Deanouk wrote:However, Rudisha ran his time in 2012 when at his season peak, in the most important race of his life
nonsense
Rudy ran 1'41.74 on a beat up new york track, which had been patched up & needed complete replacement the next year
on top of that, it was a windy day with winds for some jumps ~ 3m/s
further, he had to run within himself as trials coming up & only top-3 going to london
any injury & he couda been out
flat-out, on a windless day on a good track, he was already in at worst 1'41-flat shape
no difference between june/august shape
Coe ran his 31 years earlier with no competition and on an inferior track in early season
try unknown, questionable track
get a clue bout iaaf 65% energy return
How do the exploits of 800 runners in 1950 (31 years earlier) compare to Coe's time!?
You have to put each in historical context. When Rudisha won the Olympic title he was expected to win and ran his normal race, that gave him the best chance of winning. That's not a criticism, it's one of the greatest and bravest performances in T&F history, but an accurate analysis of his tactics. It was a 0.10 improvement on the WR
what part of "after rounds" do you not comprehend ???
At the time of Firenze, Coe was a whopping 1.71 secs faster than anyone else in history
more historical accident than anything
leaving aside likes of snell/Ryun who didn't have synthetic tracks at their peaks nor guys dragging them thru in sub-50, the likes of kiprugut/kipkurgat & caballo were all capable of 1'42-mid/high if they had got an ideal conditions/paced effort at their peak
by '79, coe shouda been chasing a wr of 1'42-mid/high if those last 3 had run their best races on the circuit & not at championships/world cups
No one in modern times has been that far ahead of his contemporaries in the 800m
a historical accident
It was a different era, when running fast times all season was not the name of the game, as it is nowadays
utter rubbish
don paige has said races in '80 were all about the clock, with pacers every time
can't you read ???
But despite this, at the time, 30 years ago, the average of Coe's top 7 times on the eve of the 1984 Olympics, was 1:43.42, faster than anyone else had run once at the time
again, more historical accident & lots of opportunities to run fast
get it into your brain :
the majority of those 7 races were paced efforts, making your assertion of lack of paced races a nonsense
coe never cracked 1'44 in a solo effort
He confirmed that Konchellah wasn't hired as a rabbit
but he ran as a rabbit
does your peabrain think an 18y ole 1'48 guy was trying to run a sensible pb off 49.4 ???
hence he had to run round him at 400m, and that it wasn't intended to be a WR attempt
that's what it turned out
He was hoping for a fast time in 1:43, with a view of attempting the WR in Oslo a month later
this is where a possible short track helps
When I suggested that he could have run under 1:41 later that season had he taken several attempts with good pacing to the bell, he said, "I think sub 1:41 is pushing it a bit, but certainly 1: 41.2/1:41.3."
no offence to coe, but anyone who saw his race on the weekend on tv knew that was season & almost certainly career peak
no chance he woud ever better that clocking
I then asked what he'd have been able to run on the latest mondo tracks, and he said, "a couple of tenths faster"
8 more pure 800s in '81 & nothing better than 1'45.4 gives nonsense supporting evidence
Ignore all the drivel from Ventolin and co that the track was short. He is always trying to demean Coe's performances, and when asked to provide evidence from others that call into question the length of the track, he is left floundering
utter drivel
sabia ran huge pb, caballo who was considered finished comes back with 1'44 !
aouita who no serious fan expected better than 13'15 runs 13'04 !!!
firenze was a seriously questionable track which conveniently disappeared in mid-'80s
i wonder why ???
perhaps they measured it, found it flawed & quietly finished meet until reappearing in 00's under total new guise & maybe even different stadium
It's a "normal" track, where the bends are longer than the straights
rubbish
bends are longer than straights but not 116/84
mre like 110/90
[quoteHe does also run about 60m wide on the 3rd bend which cost him perhaps 0.2 in terms of a perfect race[/quote]
rubbish
no more than
0.1s
Here is a better version of the race ~
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKJ_4RU4jKsA look at the race will show that Coe takes c. 10.5 sec at the end of the first lap to run the home straight (as soon as the bend ends) to the bell. That's about 82m in distance. He then goes into the bend a few metres later. So the bends are certainly not short
rubbish
there are no clear markings & you can't definitively tell when curve becomes straight & then straight again
the 100m finish line markings end on the curve, which is a sure sign of a short straight
any track where the 100m finish line doesn't coincide with end of straight is a mickey-mouse one, meaning stadium too small for a standard 116/84
i have timed it many times & get more like 11.5s making curve ~ 92m rom this method
In fact a look at Rudisha's 1:41.09 WR in Berlin also clearly shows that he took more like 12.3 secs from the beginning of the straight to the finish line on the 2nd lap
expected with a likely 116/84
Meaning the straights in Florence were shorter than the Berlin track, but the bends in Florence were longer than in Berlin
genius
how can it be otherwise ?!
Running longer bends and shorter straights would actually put an athlete at a slight disadvantage
yes
putting Rudy at a disadvantage as firenze had longer straights/shorter bends than berlin then adding in likely short bends
So in summarising, YES, Rudisha could have done this 30 + years later. But Coe's Florence run also represents one of the greatest and most ground breaking performances in T&F history
give Rudy billy as pacer, no rounds & short firenze, he wouda likely gone close to
1'40-flat