To be clear, I never said it was the hardest; I said it was one of the toughest events. I think it's fair to say that.
As for its history, the women's 400m hurdles became an Olympic event the same year the women's marathon did, 1984. That's more than enough time for the records in both those events to be significant, and I don't see anyone on this site trying to diminish Ruth Chepngetich's record (other than the PED accusations).
Now I want to dive into some data to show just how special Sydney's WR is. Here's a list I've shared before in other threads. It's a ranking of the percentage that the women's WR is better than the #2 performer's best time in Olympic track events:
400m hurdles: 1.1%
400m: 0.8%
100m hurdles: 0.7%
5,000m: 0.6%
100m: 0.5%
1500m: 0.4%
10,000m: 0.4%
200m: 0.3%
800m: 0.1%
Steeple: 0.0%
Here are the percentages for the men's world records:
100m: 1.1%
400m hurdles: 0.5%
10,000m: 0.4%
200m: 0.4%
400m: 0.3%
Steeple: 0.3%
800m: 0.2%
5,000m: 0.2%
1500m: 0.2%
110m hurdles: 0.1%
As you can see, Sydney and Bolt are head and shoulders above the rest. But, I've heard the criticism: "That's only because nobody else who's great has run the women's hurdles!" Well, one way we can debunk that myth (besides recognizing the greatness of Femke Bol and Dalilah Muhammad) is to look at women's track world records in comparison to their male counterparts. The general rule of thumb is that the men's world records are 10% better than the women's. Here's how they stack up, starting with the sprints and working up to distance:
100: 8.7% (men's WR is 8.7% better than the women's WR)
200: 10.1%
400: 9.6%
400h: 8.8%
800: 10.9%
1500: 10.1%
Steeple: 10.0%
5,000: 10.1%
10,000: 9.4%
The outliers are the 100 and the 400h. FloJo (RIP) and Sydney are the only women whose records are within 9% of the men's records.
But, skeptics might say: "That's only because the height of the hurdles for women is too low compared to the men!" Well, if that was the correct explanation, then we would expect the top 10 women on the all-time list to be similarly around 9% slower than the top 10 men, as Sydney is to Karsten. Here's that list:
#1 woman (Sydney) is 8.8% slower than the #1 man (Karsten)
#2 woman is 9.4% slower than the #2 man
#3 woman is 10.3% slower than the #3 man
#4 woman is 9.8% slower than the #4 man
#5 woman is 10.2% slower than the #5 man
#6 woman is 10.2% slower than the #6 man
#7 woman is 10.2% slower than the #7 man
#8 woman is 10.2% slower than the #8 man
#9 woman is 10.2% slower than the #9 man
#10 woman is 10.1% slower than the #10 man
Welp, there goes the theory that the women's hurdles height is too low!
Maybe now people are thinking, "That's pretty impressive, but I still think all the best long sprinting athletes are doing the flat 400!" We can test that theory by looking at how much slower the best hurdlers run the 400 while hurdling than the best 400 flat runners have run the 400 without anything obstructing their lap. Here is how it looks for men:
Karsten's WR in the 400h is 6.3% slower than the men's WR in the 400 flat.
The #2 guy's 400h time is 6.5% slower than the #2 guy's time in the 400.
The #3 guy's 400h time is 6.5% slower than the #3 guy's time in the 400.
The #4 guy's 400h time is 7.2% slower than the #4guy's time in the 400.
The #5 guy's 400h time is 7.5% slower than the #5 guy's time in the 400.
The #6 guy's 400h time is 7.6% slower than the #6 guy's time in the 400.
The #7 guy's 400h time is 7.6% slower than the #7guy's time in the 400.
The #8 guy's 400h time is 7.6% slower than the #8 guy's time in the 400.
The #9 guy's 400h time is 7.6% slower than the #9 guy's time in the 400.
The #10 guy's 400h time is 7.5% slower than the #10 guy's time in the 400.
How do the women compare?
Sydney's WR in the 400h is 5.5% slower than the women's WR in the 400 flat.
The #2 gal's 400h time is 5.8% slower than the #2 gal's time in the 400.
The #3 gal's 400h time is 6.7% slower than the #3 gal's time in the 400.
The #4 gal's 400h time is 7.1% slower than the #4 gal's time in the 400.
The #5 gal's 400h time is 7.7% slower than the #5 gal's time in the 400.
The #6 gal's 400h time is 7.8% slower than the #6 gal's time in the 400.
The #7 gal's 400h time is 7.7% slower than the #7 gal's time in the 400.
The #8 gal's 400h time is 7.3% slower than the #8 gal's time in the 400.
The #9 gal's 400h time is 7.4% slower than the #9 gal's time in the 400.
The #10 gal's 400h time is 7.4% slower than the #10 gal's time in the 400.
Once again, Sydney is the outlier!
Summary: All the data above show that Sydney is exceptional as a track athlete. Her 400h WR is tied with Bolt's 100m WR for having the largest percentage difference better than the #2 performer in their events. Sydney and FloJo are the only women to be within 9% of the men's world record in their events. Among the top 10 400m hurdlers on the all-time list, Sydney is the only woman to be within 9% of the corresponding male hurdler. And, when comparing the top 10 400m hurdles time for men and women to the top 10 400m times, Sydney are Femke are the only hurdlers whose hurdling time is within 6% of what the best sprinters can do in the 400 without hurdles.
Coe is justified when he say's Sydney's 400h performance is one of the best Olympic performances he's seen.
Not a good analysis. Try recalculating this but before Sydney or Muhammad joined the event. You will see that it was a weak event historically. Sydney is a great talent, but her competition is weaker relative to other events, because the event is weak. Simple really. Let’s see her win a 400 against Paulinho or win any sort of diamond league outside of the 400 hurdles. She obviously took the event to the next level, but her olympic performance is not as great as bolt, johnson, WVN, or warholm.
Let's see your analysis then. Show us the data supporting your view that Sydney faces weak competition in her primary event. Hopefully you can do better than just pointing to their times in a different event.
Then give us some metrics to explain why you believe Sydney's victory in the 400m hurdles doesn't deserve to be considered as one of the best in recent Olympic history along with those you listed.
Not a good analysis. Try recalculating this but before Sydney or Muhammad joined the event. You will see that it was a weak event historically. Sydney is a great talent, but her competition is weaker relative to other events, because the event is weak. Simple really. Let’s see her win a 400 against Paulinho or win any sort of diamond league outside of the 400 hurdles. She obviously took the event to the next level, but her olympic performance is not as great as bolt, johnson, WVN, or warholm.
Let's see your analysis then. Show us the data supporting your view that Sydney faces weak competition in her primary event. Hopefully you can do better than just pointing to their times in a different event.
Then give us some metrics to explain why you believe Sydney's victory in the 400m hurdles doesn't deserve to be considered as one of the best in recent Olympic history along with those you listed.
Brotha I just explained how. The 400m Hurdles was a b tier event for most of history for both sexes until Warholm/Rai/santos/sydney/bol came onto the scene. The World Athletics points table is way overinflated for this event. The WR for the mens 400m hurdles before warholm was around was 46.78. Nobody had approached this for almost 20 years. That is around 1298 points. The three guys I mentioned regularly run this time, yet its somehow equivalent to 43.34 for 400m? Only 3 men in history have run better than that, in an s-tier event. Anyone with half a brain knows it’s not actually that many points. It is probably more likely around 1280, which seems much more reasonable. For the Women, let’s go with 51.70 for the 400mH since they run that with regularity now. That’s equivalent to a 400m flat time of 48.2. There have only been 6 performances in the 400m flat that has surpassed that. Only two have been in this century, one of which is incredibly suspicious (Naser Whereabouts). SML and Bol and Muhammad have run that time and faster almost 12 times. It doesn’t take much brain power to figure out that they haven’t updated the scores to account for the outliers in the 400mH. Why? Because like I said at the start, the 400mH has been a B EVENT for much of history while the 400 flat was an S TIER EVENT. Sydney’s WR Olympic performance is great but not as great as the main performances I named already:
Usain Bolt 100m 2008 and 2012 Usain Bolt 200m 2008 and 2012 Michael Johnson 200m 1996 Wayde Van Niekerk 400m 2016 David Rudisha 800m 2012
And probably more throughout history when you account for era differences.
Brotha I just explained how. The 400m Hurdles was a b tier event for most of history for both sexes until Warholm/Rai/santos/sydney/bol came onto the scene. The World Athletics points table is way overinflated for this event. The WR for the mens 400m hurdles before warholm was around was 46.78. Nobody had approached this for almost 20 years. That is around 1298 points. The three guys I mentioned regularly run this time, yet its somehow equivalent to 43.34 for 400m? Only 3 men in history have run better than that, in an s-tier event. Anyone with half a brain knows it’s not actually that many points. It is probably more likely around 1280, which seems much more reasonable. For the Women, let’s go with 51.70 for the 400mH since they run that with regularity now. That’s equivalent to a 400m flat time of 48.2. There have only been 6 performances in the 400m flat that has surpassed that. Only two have been in this century, one of which is incredibly suspicious (Naser Whereabouts). SML and Bol and Muhammad have run that time and faster almost 12 times. It doesn’t take much brain power to figure out that they haven’t updated the scores to account for the outliers in the 400mH. Why? Because like I said at the start, the 400mH has been a B EVENT for much of history while the 400 flat was an S TIER EVENT. Sydney’s WR Olympic performance is great but not as great as the main performances I named already:
Usain Bolt 100m 2008 and 2012 Usain Bolt 200m 2008 and 2012 Michael Johnson 200m 1996 Wayde Van Niekerk 400m 2016 David Rudisha 800m 2012
And probably more throughout history when you account for era differences.
Not a good analysis. So what if a time that was previously unapproachable is now run with regularity by a new generation of great athletes. That's the nature of the sport. Look at the men's 200. The 46.78 hurdle time you cited is actually worth 1296 points, which is equivalent to a 19.52. As recently as 2010, only Michael Johnson (once) and Usain Bolt (twice) had ever run faster than that time. Now that mark has been matched or bettered 17 times by 6 different men. Does that mean the men's 200 was a weak event before 2010? No, of course not.
You also need to dig deeper to understand the historical nuances of a particular event. A 1296 score is a 43.37 in the men's 400. One of the reasons we haven't seen more instances of men running that time or faster is the guys who have been capable of it haven't done everything they can in that event.
Wayde van Niekerk tore his ACL playing rugby in the middle of his prime.
Fred Kerley switched to the 100.
Michael Norman has had various issues and temporarily switched out of the event.
Even so, 3 guys have run a 1300+ score in the 400m, which is the same number of guys that have done it in the 400 hurdles.
In the women's 400, Shaunae Miller-Uibo might have been able to run 48.2, but she decided to have a baby. Shericka Jackon might have been able to do it, but like Kerley, she switched out of the event right as she was entering her prime.
When we talk about 51.70 for the women's 400 hurdles, let's be clear that only two exceptional women are running that time or better with regularity. Muhammad only did it once. So all that means is we have two all-time greats dominating that event right now, and we should recognize them as such.
I remember being 10 years old, watching Bekele hit the front in the 5k final in Beijing with 2k left in the race. He would go on to run the final 5 laps in 4:55, with a final lap of 53.x in non-super shoes, to finish the race in sub 13. In doing so, he ran the kick out of Lagat and outkicked Kipchoge.
We often overlook just how impactful it is to have someone running in front of you, breaking the wind. Certainly more impactful than carbon plates. Most estimates put it at a whole second per lap.
I'm not sure how many guys there are in the world right now that could run a 4:55 2k with no one in front of them to break the wind, finishing it in a 53 lap, all without carbon super shoes... let alone at the end of a sub 13 5k.
I remember being 10 years old, watching Bekele hit the front in the 5k final in Beijing with 2k left in the race. He would go on to run the final 5 laps in 4:55, with a final lap of 53.x in non-super shoes, to finish the race in sub 13. In doing so, he ran the kick out of Lagat and outkicked Kipchoge.
We often overlook just how impactful it is to have someone running in front of you, breaking the wind. Certainly more impactful than carbon plates. Most estimates put it at a whole second per lap.
I'm not sure how many guys there are in the world right now that could run a 4:55 2k with no one in front of them to break the wind, finishing it in a 53 lap, all without carbon super shoes... let alone at the end of a sub 13 5k.
Jakob ran a final 2k of 4:50.05 after an opening 1k of 2:27.51 in a 7:17.55 race. You sure kenny is beating that?