How about getting back to reality instead of hypotheticals? Thanks.
How about getting back to reality instead of hypotheticals? Thanks.
Excuses, excuses.
(Seriously, Cruz is a really cool dude, very nice, polite and helpful. Probably more approachable than Cram).
glj/ wrote:
Alan Webb did it.
What else is there?
Oaky, you are probably trolling, but...
Here was the criteria:
"run a sub 46 400 relay, a sub 1:42 800 and a sub 3:30 1500."
Alan Webb did not do any of those.
I don't know is 400 PR, but it's not sub 46.
1:43.8 is not less than 1:42
3:30.5 is not less than 3:30
2 laps wrote:
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:What about how in 1985 Cram blasted past him? Ouch! Ventolin.
Mind you Cruz is a really, really nice guy. Very helpful.
To be fair to Cruz, his defeat to Cram was a week or so before this, and it was only by a few tenths, and he was the target in front. By this race. Cruz went quicker 1:42.5 , to Cram's 1:42.8. Had they raced here it would have been a toss up as to who would have won.
Also, Cram was at his career peak during those 6 weeks late summer.
Had Cruz post LA been in that race with Cram in Zurich 85, he would definitely have beaten him.
Calculo keeps repeating the same nonsense and keeps having it removed by the moderators.
He has been told by many different people, including top coaches, on many different occasions, that elite athletes run their best after a series of 3 or 4 races close together, especially in Championship years, when their whole training regime and raison d'etre is geared to doing just that and reaching a peak at the end of a series.
Cruz showed this in LA, running 1:45, 1:44, 1:43 & 1:43.0 in 4 days.
There was a big enough gap between LA and the European circuit a fortnight later in 84. His aim was to attack the WR and he and his coach must have known from training what was the best way to approach it. They could have chosen to put all their eggs in 1 basket and run just Zurich or Cologne, but they clearly believed a few attacks in the space of a week was the best bet for succeeding. He was on ideal pace for the record in Zurich but failed to touch it. Surely if he was fresher then he would have succeeded in that race and run progressively slower in the races that followed? He didn't.
The main reason he ran the best time in Cologne was due to the fact he had Koskei a couple of metres back over the last 150, ready to capitalize on any weakness Cruz might show. That knowledge of someone there in the latter stages is undoubtedly beneficial to getting every ounce out of the runner in front.
At the height of the season in late August, in a well paced race, with someone drafting him to 500m, with company until 600m and with someone breathing down his neck over the last 100m, he still didn't manage to break the WR. He left it all out on the track.
In a hypothetical perfect world he could have run slightly faster, but so can everyone. He had every break afforded him but still couldn't manage it.
Coe ran his WR in early June, not the time of year to be at a peak. If he'd wanted to attack his own WR later in summer then he would have almost certainly been faster. The fact he didn't feel the need to run faster and didn't does not mean he wasn't capable of doing so.
Coe's first lap in his 1:41 was almost identical to what Cruz ran in both Zurich & Cologne. But thereafter, Coe ran wider on the 3rd curve, thus more distance, had no drafting up to 500m, unlike Cruz, had no one near him to spur him on and had no one pushing him from behind in the last 100m.
In 1985 Coe was maxed out at 1:43.0. He happened to get into a race where the rabbit went through in sub 50 and there was someone in better shape than him pulling him to a fast time. In that particular year, given those particular circumstances, he probably got pretty close to what he was capable of that year, even though he pretty much ran a solo 1:44.0 in May.
In 84 and 86 Coe was in much better shape than he had been in 85. In the 86 European he ran a 1:44.5 with negative splits, in cold, windy weather, running 10m + wide on bends and still covered the last 200m (2.5m wide) in 24.8.
That's worth 1:43.2 with a last 200 in 24.5, just based on extra distance run.
He was worth at least 1:42 flat that day in race with ideal pace and competition.
Same in LA. He ran wider than anyone in the race, about 10m, making his 1:43.6 worth more like 1:42.3. And that's not even considering distribution of effort, lack of drafting, etc.
Calculo's suggestion that Coe (or, coe, in lower case as I notice he always uses) was in better 800 shape in 85 than 84 or 86 reflects poorly on his understanding of that era of 2 lap running. Just as the suggestion Ryun could run 1:39 low (I remember him saying it was 1:42 high a few years back) and that Cram, a 48 flat 400m runner, could run 1:41 low, also does. Cram was a maxed out 1:42 mid guy given drafting to bell off a 50 mid first 400m. Anything starting with a 4 would have been suicide for him, as too close to his 1 lap maximum ability. Hence he ran his best times off even laps. He was much better suited to the 1500m.
2 laps wrote:
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:What about how in 1985 Cram blasted past him? Ouch! Ventolin.
Mind you Cruz is a really, really nice guy. Very helpful.
To be fair to Cruz, his defeat to Cram was a week or so before this, and it was only by a few tenths, and he was the target in front. By this race. Cruz went quicker 1:42.5 , to Cram's 1:42.8. Had they raced here it would have been a toss up as to who would have won.
Also, Cram was at his career peak during those 6 weeks late summer.
Had Cruz post LA been in that race with Cram in Zurich 85, he would definitely have beaten him.
Calculo keeps repeating the same nonsense and keeps having it removed by the moderators.
He has been told by many different people, including top coaches, on many different occasions, that elite athletes run their best after a series of 3 or 4 races close together, especially in Championship years, when their whole training regime and raison d'etre is geared to doing just that and reaching a peak at the end of a series.
Cruz showed this in LA, running 1:45, 1:44, 1:43 & 1:43.0 in 4 days.
There was a big enough gap between LA and the European circuit a fortnight later in 84. His aim was to attack the WR and he and his coach must have known from training what was the best way to approach it. They could have chosen to put all their eggs in 1 basket and run just Zurich or Cologne, but they clearly believed a few attacks in the space of a week was the best bet for succeeding. He was on ideal pace for the record in Zurich but failed to touch it. Surely if he was fresher then he would have succeeded in that race and run progressively slower in the races that followed? He didn't.
The main reason he ran the best time in Cologne was due to the fact he had Koskei a couple of metres back over the last 150, ready to capitalize on any weakness Cruz might show. That knowledge of someone there in the latter stages is undoubtedly beneficial to getting every ounce out of the runner in front.
At the height of the season in late August, in a well paced race, with someone drafting him to 500m, with company until 600m and with someone breathing down his neck over the last 100m, he still didn't manage to break the WR. He left it all out on the track.
In a hypothetical perfect world he could have run slightly faster, but so can everyone. He had every break afforded him but still couldn't manage it.
Coe ran his WR in early June, not the time of year to be at a peak. If he'd wanted to attack his own WR later in summer then he would have almost certainly been faster. The fact he didn't feel the need to run faster and didn't does not mean he wasn't capable of doing so.
Coe's first lap in his 1:41 was almost identical to what Cruz ran in both Zurich & Cologne. But thereafter, Coe ran wider on the 3rd curve, thus more distance, had no drafting up to 500m, unlike Cruz, had no one near him to spur him on and had no one pushing him from behind in the last 100m.
In 1985 Coe was maxed out at 1:43.0. He happened to get into a race where the rabbit went through in sub 50 and there was someone in better shape than him pulling him to a fast time. In that particular year, given those particular circumstances, he probably got pretty close to what he was capable of that year, even though he pretty much ran a solo 1:44.0 in May.
In 84 and 86 Coe was in much better shape than he had been in 85. In the 86 European he ran a 1:44.5 with negative splits, in cold, windy weather, running 10m + wide on bends and still covered the last 200m (2.5m wide) in 24.8.
That's worth 1:43.2 with a last 200 in 24.5, just based on extra distance run.
He was worth at least 1:42 flat that day in race with ideal pace and competition.
Same in LA. He ran wider than anyone in the race, about 10m, making his 1:43.6 worth more like 1:42.3. And that's not even considering distribution of effort, lack of drafting, etc.
Calculo's suggestion that Coe (or, coe, in lower case as I notice he always uses) was in better 800 shape in 85 than 84 or 86 reflects poorly on his understanding of that era of 2 lap running. Just as the suggestion Ryun could run 1:39 low (I remember him saying it was 1:42 high a few years back) and that Cram, a 48 flat 400m runner, could run 1:41 low, also does. Cram was a maxed out 1:42 mid guy given drafting to bell off a 50 mid first 400m. Anything starting with a 4 would have been suicide for him, as too close to his 1 lap maximum ability. Hence he ran his best times off even laps. He was much better suited to the 1500m.
Cram & Cruz both were in good shape in 1985. Ventolin's statements are insanity, 1:39 in reality is hyperspeed.
Cram without too much difficulty handled Cruz in the home straight and pulled clear from him during Cruz's second best stretch of races in his career, whereas Coe could not catch Cruz and the latter pulled away from him. So, Cram was in by far the best 800m, as well as 1k, 1500m, and mile shape in 1985. And so you would be hard pressed to assert that Cram was not in shape to break 1:42 against Joachim Cruz at or very close to the best shape of his career. Cram obviously did not take a lot of shots at a fast 800m or 1k, so he had to settle for among the best times of all time then. And Coe did not run a lot of 800s for time after his 1:41.73, so even he did not likely maximize at the distance. In 1981, he was head and shoulders above any of his form in later years, though his 1500m shape was solid at the LA Olympics and he obviously broke 3:30 only years later.
I agree with most of what you have put, but think you overestimate Cram's 800 ability.
He has stated several times that he could never match Coe or Ovett over 400m, and has said he never broke 23 for 200 and his best ever 400 in 85 was 48.1. His best relay was 47.6.
Coe ran 21.7 for 200 in training, and has a best 400 relay of 45.5 and ran a 45.6 relay leg when stumbling, just an hour after a 1:44.0. That run was evidence of at least 46.1 for an open 400. That's about 2 sec better than Cram.
Over 1500 their pbs are almost identical, only 0.1 apart, and both were doubtless capable of 3:28.
It is impossible that 2 athletes with the same 1500 ability but with one 2 sec faster over 400m, for them to have the same ability over 800m.
If Cram were capable of sub 1:42, as you suggest, that makes him just a couple of tenths within Coe's time.
I can't think of any other athlete who has gone sub 1:43, without having run a sub 48 400m. I doubt anyone whose gone sub 1:42.5 has not run at least 47.5 for 400m!
Cram had good pacing, drafting and a rabbit until 700m in his oh 800. You can tweak it to 1:42.5, but he's not going any faster if he's got to run from the front for the entire 2nd lap.
Had Coe had Rudisha in front of him up to 700m in Florence then he would have gone at least 0.5 faster as it would have been a race not a front running time trial.
Give both athletes at absolute peak their chosen pace up to 400m, perfect conditions, no wide running, etc. and then left in front for the entire 2nd lap, with no one within 10m behind, then I don't see Cram going any faster than 1:42.5, and probably a couple of tenths slower.
I give Coe more like 1:41.2.
Same 1500 endurance, 2 sec difference 400 ability would result in a difference of at least 1 sec for 800.
Noble KaneYou keep repeating t wrote:Cruz was not hugely sub par in this race
is this a joke ???
he ran a virtually undrafted 1'42.4 !!!
85 was his 2nd best ever season and he was getting better with every race at the tail end of 85
is this a joke ???
coe was aiming for peak in zurich & got crushed by cram !!!
you think coupla days later when he destroyed coe in koln was better shape ???
He wasn't in his peak 84 shape, but pretty close
no
he wasn't
in '84 he was in
~ 1'41-flat
in '85 he was in
~ 1'42-flat
he was 1s slower in '85
Coe had missed a month's training by this point in 85 and was running with a n old back problem which forced him to pull out of several races
irrelevant
even at his peak, he was hugely slower than Cruz at fully-rested in '84
He was the one below par here
not in same league ever in Cruz-Koln
1'41.77 !!!
genuine, after criminal fast runs past few days !!!
A shadow of his 81 peak or even that of 84 and 86
no
coe was in very similar shape '81/'84/'86, except only latter 2 had proper auto-timing for 800
He has been told by many different people, including top coaches, on many different occasions, that elite athletes run their best after a series of 3 or 4 races close together, especially in Championship years
is this a joke ???
if peak Big-Man or Wilson were offered 1-off runs in olympics versus coe, but coe had to run 3 prelims before, you think coe has got the advantage ???
when their whole training regime and raison d'etre is geared to doing just that and reaching a peak at the end of a series
is this a joke ?
see above
Cruz showed this in LA, running 1:45, 1:44, 1:43 & 1:43.0 in 4 days
is this a joke ???
he ended up with even harder runs in few days with incredible
1'41.77 !!!
There was a big enough gap between LA and the European circuit a fortnight later in 84
no
he was ill
no grown-up who saw his gold on tv expected him to run again that year , let alone 1'41.77 !!!
His aim was to attack the WR and he and his coach must have known from training what was the best way to approach it
is this a joke ???
you think best way to attack 800wr is to run 1k just 2 days before ???
his coach clearly had no clue at all about Cruz's plan's apart from Cruz was chasing serious ??? on circuit
They could have chosen to put all their eggs in 1 basket and run just Zurich or Cologne
is this a joke ???
any grown-up watching it live was shocked Cruz even turned-up after gold !!!
the indication was after huge NCAA season earlier, he was finished
here is Cruz's season :
http://www.thegreatdistancerunners.de/JoaquimCruz.htmlwhere on earth are coe's number of run's before games ???
Cruz was absolutely hammered before even setting foot in los angeles !!!
but they clearly believed a few attacks in the space of a week was the best bet for succeeding
is this a joke ???
if peak Big-Man or Wilson were offered 1-off runs in olympics versus coe, but coe had to run 3 prelims before, you think coe has got the advantage ???
He was on ideal pace for the record in Zurich but failed to touch it
is this a joke ???
he'd run a vitrually solo 2'14-flat hust 2/7 before !!!
zurich organiser musta been mad !!!
in zurich, Cruz was angry at not pulling-out at bell, but slowing suddenly & forcing him wide costing him lot of momentum
Surely if he was fresher then he would have succeeded in that race and run progressively slower in the races that followed?
is this a joke ???
so, after 5 fast races you shoud get quicker on last !
so, after 10 fast races you shoud get quicker on last !!
so, after 100 fast races you shoud get quicker on last !!!
so, your law of running is that the more fast races you run in a few days, the faster you will become ???
He didn't
is this a joke ???
if this had been a 1-off, fully rested, it wouda been a legit, fully-auto-timed
1'41-flat/low
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2tHUPdjnnwThe main reason he ran the best time in Cologne was due to the fact he had Koskei a couple of metres back over the last 150
is this a joke ???
he had sammy behind him in zurich !!!
how did that work out for sammy ???
ready to capitalize on any weakness Cruz might show
how did that work out in zurich for sammy ???
That knowledge of someone there in the latter stages is undoubtedly beneficial to getting every ounce out of the runner in front
then why didn't that nonsense work in zurich ???
At the height of the season in late August
virtually dead after brutal college season
in a well paced race with someone drafting him to 500m
is this a joke ???
were you even a grown man watching Cruz run Nice/Zurich/Brussels then Koln !!! in just a few days !!!
it was most incredible feat ever seen !!!
you clearly didn't see these runs live on tv at time as grown-up
any-one who did wouda understood Cruz's 1'41.77, if fully-rested 1-off, wouda been
~ 1'41-flat/low
with company until 600m
is this a joke ?
he destroyed same in zurich
and with someone breathing down his neck over the last 100m, he still didn't manage to break the WR
is this a joke ???
what shape do you think his legs were after virtually solo 2'14.0 just 48 hours earlier ???
He left it all out on the track.
no
he ran stoopid, chasing $$$, when if he'd fully rested for Koln, it wouda been
~ 1'41-flat/low
In a hypothetical perfect world he could have run slightly faster, but so can everyone
eh ??
what unrested guys ???
on what known tracks with full auto-time ???
He had every break afforded him but still couldn't manage it
no
you clearly weren't watching '84 as grown-up
Nice 2'14-flat, virtually solo, killed-off any chance of 800WR :
https://youtu.be/4NNKBFEgYoM?t=168Coe ran his WR in early June, not the time of year to be at a peak
is this a joke ???
numerous 800s later & never broke 1'45 !!!
as pa-coe said :
"uncork"
best early season
any intelligent grown-up who heard coe ran "big wr" in '81 knew he woud never match it again
oslo promoter even asked him to run 1k in '81 as knew no chance of 800wr again in '81 !!!
If he'd wanted to attack his own WR later in summer then he would have almost certainly been faster
is this a joke ???
how about 8 more 800s in '81 ???
not one quicker than 1;45 !!!
did he want 100 more attempts to break 1'42 ???
The fact he didn't feel the need to run faster and didn't does not mean he wasn't capable of doing so
is this a joke ???
i was grown-up back then, expecting him to run a serious 800 on somewhere i had heard off, not nonsense firenze, to back-up that hand-timed nonsense
coe failed badly
8 more 800s in '81 & nothing quicker than 1'45 in a stand-alone 800
Coe's first lap in his 1:41 was almost identical to what Cruz ran in both Zurich & Cologne
is this a joke ?
latter 2 on proper 8-lane tracks with running auto-timing
firenze was neither
But thereafter, Coe ran wider on the 3rd curve, thus more distance
joke track/meet
had no drafting up to 500m
is this a joke ???
what shape you think Cruz was by Koln ???
unlike Cruz, had no one near him to spur him on and had no one pushing him from behind in the last 100m
is this a joke ???
sammy was pushing him from behind in zurich !
what it do for sammy in zurich, let alone Cruz ?
In 84 and 86 Coe was in much better shape than he had been in 85. In the 86 European he ran a 1:44.5 with negative splits, in cold, windy weather, running 10m + wide on bends and still covered the last 200m (2.5m wide) in 24.8.
That's worth 1:43.2 with a last 200 in 24.5, just based on extra distance run.
He was worth at least 1:42 flat that day in race with ideal pace and competition
is this a joke ???
he limpited Cram like worst parasite possible, gaining 0.5s, pushing time out to 1'42.5+
Same in LA. He ran wider than anyone in the race, about 10m, making his 1:43.6 worth more like 1:42.3. And that's not even considering distribution of effort, lack of drafting, etc
absolutely hammered by Cruz who was in worst shape off Koln of
~ 1'41-flat/low
Calculo's suggestion that Coe (or, coe, in lower case as I notice he always uses) was in better 800 shape in 85 than 84 or 86 reflects poorly on his understanding of that era of 2 lap running
is this a joke ?
where did coe run running clock 1'42+ on a proper 8-laner ???
Just as the suggestion Ryun could run 1:39 low (I remember him saying it was 1:42 high a few years back)
Ryun was in
1'40.0
shape in '66 if fully healthy in a 1-off on proper synthetic not asphalt
he was immensely better shape in '67
and that Cram, a 48 flat 400m runner, could run 1:41 low
is this a joke ???
learn to digest info
Kipruto, the 3k SC king has 47+
it is absurd to believe cram had slower 400
also does
is this a joke ???
cram ran huge extra wide in that 1'42.88 in a tactial run
it wouda been 1'42-low just for extra wide, let alone nonsense 50-high split when all expected 49-high if pacer wasn't so rubbish
it was supposed to be 49-high pacing in zurich in '85, not nonsensense 50-high !!!
Cram was a maxed out 1:42 mid guy given drafting to bell off a 50 mid first 400m
is this a joke ???
his extra on bends already got him down to 1'42-low off nonsense 50-high
it was supposed to be 49-mid/high race !!!
Anything starting with a 4 would have been suicide for him, as too close to his 1 lap maximum ability
is this a joke ???
he ran intrinsic 1'42-low off off nonsense 50-high
if he'd run 50-mid or low or flat or 49-high or mid, offer mathematical adjustments to intrinsic route-1 of 1'42-low ?
where is breaking point when 800s get slower than 1'42-low ???
Hence he ran his best times off even laps
is this a joke ???
his zurich run was ~1'42-low intrinsic off 50-high
how is tht even-pace ???
consuelus, the 3k SC champ has 400 speed
how is cram slower ???
He was much better suited to the 1500m
no
edinburgh-86 showed he was an incredible 800 runner
if 1-off in hot weather, fast pace to bell, he wouda been
~ 1'41-low