Rudisha Says 48.5, 50.5 Split Possible......

charlatan wrote:

Well this is not how I was expecting this thread to go. Quite the meltdown from Mr Ventolin there.

http://i.imgur.com/K4Epu.jpg

Don't suppose you could make one of him with a Viren beard?

Chef wrote:

Maybe the problem is that Ventolin is a Gay Homosexual, and he just hasn't found the right boyfriend.

Sorry guys, but have to agree with ventolin on this one. He's trying to make some serious points about the sport, and the rest of you are spouting bullshit and slinging mud. In my book, this makes you look pretty small.

Middle Distance Coach wrote:

Sorry guys, but have to agree with ventolin on this one. He's trying to make some serious points about the sport, and the rest of you are spouting bullshit and slinging mud. In my book, this makes you look pretty small.

You look VERY, VERY SMALL to me.

Middle Distance Coach wrote:

Chef wrote:

Maybe the problem is that Ventolin is a Gay Homosexual, and he just hasn't found the right boyfriend.

Sorry guys, but have to agree with ventolin on this one. He's trying to make some serious points about the sport, and the rest of you are spouting bullshit and slinging mud. In my book, this makes you look pretty small.

Which part of Ventolin's ravings do you agree with? You have to be a little specific, as there is all sorts of ridiculous beliefs he is ranting about.

Do you agree that a 20 year old Ryun was capable of 1:40.3/ 3:24.4 some 45 years ago, which would still make him the WR holder in both events, much faster than all the EPO freaks of the late 90's???????

Your response - in addition to suggesting that you didn't take the time to read my post - only proved my point.

Not knowing much about the 800m, I would guess that for Rudisha to break 1:40 would require somebody else running 1:40

He needs that push. You can only go so far alone in a speedy event. (yes, I have seen Komen's 2-miler, but that was a distance event)

IF he can go 1:39 alone, then he could go 1:38 if he had somebody else fast to run against.

Of course, only guessing, I know squat about the 800m.

Rudisha will never go sub 1:40. I doubt I'll ever see a pair of guys both breaking 1:40 in my lifetime.

Rudisha has only improved Kipketer's record by 0.1. To ask him to improve by another 1.0 is a massive ask.

The only way I see him approaching 1:40 is if he has perfect drafting to 600m in 1:14.0

deanouk wrote:

Rudisha will never go sub 1:40. I doubt I'll ever see a pair of guys both breaking 1:40 in my lifetime.

I can certainly see it being done in the next 20 yrs if the right combination of talent comes along.

[quote]Middle Distance Guru wrote:

1:39! R U f*cking kidding me? Would love to see that shit. There is an article out there, but couldn't get the link to post.[/quote

His attitude is partly what has already got him the world record.

Saw amazing doc. film the other wk where he went back to Brother Colm doing some workouts

ukathleticscoach wrote:

[quote]Middle Distance Guru wrote:

Saw amazing doc. film the other wk where he went back to Brother Colm doing some workouts

Post the link please. Would love to see it!

While Ventolin is talking about 'maybes' and 'what ifs', I don't think some of the folks on the other side of this discussion are doing anything differently. Part of being a great 800m runner is not making stupid mistakes like both Kipketer and Coe did in arguably their biggest races. Both lost at their OG races because of poor tactics; that alone questions any mantle of GOAT. IMO, Ventolin's discussion is no more theoretical than folks who dismiss the strategic part of the race; 800m races aren't run on athletic ability alone.

Same thing with talking about if athletes hadn't got sick or injured. They DID get sick and/or injured, and that's a part of their track record. Arguing about what they might have done had they stayed healthy is, imo, no different than ventolin's theoretical calculator.

Coe was awesome, and Kipketer every bit as awesome, imo. But Coe DID get hosed by Cruz (more than once?). And Cruz ran, for argument's sake, just as quickly over 800m as Coe EVER did (4/100th of a second). He also ran sub 1:43:00 something like 7 times or so.

Watching Rudisha run sub 1:42 so comfortably, twice already this year, I think it's safe to say if he isn't yet the GOAT, he's sure on track to be. And if he wins in London, he'll be the only one of Coe, Kipketer and Rudisha to have won the OG, when it really matters.

So we'll see, I say.

PS: just to be clear; all these guys are ridiculously amazing, awesome athletes, something that often gets sidelined in discussions like this. Full props to all of them

Finally a sensible and sane post in this thread.

A lot of good points, but the GOAT is not purely based on the results from the Olympics. Its based on several factors like longevity of top performances, win/loss records over your peers, fastest time, record over the big races.

In terms of the Olympics Rudisha is behind Snell, Coe and Kipketer at present.

And as for Cruz running the same time as Coe, that's besides the point. Coe did it first. He was the first sub 1:43 and the first sub 1:42. It's a bit like climbing Everest. The one who does it first is the one they all remember. After that person has shown the way, of course others will follow.

Also Cruz's peak years of 84 & 85 coincided with Coe's decline as the top 800m runner. Cruz had several attacks on the World record at the height of the 84 & 85 seasons, but never managed it. Coe in 81 ran alone for all the 2nd lap, ran wide and it was very early in the season. He faced Cruz in the World Cup that year when Coe won by about 15m. Coe did well to get the silver in LA after coming back from illness. Cruz wouldn't have had it all his own way had Coe been in his 81 form.

Agreed. And I wasn't saying Cruz was 'better' than Coe, Snell, or anyone else. Just that some of the arguments made earlier are every bit as subjective conjecture as Ventolin's post, or more. You do the same thing in this post above when you talk about 'if Coe had been in his 81 form'; neither of us know that, he was in excellent form in 80, and Ovett hosed him. Or, 'he ran wide for the WR'; well, that, to me, says everything. When you make excuses for why he ran this time or that time (like 1:41 needs an excuse:-) ) it's no different to putting #s together with a calculator, imo. He ran what he ran, and Cruz' run 1:41:77 puts him definitely in the same class as Coe, IMO, as far as fastest time run. The point about Cruz/Coe's time is not beside the point, it IS the point. Coe ran a WR, and Cruz ran a time that, for all intents and purposes, is every bit as impressive. 4/100th of a second in a distance like that is nothing.

Another point is that it's simply incorrect to say GOAT is based on this, that or the other; it's based on whatever anyone wants to base it on (which is one reason these kinds of discussions are futile). But I do think it's reasonable to say that failing to win the big one, the OG, is a big strike against an athlete's claim to the GOAT. And Coe and Kipketer failed (for want of a better word) twice. Cruz won his, and then very nearly won a 2nd 4 years later.

The importance of the OG is huge though. For any athlete, that's THE track medal that matters. Watch that interview with El G in the BBC 1500m documentary. His world record was/is great, and he ran some fantastic runs over the years. But that OG gold medal is what he wanted.

I agree longetivity is a big deal in these kinds of discussions. That's why, for example, Carl Lewis winning 2x100m is so awesome.

btw, in 81 Cruz was 18 years old, fer cryin' out loud. That he was there at all is a tribute to his bada**edness. :)

I think in a few years time if we revisit this discussion, Rudisha will have an inarguable stamp on the GOAT of the 800m. But at the moment, perhaps we should just sit and watch in awe at his greatness, as we did when any athlete like this comes along.

Speaking of conjecture, here's an interesting side note: I was in Eugene in 83/84 (in high school). One day, riding my bike home from school, I came within a hair's breadth of wiping out Cruz as he left Hayward Field from a training session. I missed hitting him by MAYBE 6 inches. Had I been 4/100th of a second faster, Cruz wouldn't have even been running against Coe 8 weeks later in LA; Coe would have his gold medal, and this discussion would be over. :)

If Rudisha wins Olympic gold this year he's the GOAT. Look at the top 10 800s ever:

1 1:41.01 David Rudisha

2 1:41.09 David Rudisha

3 1:41.11 Wilson Kipketer

4 1:41.24 Wilson Kipketer

5 1:41.33 David Rudisha

6 1:41.51 David Rudisha

7 1:41.54 David Rudisha

8 1:41.73 Sebastian Coe

8 1:41.73 Wilson Kipketer

10 1:41.74 David Rudisha

In just 3 years Rudisha has already filled up 6/10 of that list. GOAT are determined by

1. # of Olympic Golds (you can't be a GOAT if don't have Olympic gold)

2. # of World Championship Golds

3. World Records/ PRs

Once Rudisha wins in London he'll have achieved all 3 of those and proved he's the best ever. Anything he does after 2012 is a bonus.

Fluffy wrote:

If Rudisha wins Olympic gold this year he's the GOAT. Look at the top 10 800s ever:

1 1:41.01 David Rudisha

2 1:41.09 David Rudisha

3 1:41.11 Wilson Kipketer

4 1:41.24 Wilson Kipketer

5 1:41.33 David Rudisha

6 1:41.51 David Rudisha

7 1:41.54 David Rudisha

8 1:41.73 Sebastian Coe

8 1:41.73 Wilson Kipketer

10 1:41.74 David Rudisha

In just 3 years Rudisha has already filled up 6/10 of that list. GOAT are determined by

1. # of Olympic Golds (you can't be a GOAT if don't have Olympic gold)

2. # of World Championship Golds

3. World Records/ PRs

Once Rudisha wins in London he'll have achieved all 3 of those and proved he's the best ever. Anything he does after 2012 is a bonus.

While I believe Rudisha will have a better claim to being GOAT if he win Olympic gold, I certainly do not agree that the 2nd most important criteria of greatness is World Champs gold. That prevents anyone who compted before the mid 80's (e.g. Snell, Elliott, Ryun, etc) from being considered, as they didn't exist then, and it also puts athletes who competed in the 80's at a disadvantage, as they only had them every 4 years.

You have to choose criteria which existed for all athletes from all eras. Olympics, WRs, total ranking points, other medals.

Coe's win in the 81 World Cup was the nearest he had to competing in a world champs. His win there was just as dominant as Rudisha's winning the Worlds last year.

With your criteria practically every GOAT will be athletes competing in the last 20 years!

rushida - kipkiter - coe

it is a no brainer that all 3 with better drafting (to 600m behind 2 people) alone could go about 0.8 - 1.2 seconds faster.

coe missed his peak years due to injury so he could have gone faster.

kipkiter was compromised a bit too.

rushida is on a role and peaking perfectly.

so the 1:39 can happen, but of course we'll probably see a 1"40 mid instead.

in regards to vertolin - he's gone of his rocker big time - i like his calculator speculations and he's got great knowledge - but he needs to get that BRAIN CANCER FIXED pronto.

good luck with the chemo my friend vertolin.

rushida - kipkiter - coe

it is a no brainer that all 3 with better drafting (to 600m behind 2 people) alone could go about 0.8 - 1.2 seconds faster.

coe missed his peak years due to injury so he could have gone faster.

kipkiter was compromised a bit too.

rushida is on a role and peaking perfectly.

so the 1:39 can happen, but of course we'll probably see a 1"40 mid instead.

in regards to vertolin - he's gone of his rocker big time - i like his calculator speculations and he's got great knowledge - but he needs to get that BRAIN CANCER FIXED pronto.

good luck with the chemo my friend vertolin.

wtfunny wrote:

Agreed. And I wasn't saying Cruz was 'better' than Coe, Snell, or anyone else. Just that some of the arguments made earlier are every bit as subjective conjecture as Ventolin's post, or more. You do the same thing in this post above when you talk about 'if Coe had been in his 81 form'; neither of us know that, he was in excellent form in 80, and Ovett hosed him. Or, 'he ran wide for the WR'; well, that, to me, says everything. When you make excuses for why he ran this time or that time (like 1:41 needs an excuse:-) ) it's no different to putting #s together with a calculator, imo.

No, it is not anywhere near the same thing. You have one person claiming a runner could have run 1:41.0 with more efforts after running 1:41.7, which involved running at least an extra 2m more than necessary. This is based on the general rule of thumb that top athletes improve over a season and will get faster the more attempts they have at running fast. That's a difference of 0.7

Then you have another, mad person, claiming this is nonsense and going out of his way to insist this was not possible based on nothing. He then foul-mouths anyone who suggest that this was possible.

This same mad person then states that someone from 45 years ago with pbs of 1:44.3 & 3:33.1, was actually capable of being 4 seconds faster over 800 & 9 secs faster over 1500, based on what he thinks the man could have run the following year when he didn't actually run any fast 800s? Are people keeping up with his train of thought? He is then happy to further "skew" this athlete's potential by talking about heat, wind, pace and a whole multitude of variables that cannot be measured in a scientific way.

Ventolin claims that 'had Ryun bothered to run a fast 800m in 1967 (which he did not), that he would have run 1:40.3 (or the equivalent on cinders) based on what he ran at 1500m, and that he must have improved his speed as well because he was a year older. Something which he dismisses could have been the case for Coe from 81 to 82! He then claims that Coe couldn't have run a 1:41.0, despite running 1:41.7, because he didn't bother to front run a 1:42.5 to win the European & World Cup races!! He clearly cannot see the irony of it. Hopefully most sane people will realize the bizarre contradiction and hypocrisy that his argument contains.