Keino vs. Ryun, 1500 Meters, 1968 Olympics

wtfunny wrote:

That MAY be true .. but there's also no question the world of athletics is far more competitive today, with a much larger talent pool to draw from, meaning top athletes from years gone by may well not be the cream of today's crop.

Further, and more importantly, the idea that guys from 50 years ago were actually running times comparable and faster than guys today simply by changing track surfaces and shoes is ridiculous.

I agree with your first paragraph.

I don't mind 'team tactics' in Championship events too much. It's just one more element to the race; on the other hand, I didn't like what happened with Skah and Chelimo, and I don't believe Skah at all that he didn't support it.

If Keino had Jipcho go out fast to help his chances, Ryun should've done a better job of staying in touch … though he did win himself a silver medal, which isn't shabby.

The Japanese used "team tactics" in the Boston Marathon in 1965 and 1966 sending out 5 and 4 runners against anyone who threatened them. They were very successful both years.

wtfunny wrote:

I agree with your first paragraph.

I don't mind 'team tactics' in Championship events too much. It's just one more element to the race; on the other hand, I didn't like what happened with Skah and Chelimo, and I don't believe Skah at all that he didn't support it.

If Keino had Jipcho go out fast to help his chances, Ryun should've done a better job of staying in touch … though he did win himself a silver medal, which isn't shabby.

I think different. Demolishing his own chances with the goal to improve the chances of someone else (mostly a country man) is not what I expect to see in sport. What I want to see (and what I think is the intention at all) is that all competitors try the best for THEMSELVES. In snooker (billard) you even have to pay some fine if you don't try your best (which I also think is little strange).

Then, like me, you do not condone Rabbits in races. Rabbits turn so-called races into time trials.

Cenato Ranova wrote:

wtfunny wrote:

That MAY be true .. but there's also no question the world of athletics is far more competitive today, with a much larger talent pool to draw from, meaning top athletes from years gone by may well not be the cream of today's crop.

Further, and more importantly, the idea that guys from 50 years ago were actually running times comparable and faster than guys today simply by changing track surfaces and shoes is ridiculous.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8COaMKbNrX0

wtfunny is talking a lot of common sense. In almost all sports there has been considerable development in the past 50 years. Those at the top of the sport in the 60's would not dominate against today's elite just by putting them on the same tracks. That's not to say a former champ didn't have the potential to be as good as today's elite had they grown up in the modern era with all the other advances in training, diet, spikes, etc. Transport 1967 Ryun to 2014 and I have no doubt he could mix it with the big boys of today. But this is not what Ventolin is claiming. Based on tracks alone and a few splits in a few races, he claims that Ryun would have run 1:39 and 3:24 in the same season!

To imagine that one person from 50 years ago could be that much better at not 1 but 2 distances, and far better than anyone else that ever lived at both distances is absurd. There is no precedent in any other sport.

Lets remember that Ryun's pb for 800m was a hand timed 1:44.3 on synthetic not dirt. His 1500 best was another ht 3:33.1. No one with common sense would believe based on the above that he was capable of 4.5 sec faster over 2 laps and 9 secs faster over 3.75.

And what Epstein says in the link does not concur with Ventolin's ramblings.

He specifically talks about Bannister and today's tracks. He doesn't stipulate what sort of dirt was used on the track his 'experts' tested, what the weather conditions were like, how many times they carried the test out, etc.

Did he use a top mondo track for his comparison or an old tartan track used in the 70's. All these variables will have an effect on the results. And he does not go into any details about the variables at play. He makes a general sweeping statement that synthetic tracks are 1.5% faster than dirt ones.

1.5% in a 3:33.1 ht 1500m is equivalent to a 3:30 1500m. That would be the absolute maximum improvement possible and is a long way from 3:24!

The fastest Ryun ran 880 in 67 was 1:46.1 in a relay on the anchor. Yet on this evidence and the fact he ran a 46.9 relay leg the year before on dirt, Ventolin claims he could have run 1:39 in 67! Well if that were the case then Ryun should have been able to manage 1:41.5 on dirt (for a 1:39.8) for 800 and would have to be capable of 45.0 flat in an open 400m on synthetic, or 45.6 in an open on dirt, based on this 1.5% that Ventolin now seems to be quoting as the gospel. Well, if you can run a 45.6 open on dirt then that should enable such an athlete to run a sub 45 (45.3 for 440 yds) relay leg. Ryun never came close to that in 66 or indeed 67, when his best 440 relay was 47.0 (twice) despite running many of them throughout the year. So from the evidence that is available Ryun was actually slower over 440 and 880 than he had been in 66.

Surely a sub 1:40 800m man would have been able to run a 45 low relay leg just once? He didn't.

Cenato Ranova wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8COaMKbNrX0

I enjoyed that, thanks. He essentially says the same thing .. track surfaces and shoes might make a substantial difference, but they're FAR from the only differentials.

His initial example, the marathon, is a better one, and he doesn't elaborate on it .. the surface for the marathon isn't the difference between 2:03 and 3:28. his example with Usain is a little disingenuous .. He takes Owens' WR and compares it to Usain's 9.77 .. instead of Usain's WR .. which is another 2-3m difference. His example in the swimming 100m wr leaves out a # of drops that have nothing to do with technologies.

The big difference, imo, is the level that people compete at … put people against other athletes who run/swim faster, and those same people will improve. Markedly. They'll train harder, they'll push harder, they'll work smarter and they'll compete harder and their times will improve. But pretending that those guys 50 years actually ran the equivalent of modern record times, or better, is simply silly.

said88 wrote:

I think different. Demolishing his own chances with the goal to improve the chances of someone else (mostly a country man) is not what I expect to see in sport. What I want to see (and what I think is the intention at all) is that all competitors try the best for THEMSELVES. In snooker (billard) you even have to pay some fine if you don't try your best (which I also think is little strange).

That's fair enough; but the OG do involve countries competing; there's simply no other way to address it. People wear the country's uniform, and their country's name is listed next to their own in the startlists/results. And everyone tallies up medal counts for countries. So there is always going to be that element of one country Vs. another. And that will inevitably play out in events like track with pacing, etc.

Without getting into all the detail .. more importantly, granting, say, Ryun, a 3:24 without adding in factors like modern levels of competition, training and coaching, diet, psychology, understanding of peaking and rest and so on, and all the other critical factors that go towards peak athletic performance must add even a few more seconds to this drop .. making his 3:24 more comparable today to something well under that mark.

Nonsense.

Seb Coe's recent statement about dirt being 1.5s/lap slower, plus Epstein's 1.5% figure, plus the unearthed ryun dusseldorf video has got deano panicking to downplay ryun's accomplishments!

hahahahahahahahaha

That video tells us nothing except that Ryun was a great kicker off a slower pace.

Maybe even the best ever at kicking off a slower pace, but still no better than a 3:30 guy.

Good point, wtfunny. A larger pool usually produces better runners to choose from. That's why, in general, a 5A high school will have better top runners than a 3A high school, and Division 1 NCAA will outclass te Ivy League. It doesn't always work that way, of course. For example, in Utah Ben Saarel came out of a 4A school, but his State records are significantly better than those of the 5A pool. And it's not "simply" track surfaces and shoes that have evolved, although those are significant factors no matter what anyone will tell you. EVERY aspect of running has evolved. For example, do you really think Galen Rupp would be anywhere near the runner he is without Alberto Salazar's innovative training and NOP's state-of-the-art training facilities? Put Herb Elliott or Jim Ryun in this era, and I believe they would still kick ass.

SMJO wrote:

but still no better than a 3:30 guy.

1.5% for 3:51.1 would be 3:47.68. That is a solo run, with no rabbits, a big negative split on the final lap, and a semi-final run the night before.

To say he was worth no better than 3:30 shows how incredibly clueless you are.

All of those factors can be beneficial rather than detrimental to performance, particularly for a guy like Ryun.

What does 3:47:68 translate to in a 1500..

SMJO wrote:

All of those factors can be beneficial rather than detrimental to performance, particularly for a guy like Ryun.

What does 3:47:68 translate to in a 1500..

Beneficial if you ignore the laws of physics...

You are clueless bro

ALAN MF WEBB wrote:

SMJO wrote:

All of those factors can be beneficial rather than detrimental to performance, particularly for a guy like Ryun.

What does 3:47:68 translate to in a 1500..

Beneficial if you ignore the laws of physics...

You are clueless bro

I do not think you know the difference between physics and psychological.

SMJO wrote:Keino was never going to run under 3:30. EVER.

He raced a lot and never got close to that mark anywhere.

His strength was that he could deliver his best at altitude as well.

Keino had pretty modest talent relative to the modern era of Kenyans and those guys can barely dip under 3:30 now.

utter drivel

go put his 3'34.91 at 7200' into ncaa altitude calculator app & tell me where it says "kenyans don't count"

even roger has said that was worth a 3'30 at sea-level

'68 was keino's best year as he got more time to train & even had benefit of a training camp for 1st time

he never was offered similar again until '72 when way past his peak but still picked up gold/silver

he had even retired for 1y between '68 - '72 but persuaded to come back

wtfunny wrote:You're (intentionally ?) missing the point. You said Keino was 3+ secs faster at sea level .. which would have to make him even further ahead at altitude .. if you compound that with Ryun's poor tactics in that race, Keino should've beaten him by even further again .. yet the difference was actually LESS than what you claimed it shoulda been at sea level.

Claiming the difference in that race, at altitude, was likely 1-2s is completely contradictory to claiming that Keino was likely 3 plus seconds better shape at sea level.

There is no way in the world Keino was as fast as Kiprop over 1500m .. at any altitude.

you are dumb

i said Ryun shouda been 1 - 2s behind if he'd run more aggressively, in what turned out to be an 800 race - he was close to last at this point, as keino had 2 germans with him at 700 mark

for a full-out 1500, you can nearly double 1 - 2s, which gives you ~ 3s

your brain doesn't seem to comprehend we are talking individuals

show me what law of nature says guys today have to be better than 50y ago ???

no

an individual coud

what law of nature says otherwise ???

i see your brain coud learn nothing from that brief vid

no one, i repeat no one has ever run like that before or since '67

nonsense

we are talking an individual

i have never seen rudy/kip/hicham/bernie/noah ever show anything like the power shown in that vid

what law of sport are you quoting ???

fool

how many times have you been told it was semi-synthetic with a prelim coupla hours before & he felt "terrible"

he shoudn't even have been running that day but set a 880wr !!!

fool

again you ignore fact he ran on chewed up dirt in 95F a last 1200 of 2'46.6 which wouda been ~ 2'46-flat if not for extra distance

that is 3'27+ pace !!!

& he only ran it hard in last 300 !!!

fool

how many times have you got to be told ???

he talks about roger & jesse

i see your peabrain can't read thru the lines

he obviously means pristine dirt track with all other environmental conditions the same - specifically dry

where woud biomechanical experts find '70s synthetic tracks today ???

learn to listen

he says consensus of experts, meaning more than 1

how many times have you got to be told that was off a jog for 300

his last 1200 was ~ 2'46-flat considering running wide into lane 2 between 300 - 400

using 1.5% that's a last 1200 of

2'43.5 which is

3'24.4 pace

& like the vid/accounts show, he only put in hard effort in last 300 !!!

not in peak of his year & as he says in a vid, he only was ready to run fast a handful of times/y out of 60/70 races he ran/y

how many times have you been told

a 46.9 for 440y on a quagmire unfit to lj on & after a 3'55 mile in his legs !!!

that is ~ 45-flat speed on synthetic

with that speed & crushing endurance, in '67 he coud run 1'39.9/3'24.2

now show me which paced 800s he ran in late-'67 or open 400 ???

utter nonsense

he has said he was only ready to run fast a handful times/y & his peak was late-'67

& every guy who has a clue about Ryun knows his peak year was '67 FOR ALL EVENTS

he wasn't wasting time running 400 relays late-'67 when he had big international races to run

your peabrain can't seem to comprehend coe's comments about a wet dirt track costing 2 - 3s

all accounts make that kansas quagmire being 2 - 3s slower

that makes his 46.9 for 440y being 43.9/44.9

i've used a conservative 2s making it 44.9 for 440y which is 44.6 for 400

add 0.7s for flying -> 45.3 & knock off few tenths for that 3'55 mile run on same quagmire early

that is 45-flat for anyone with a clue