically over night in the late 60's, taking any altitude runs into consideration. Did they? NO!
Don't tell me!,..... all the great athletes were from the late 60's and those that followed them were so far inferior that the expected time improvements didn't occur!?
why ask a dumb question if you've already provided some semblance of the answer ?!
why not look at the top clockings/guys for 800 - 10k between '00 - '05 & compare them to those running between '05 - '10 ?
then tell me why it is so hard to disbelieve the guys from '65 - '70 were much better than guys from '70 - '75 ??
Or perhaps they were so good in the 60's because the American collegiate system was rife with steroid use which was not illegal at the time. No drug tests. By Ovett's era they were illegal and they tested for them after world records and at major champs
not interested in drivel
when were snell, clarke, keino in ncaa ???
Ryun's 800m WR was on synthetic and it's pretty lame to say that it was worth 2 secs faster due to an earlier heat or he was feeling a bit under the weather. It was what it was, an excellent 1:44.3 hand timed 800m. If he was going to run sub 1:42 (ridiculous) then he had ample opportunities in 67 had he so wished
no
it was described as a semi-synthetic track called grasstex which was described as mixture of dirt & tyre shavings
1'44.3 :
- knock off 1s for semi-synthetic instead of 2s -> 1'43.3
- knock off a few tenths for running huge -ve splits instead of 2s +ve -> ~ 1'43.0
- knock off a sec for being ill & fatigue of a prelim 800 just 3 hours before - no way to run your best 800 -> ~ 1'42.0
- knock off some tenths for this being in '66 when he was an inferior guy, a 19y ole compared to the full-out monsta of '67 ->
sub-1'42
it's unfortunate he didn't run a serious 800 in '67, but this was his secondary event & he was more interested in the mile/1500
Snell's career was almost over by the time I started paying any attention to track. But I was following the sport pretty closely by the time Ryun was hitting his prime.
From vidoes of his races and accounts I've read Peter was tremendous but when Ryun was in his prime you just knew he was going to win the race and was going to do it by a comfortable margin. In those two years I can't recall him being seriously challenged at all at 1500/mile and I don't have that same recollection of Peter. Additionally, Ryun beat Peter as a high schooler. True, Peter's career was winding down but Ryun's had not yet peaked so I'd give him an edge there.
I also never saw Elliott run but from videos and things I've read get the sense that he also was never seriously challeneged.
steve scott
It's only a gut feeling, but I think this thread could contain Ventolin's most preposterous claims ever. And still no evidence or indication that he's a wind up merchant, just a most peculiar mixture of above average intellect and bizarre lack of common sense.
I think Steve Ovett would win this imaginary race as he grew up with national and international competition at a higher level and rose to conquer this level. He would sit on Ryun and kick past him. However if Jim Ryun had been born a few years later his talent could have blossomed even more extravagantly.
It's a meaningless hypothetical of course.
Ryun in his prime (1966-67) was blowing everyone he ran against off the track. In a 1967 race in Germany against Tummler and Norpoth (both Olympic medalists) he ran an estimated 50.6 final 400 in a 3:38 race. He similarly blew Keino away in Los Angeles and London that year by large margins.
Ovett ran similar races (like the '77 World Cup) where he was overwhelmingly dominant. But he was vulnerable at times, losing the OG 1500 to Coe and wasn't as dominant thereafter.
I do think Ryun never approached his potential times; I believe he could have run 3:30/3:47, which is about what Ovett actually ran.
I think they had comparable basic speed; Ryun ran about 47 in a relay, and supposedly Ovett ran a 21.7 200.
Tough to pick but I'll go with Ryun since he was so much better than his contemporaries (Forget 1968 Olympics, unfair).
'actually, fast or slow ( ryun was 800wr holder ), ovett didn't stand a chance'
Ovett won Olmypic Gold against a much more formidable competitor than Ryun
ukathleticscoach wrote:
'actually, fast or slow ( ryun was 800wr holder ), ovett didn't stand a chance'
Ovett won Olmypic Gold against a much more formidable competitor than Ryun
Good point. And also Ovett won when it mattered and has the gold medals at 3 different distances. Ryun, for whatever reason, had just one silver medal.
Ventolin's claims on this issue haven't changed in years, so he's not going to change now!
The idea that he can chop seconds off here for this and seconds off there for something else to make Ryun a 1:41 runner is his most preposterous claim.
There is no scientific way for measuring any of the variables he mentions. He just plucks them from thin air as they serve his purpose.
Same could be done for any athlete.
Ovett in Rieti 83 - 3:30.77
- 1 sec for strong wind (air turbulence not flatulence) = 3:29.7
- 0.25 for lack of drating from 1000 to 1100m = 3:29.4
- 1 sec for first lap being too fast = 3:28.4
- 1 sec for damaging his leg on those church railings in 81 = 3:27.4
-1 sec for it being 1983 and not 1980. He was past his best and was almost 28 in 83. Everyone knows you run better at 24 than 28! duhh! = 3:26.4
Ergo he beats Ryun, as he also had 21.7 200m speed (Ryun's fastest was a "flying" 220 yd relay leg of 21.6) and better endurance- much faster 2 Mile time than Ryun (8:13.52 to Ryun's 8:25.2)
There, it's easy being Ventolin!
I could revise the entire All time lists for all events this way. Hang on, if Komen had opened his bowels before rather than half an hour after his 3k WR he would have been lighter and 0,3 secs faster per lap = 2.25 secs. Therefore he would have run 7:18.42. So there!
lol lol lol lol wrote:
tacomafan wrote:I give Ryun a slight edge in talent, Ovett a larger edge in competitiveness. Two man race? Ovett, although the time wouldn't necessarily be very fast.
It's an interesting hypothetical.
I don't know who was more innately gifted, Ryun trained very, very hard while in his teens, Ovett relatively lightly.
Based on PRs, they were very similar in basic speed, but Ovett was stronger (8:13 to 8:25, etc.).
BTW--Ovett was not at his fittest in 1978, if he is to be believed.
It wouldn't even be close. Ryun was capable of closing the final 400 in under .50. No way Ovett had that kind of speed. Besides Ryun was basically running his PRs in leather "cleats" on slow tracks. With the same equipment and conditions, Ryun wins easily.
ukathleticscoach wrote:
'actually, fast or slow ( ryun was 800wr holder ), ovett didn't stand a chance'
Ovett won Olmypic Gold against a much more formidable competitor than Ryun
Ovett won Olympic gold in the 800 in 1:45 in a watered down boycott field where his top competitor ran like a freaked out imbecile. Went out in 54 and Ovett got away with murder knocking people around.
I would see this race as Ryun going back to last place and Ovett hanging mid pack for the first 400. If it was a slow race at 800 Ryun would move up and Ovett would shadow and Ryun would get him with a 52 last 400. He would have it won by the homestretch.