Coevett wrote:
14-flat wrote:
He was WR holder at 800m, 880yd, 1000m, and Mile (twice). He was Olympic champ three times.
With the same "benefits" that those in the '90s enjoyed, he would have run 1:41.xx / 2:12.xx / 3:27.xx / 3:44yd / 4:48 2k.
Every middle-distance WR-holder and Olympic champion from the last 60 years would have if they had the right drug benefits that they had in the 1990s and beyond. That is why the 1000m, 1500m, Mile, 2k, 3k and 2M WRs have not been beaten in 20 years. It is not because the runners from 1997-99 just happened to be the best in the history of the world.
Rekrunner actually believes that it was simply an abundance of talent in North and East Africa, despite the populations of these regions doubling since the 90s. That and 'talent moved to the roads'.
Such a shame Snell basically had to retire in his mid-twenties, rather than carry on until Mexico. The first Olympic games on an all-weather synthetic track, and at altitude of course. Ralph Doubell won Gold in a new WR of 1:44.3. Snell himself believes he would have won his third 800m Gold in Mexico, and surely he would have ran 1:43.
I would disagree with "simply". I believe progress since Snell is a complex combination of many factors, including the aforementioned shoes and tracks, plus changes to training, professionalism, competition formats, etc. I don't believe that drug benefits of the '90s were unavailable to anyone who wanted them outside of Africa.