Kipchoge pushed the limits of the human body, regardless of Nike's input. Bannister did the same. Influence on the sport as well as accomplishments should carry weight.
Kipchoge pushed the limits of the human body, regardless of Nike's input. Bannister did the same. Influence on the sport as well as accomplishments should carry weight.
Coevett wrote:
Aouita is as close to a proven drug cheat as you can get without the actual proof. And presumably he's so high because of his 'versatility and range' (i.e. expert in the art of ducking Coe, Ovett, Cram).
But if that's the case, what the hell is an 800m specialist David Rushida doing at number 7 above the likes of Coe??? Do you think Rushida would have been running 1:41 back in 1981 on crap tracks and in flimsy plimsoles if he'd been spending the majority of the season trying to outdo Ovett over 1500 and Mile?
Plimsoles and crap tracks in 1981? You’re off by a couple of decades. Current spikes and tracks might be slightly better than those from the 80’s, but tracks were synthetic and the spikes were pretty good—I still have a pair! I think people stopped racing in plimsoles in the 50s or 60s.
I do agree with your conclusion though. Rudisha is ranked too high
Two Minute Thousand wrote:
Plimsoles and crap tracks in 1981? You’re off by a couple of decades. Current spikes and tracks might be slightly better than those from the 80’s, but tracks were synthetic and the spikes were pretty good—I still have a pair! I think people stopped racing in plimsoles in the 50s or 60s.
I do agree with your conclusion though. Rudisha is ranked too high
Well maybe I was exaggerating a little but somebody posted here just the other day a photo of the very spikes that Coe wore in his 1:41 WR and I don't think any of today's elite would be seen dead in them.
There have been studies that showed that the best (carbon fibre, hard plate etc) spikes of today improve times even in the sprints by over a 1/10 of a second. Tracks and shoes might be the most obvious differences influencing times between Coe's era and today, but the point is there's probably dozens of smaller micro-improvements in other areas that all add up. And obviously the difference between today and the 30s,40s,50s is vast, especially as most of those athletes were part-time and had no financial incentives.
In my opinon, Coe, Ovett, Cram pushed each other to just about the limits of human performance in middle-distance. Any improvements since have been due to technology (and in many cases obviously PEDs such as EPO).
Coevett wrote:
https://cdn.globalauctionplatform.com/81cc9912-5df5-4e78-8405-a5d800e596c0/901f7b43-7a93-4023-80b9-87a892601843/original.jpghttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/CoXHQvTXEAAKS0n.jpgHas this ever been posted here, btw.?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/07/28/article-2708770-2012804000000578-148_634x769.jpg
There are a few discrepancies in that comparison model. It says Coe went through 200m in 24.4 on the picture, but then has 24.5 in the table. At the time his 200 split was given as 24.6 and Konchellah's was given as 24.4, but then it changed a few years after. TBH, I don't think the 200 and 600 splits given are particularly precise as analysis of the run from 200 to 600, by using the exact same spot at around 24.4 using a stop watch on both laps, indicates that his 400m from 200 to 600m was nearer to 51.0 than the 50.6 attributed if using the 'official' splits of 24.4 and 1:15.0.
I would suggest that if the 24.4 is accurate, which I would think is more likely the more accurate of the 2 splits, then his 600m was more like 1:15.4 than 1:15.0.
One also has to remember that Coe ran at least 1.5m more by running most of the third bend wide of Konchellah. That is equivalent to 0.2 +.
I think Coe's actual splits in Florence were probably - 24.4, 49.7, 1:15.4 (24.4, 25.3, 25.7, 26.3)
Without the extra 1.5m, they would have been more like - 24.4, 49.7, 1:15.2, 1:41.5 (24.4, 25.3, 25.5, 26.3). It is not unreasonable to suggest that the improvements in spikes and track surfaces in the 35 years since that run would have accounted for perhaps 0.5 secs.
I think there is something to be said for going out quicker in the first 200m, as it is practically all anaerobic. Both Kipketer and Rudisha ran their best times by running sub 24 and then slowing quite considerably for the next 200m. In the latter's case he then increased the pace in the 3rd 200m, which is unusual at that level, but was made possible by the 2nd 200m being a relatively leisurely 25 high.
I think 24 flat looks about ideal at 200m for running a 1:41.
I was expecting to wake up this morning and see this thread decimated by Calculo, but only a typically clear and concise analysis by Deano.
Well done to the OP for compiling his list. It must have taken a lot of time and he seems to have put quite a bit of effort and thought into it. I think the problem is that it covers too broad a range (800m to marathon) without a clear and consistent weighting given to 'range' and success over multiple events. Also seems to me to favour Epo era Africans a little to much for my liking and ignores or relegates olden era European greats like Harbig and Bannister. But any such list is never going to have even 10% of readers in agreement.
And Rushida is certainly one of the very best of all-time and my favourite Kenyan athlete. Never seen him in an interview where he hasn't been completely humble and respectful of the history of his event and other greats like Coe.
Coevett wrote:
I was expecting to wake up this morning and see this thread decimated by Calculo, but only a typically clear and concise analysis by Deano.
Well done to the OP for compiling his list. It must have taken a lot of time and he seems to have put quite a bit of effort and thought into it. I think the problem is that it covers too broad a range (800m to marathon) without a clear and consistent weighting given to 'range' and success over multiple events. Also seems to me to favour Epo era Africans a little to much for my liking and ignores or relegates olden era European greats like Harbig and Bannister. But any such list is never going to have even 10% of readers in agreement.
And Rushida is certainly one of the very best of all-time and my favourite Kenyan athlete. Never seen him in an interview where he hasn't been completely humble and respectful of the history of his event and other greats like Coe.
The list has been edit pasted with no sort of scoring system so athletes can be compared across generations.
Shouldn't Ritz be on here?
Deanouk wrote:
wtfunny wrote:
Daniel Komen has the same 1500m PR as Aouita, a faster mile, still owns the WR over 3000m, at nearly 10 seconds faster than Aouita, and his 5000m PR, and former world record, is almost 20 seconds faster than Aouita.
And it's not simply his PRs .... he ran faster than Aouita's 3000m PR six times. He ran faster than Aouita's's 5000m PR ten times. It's simply insane to consider that Aouita was a better distance runner than Daniel Komen. He MIGHT have beaten Komen over 800m. Anything longer and Komen would trounce him.
El G raced Komen over 1500/mile and beat him, barely, but consistently. But he never touched Komen 3000m and didn't come close to times Komen ran multiple times over 5000m. To put El G 8 places ahead of Komen seems odd.
Regardless of whether Aouita doped or not, he certainly didn’t have access to the EPO available to the likes of Komen, El G, etc. For me those two were far more likely to have doped. They ran silly times week in week out, at a time when there was no testing for EPO.
In any case, a peak Komen would not have beaten a peak Aouita over 1500m.
But the main reason Aouita should be above Komen in any list is because Aouita won medals at international level over 800, 1500 and 5000m, including an Olympic and World Championship golds. How many gold medals did Komen win? How many number 1 world rankings did Komen accumulate during his career?
Not only did Aouita gain a #1 world ranking over 800, 1500, 5000 and 10000, but he broke world records at 1500, 2000, 3000, 2 Miles and 5000m. Komen broke WR’s at just 2 distances. So, drug accusations aside, Aouita’s overall achievements were far beyond those of Komen IMO.
Discounting an athlete because they had access to EPO seems somewhat absurd. All athletes today have access to whatever FloJo and Kratochvilova were on. What of it?
Komen had a faster time than Aouita over a mile and the exact same time over 1500m and the distance wasn't his specialty. There's also no question he was capable of a faster mile given the race he ran in his PR. I don't know who'd have won a race between them, but he was consistently closer to El G when they raced than I believe Aouita would've ever been.
He was WC over 5000m and also #1 over 3000m. He broke world records at 3000m, two mile and 5000m (indoors and outdoors). Two of those WRs still stand twenty years later, as does his indoor 3000m WR. His best PRs are light years ahead of those of Aouita.
It's hard to take you seriously when you say things like "... Aouita should be above Komen in any list". That's simply poorly thought through. Give me your list of top 3000m runners.
Does anybody remember The Commander? He won the inaugural Commander's Cup and STILL holds the title!! I think he heads the list!!!
The 3000 m is not an international championship event, so any list is quite pointless.
Aouita Has one more medals at international level, broken more world records, accomplished more number one world rankings and over a greater range of distances than Komen. He also had a much longer career. In fact his record is superior in practically every area of comparison.
As well as my opinion it also appears to be the opinion of the authors of “The World’s Greatest in Athletics “, who are 3 of the most knowledgeable and respected statisticians in the sport; Peter Matthews, Richard Hymans and Jonas Hedman.
In their list for 5000m, they have Aouita at no. 3, bshine Bekele and Nurmi, with Komen nowhere in the top 10.
They also compiled a list of all round distance greats, and they have Aouita at no. 4, with Komen not in the top 10.
I think my argument is pretty sound and taken seriously by most thank you.
Deanouk wrote:
The 3000 m is not an international championship event, so any list is quite pointless.
Aouita Has one more medals at international level, broken more world records, accomplished more number one world rankings and over a greater range of distances than Komen. He also had a much longer career. In fact his record is superior in practically every area of comparison.
As well as my opinion it also appears to be the opinion of the authors of “The World’s Greatest in Athletics “, who are 3 of the most knowledgeable and respected statisticians in the sport; Peter Matthews, Richard Hymans and Jonas Hedman.
In their list for 5000m, they have Aouita at no. 3, bshine Bekele and Nurmi, with Komen nowhere in the top 10.
They also compiled a list of all round distance greats, and they have Aouita at no. 4, with Komen not in the top 10.
I think my argument is pretty sound and taken seriously by most thank you.
Dean you just pointed out Aouita's WRs in the 2000m, 3000m and 2 mile. Don't then tell me a list of the greatest 3000m runners is quite pointless if you expect to be taken seriously.
Aouita was nowhere the runner Komen was over 3000m and/or 5000m.
Having a long career doesn't make anyone a great runner. Running a faster time does. And running a time faster than anyone else has makes you the greatest runner over that distance. Aouita did nothing that might suggest he could ever break 12:50. Komen broke 12:40. They're simply different categories of runners.
Athletics isn't a "career". It's a sport. And athletes compete against one another. Had the two competed, Aouita would likely have won over 800m. 1500m they were close enough to make it a tossup. Anything longer and Komen would've cleaned his clock. There's simply nothing that suggests otherwise.
Rod Dixon should be more than just an honorable mention.
Kuts should not be ahead of Viren.
And you really shouldn't throw in middle-distance runners with distance runners. Two separate categories.
1. Dean Karnazes
2. Dane Rauschenburg (or however you spell it)
3. Parvaneh Moayedi
4. Larry Macon
5. Rob Young
6. Kelly Agnew
7. Killian Jornet
Pretty stupid list.
Gaston Roelants - one of the greatest distance athletes ever is not on the list - Wilson Kipsang (who's not Top 500 AT) is at No.16, higher than Kip Keino???
Moses Kiptanui No.37 - Saaeed Shaheen No 29?
Silas Kiplagat on the list??? ahead of Juantorena, Cova, Hagg, Jazy, Mamo Wolde???????????????
Galen Rupp??? Stanley Biwott? Mel Sheppard? Dejen Gebremeskel?????? Peter Elliott - i really liked him, but....
Or, perhaps, it's just standard - ignorance is bliss
Here You have 80 names without some specific order. Task - add 20 brilliant distance runners
800m
Harbig
Whitfield
Snell
Juantorena
Coe
Cruz
Konchellah
Kipketer
Rudisha
Borzakovsky
Bungei
1500m/mile
Bannister
Elliott
Ryun
Keino
Bayi
Walker
Ovett
Cram
Morceli
El Guerrouj
N'Geny
Cacho
Lagat
Kiprop
Makhloufi
Scott
Maree
5000m/3000m
Nurmi
Ritola
Clarke
Gammoudi
Aouita
Komen
Farah
Moorcroft
N'Gugi
Sihine
Puttemans
Hagg
Iharos
10000m
Zatopek
Kolehmainen
Kuts
Bolotnikov
Temu
Viren
Yifter
Cova
Antibo
Skah
Gebresilasie
Tergat
Bekele
Kamworor
Moses Tanui
Hissou
3000msteeplechase
Roelants
Jipcho
Henry Rono
Malinowski
Garderud
Kariuki
Kiptanui
E. Kemboi
Saif Shaheen
Kipruto
P.K.Koech
Barmasai
Marathon/HM
Bikila
Clayton
Shorter
Cierpinski
Seko
De Castella
Lopes
Kimihara
Abera
Wanjiru
Kipchoge
Tadese
Mimoun
