Those numbers are another good way of demonstrating that El G was a generational athlete.
How about Sebastian Coe? He lowered the 800m WR from 1:43.4 to 1:42.33, an improvement of 1.03%. Then Coe dropped it even further to 1:41.73, a total improvement of 1.67 sec and 1.62% over Juantorena's old record.
Then there's this: Coe is still his national record holder and tied for 8th in the world on the all-time list! That's incredible when we consider he'll be turning 70 next year.
Coe is special as someone born before 1960 still appearing so high on the world all-time list today. Here are the current highest standing men born before 1960 on the all-time list in the other championship track events, along with the second-highest in the 800m after Coe:
100m: Jim Hines, 116th
200m: Pietro Mennea, 19th
400m: Lee Evans, 20th
800m: Alberto Juantorena, 93rd
1500m: Saïd Aouita, 36th
5k: Saïd Aouita, 122nd
10k: Fernando Mamede, 167th
110h: Renaldo Nehemiah, 14th
400h: Edwin Moses, 6th
steeple: Peter Koech, 38th
That's an average standing of 63rd, with a median of 37th. Coe is still 8th! Only Edwin Moses is still with him in the top 10, and we know how special Moses was in his event.
Coe and El G were both generational athletes.
Jeezus, you clearly aren’t understanding his point. Of course he is a generational athlete but the mark he set at the height of the EPO era defies all belief and there is no rational explanation as to why it was so ahead at the time and since then nobody has approached until now. It took more than being a generational athlete, and we all know how.
El G. is an output of the domination started by Aouita in the 80s and the competition (rivalry) Morocco vs Algeria that started at that the 90s.
If you were living at that era you can understand, if not just leave "Jeezus" away.
Morocco a double World Cross Country since the 90s, first African that won a World Cross Country (1960 and 1964).
A country with elevation, 10 mountains peaks around 4000 meters.
What have USA/GBR since the Golden era? ... everything ended after 1974.
1 marathon records (+ another offered to USA by an "ingrat" runner).
Jawad Gharib 2 WC marathon + 1 Silver Medal
Do you want me to draw you a picture to understand? Don't get involved in what doesn't belong to you, you can buy everything with your money but not ethics.
Lagat still ran 3:27.40 in June 2004 after having had an A sample test positive and get back a negative B sample. So, it's not clear to me that EPO made that much a difference, as surely he was not doping after that doping positive, as he never tested positive again. But he ran 3:26.3 behind El G prior to testing positive. If he was any better on EPO (if he ever was on it), it wasn't much.
EPO is notoriously hard to detect especially before the advent of ABP. So while Lagat never tested positive again, it’s impossible to know if that was due to luck, more subdued EPO use, or he was clean all along.
Jeezus, you clearly aren’t understanding his point. Of course he is a generational athlete but the mark he set at the height of the EPO era defies all belief and there is no rational explanation as to why it was so ahead at the time and since then nobody has approached until now. It took more than being a generational athlete, and we all know how.
El G. is an output of the domination started by Aouita in the 80s and the competition (rivalry) Morocco vs Algeria that started at that the 90s.
If you were living at that era you can understand, if not just leave "Jeezus" away.
Morocco a double World Cross Country since the 90s, first African that won a World Cross Country (1960 and 1964).
A country with elevation, 10 mountains peaks around 4000 meters.
What have USA/GBR since the Golden era? ... everything ended after 1974.
Morocco is a very well endowed nation, from laid back Tangiers in the Northern tip overlooking Spain to Marrakesh in the south. Huge amount of natural untouched solutions such as high mountains and deep valleys and those by the sea coasts ensures a huge breadth of human physical talent for sport as these mountains provide a battery charge full of energy for sport. It wasn't EPO, it was jealousy from white nations. They couldn't believe a skinny El g could run rampant on the circuit. 3 worlds IAAF world athletes of the world, favorite son of Antonia Samaranch the former IOC chief. Seb Coe loved him to no words.
Those numbers are another good way of demonstrating that El G was a generational athlete.
How about Sebastian Coe? He lowered the 800m WR from 1:43.4 to 1:42.33, an improvement of 1.03%. Then Coe dropped it even further to 1:41.73, a total improvement of 1.67 sec and 1.62% over Juantorena's old record.
Then there's this: Coe is still his national record holder and tied for 8th in the world on the all-time list! That's incredible when we consider he'll be turning 70 next year.
Coe is special as someone born before 1960 still appearing so high on the world all-time list today. Here are the current highest standing men born before 1960 on the all-time list in the other championship track events, along with the second-highest in the 800m after Coe:
100m: Jim Hines, 116th
200m: Pietro Mennea, 19th
400m: Lee Evans, 20th
800m: Alberto Juantorena, 93rd
1500m: Saïd Aouita, 36th
5k: Saïd Aouita, 122nd
10k: Fernando Mamede, 167th
110h: Renaldo Nehemiah, 14th
400h: Edwin Moses, 6th
steeple: Peter Koech, 38th
That's an average standing of 63rd, with a median of 37th. Coe is still 8th! Only Edwin Moses is still with him in the top 10, and we know how special Moses was in his event.
Coe and El G were both generational athletes.
Jeezus, you clearly aren’t understanding his point. Of course he is a generational athlete but the mark he set at the height of the EPO era defies all belief and there is no rational explanation as to why it was so ahead at the time and since then nobody has approached until now. It took more than being a generational athlete, and we all know how.
I'm not here to argue about whether or not El G was taking EPO. I wouldn't be surprised if he was doping, but there's no way to prove it now. What I'm saying is he isn't unique as a track & field athlete who broke a world record by a large margin and held it for a long time, so that alone can't be held against him. As I've demonstrated, longstanding records have been a common phenomenon across multiple events and decades. Why should the 1500m be any different than the other events?
Plus, it's not like El G was untouchable in his time. Ngeny beat him at the 2000 Olympics, and Lagat nearly did the same four years later.
Anyone bringing doping accusation heat to El G is a hypocrite if they aren't doing the same to Coe, who obliterated the 800m record by a far greater percentage than El G did in the 1500m, and who remains the only man to repeat as Olympic 1500m champion.
In terms of putting down historically fast times that endured, are Coe, Cruz, and Kipketer really all that different than El G, Lagat, and Morceli? When Cruz joined Coe in the sub-1:42 club three years after Coe established it, they were the only two members of that club for nearly 13 years before Kipketer joined them. Then it was a club of three for another 13 years before Rudisha.
In total, it took 29 years for there to be three people other than Coe under 1:42. It took about 26 years for there to be three people other than El G in the 3:26 club. Seems comparable to me.
Jeezus, you clearly aren’t understanding his point. Of course he is a generational athlete but the mark he set at the height of the EPO era defies all belief and there is no rational explanation as to why it was so ahead at the time and since then nobody has approached until now. It took more than being a generational athlete, and we all know how.
El G. is an output of the domination started by Aouita in the 80s and the competition (rivalry) Morocco vs Algeria that started at that the 90s.
If you were living at that era you can understand, if not just leave "Jeezus" away.
Morocco a double World Cross Country since the 90s, first African that won a World Cross Country (1960 and 1964).
A country with elevation, 10 mountains peaks around 4000 meters.
What have USA/GBR since the Golden era? ... everything ended after 1974.
This fella’s posts read like he’s going to pick up a machete and attack pedestrians on a busy street. You can feel the hate radiating from his bizarre, frantic posts. He probably doesn’t blink once when typing them.
Lagat still ran 3:27.40 in June 2004 after having had an A sample test positive and get back a negative B sample. So, it's not clear to me that EPO made that much a difference, as surely he was not doping after that doping positive, as he never tested positive again. But he ran 3:26.3 behind El G prior to testing positive. If he was any better on EPO (if he ever was on it), it wasn't much.
Lagat was full throttle after officials decided to rig things his way and declare his B sample negative. They couldn’t very well let themselves look foolish or complicit after letting off muh poor African for the good of the sport. Lagat was filthy, Ngeny was filthy, and El G was filthy. Just three high-responders who were allowed to wreak havoc via their unimpeded drug use.
Jeezus, you clearly aren’t understanding his point. Of course he is a generational athlete but the mark he set at the height of the EPO era defies all belief and there is no rational explanation as to why it was so ahead at the time and since then nobody has approached until now. It took more than being a generational athlete, and we all know how.
I'm not here to argue about whether or not El G was taking EPO. I wouldn't be surprised if he was doping, but there's no way to prove it now. What I'm saying is he isn't unique as a track & field athlete who broke a world record by a large margin and held it for a long time, so that alone can't be held against him. As I've demonstrated, longstanding records have been a common phenomenon across multiple events and decades. Why should the 1500m be any different than the other events?
Plus, it's not like El G was untouchable in his time. Ngeny beat him at the 2000 Olympics, and Lagat nearly did the same four years later.
Anyone bringing doping accusation heat to El G is a hypocrite if they aren't doing the same to Coe, who obliterated the 800m record by a far greater percentage than El G did in the 1500m, and who remains the only man to repeat as Olympic 1500m champion.
In terms of putting down historically fast times that endured, are Coe, Cruz, and Kipketer really all that different than El G, Lagat, and Morceli? When Cruz joined Coe in the sub-1:42 club three years after Coe established it, they were the only two members of that club for nearly 13 years before Kipketer joined them. Then it was a club of three for another 13 years before Rudisha.
In total, it took 29 years for there to be three people other than Coe under 1:42. It took about 26 years for there to be three people other than El G in the 3:26 club. Seems comparable to me.
There is a huge difference between Coe and El G that you're missing. You even said it in your post. Someone ran 1:41.77 WITHOUT Coe in the race within 4 years after he set it. That is extremely close. That showed that it was possible to break the mark on a good day, it was a shame after 1985 Cruz was riddled with injuries. The biggest thing here is there was a rational reason to believe this mark could be bettered. Why? Because someone just ran within hundreths of a second of the mark in their own time trial. Another huge thing that you're missing: his mark was bettered 16 years later by kipketer, who by the way ran under 1:42 four times alone. Cruz showed it was possible to go under 1:42 and Kipketer was able to do it multiple times within 16 years. Another 13 years and Rudisha further puts Coe down the all time list. Another big thing you are missing, just because someone is not in the sub 1:42 club doesn't mean that they weren't close. Sammy Koskei ran 1:42.28 behind Cruz and I wouldn't say thats not close to 1:41.73.
The point here is that (a) runner A showed that running close to and breaking the mark was possible (b) runner B did it 16 years later (c) close to 30 years later (similar in time length to El G) the mark is now only 9th AT. Lastly, EPO didn't exist in 1981 so was Coe blood doping? Probably or probably not. But the point is that, he was a generational athlete but there was a rational reason to believe his mark could be bettered. Just like there was a rationalreason for other marks to stand for as long as his did. You keep repeating field event world records as valid comparisons but World Athletics doesn't care about the wind conditions so what do you get if you're a thrower and you get extremely lucky conditions? An insane mark. That is a rational reason for those records. Majority of those old sprint records you also cited from the 60's/70's were run in Mexico City, at altitude. As we all know it is a benefit to sprinters. So.....again we have a rational reason for those records. The rest were run in the same era as El G but even then, they weren't as astonishing as his really.
OK....so how about the 1500? El G ran an astounding 3:26 and then preceded to run under 3:27 five times. So how is the AT list doing 16 years later? Nope just Lagat who drafted behind him in a perfect race in the same EPO era, who then failed an A sample only to then get a negative B sample. The only other Postive A sample/negative B sample people were marion jones and some other busted spaniard. Not a good look! Let's go to the next second. Lagat again runs 3:27.4 behind El G + 3:27.9 and Kiplagat 3:27.64. Now...I don't know about you but if someone runs 3:27.64, I'd be excited for them as a potential prospect for the WR or even getting close it like Cruz did....but he ran that time behind a doped up Kiprop and never ran close to it again. So why has nobody cracked El G times? You fast forward to 2023 and it took the first guy in a supershoe, bicarb, wavelight, threshold training since child athlete to finally crack 3:28? Nearly 25 years later? Fast forward to today and we are seeing more athletes in the era I described cracking 3:28, especially in an Olympic final where everything is on the line, in a race which very well could be their peak? Why does it take so many improvements to just barely approach the mark set by someone nearly 30 years later? Ingebrigtsen ran 3:26.73 and I wouldn't say that is close to 3:26 flat, and it is far from a given that he'll even break it.
It isn't hypocritical at all to think that El Guerrouj had something assisting him. It just isn't the same as Coe's mark. There is literally no rational reason I can think of for how he achieved those times. Were the shoes and tracks that much different from Cram who ran 3:29 a decade beforehand? Or Morcelli? Was there just a huge hole in talent in the 1500m for nearly 20 years? I doubt it given that it is a premier distance. Did nobody take time trialing seriously? I doubt it too...the fastest guys who succeeded in time trials either got banned (Kiprop) or did it in one offs being paced the whole way. This is the whole point of Stitchmo's argument. El G was so far ahead in comical proportions that there is no rational reasoning for it.
There is a huge difference between Coe and El G that you're missing. You even said it in your post. Someone ran 1:41.77 WITHOUT Coe in the race within 4 years after he set it. That is extremely close. That showed that it was possible to break the mark on a good day, it was a shame after 1985 Cruz was riddled with injuries. The biggest thing here is there was a rational reason to believe this mark could be bettered. Why? Because someone just ran within hundreths of a second of the mark in their own time trial. Another huge thing that you're missing: his mark was bettered 16 years later by kipketer, who by the way ran under 1:42 four times alone. Cruz showed it was possible to go under 1:42 and Kipketer was able to do it multiple times within 16 years. Another 13 years and Rudisha further puts Coe down the all time list. Another big thing you are missing, just because someone is not in the sub 1:42 club doesn't mean that they weren't close. Sammy Koskei ran 1:42.28 behind Cruz and I wouldn't say thats not close to 1:41.73. The point here is that (a) runner A showed that running close to and breaking the mark was possible (b) runner B did it 16 years later (c) close to 30 years later (similar in time length to El G) the mark is now only 9th AT. Lastly, EPO didn't exist in 1981 so was Coe blood doping? Probably or probably not. But the point is that, he was a generational athlete but there was a rational reason to believe his mark could be bettered. Just like there was a rationalreason for other marks to stand for as long as his did. You keep repeating field event world records as valid comparisons but World Athletics doesn't care about the wind conditions so what do you get if you're a thrower and you get extremely lucky conditions? An insane mark. That is a rational reason for those records. Majority of those old sprint records you also cited from the 60's/70's were run in Mexico City, at altitude. As we all know it is a benefit to sprinters. So.....again we have a rational reason for those records. The rest were run in the same era as El G but even then, they weren't as astonishing as his really. OK....so how about the 1500? El G ran an astounding 3:26 and then preceded to run under 3:27 five times. So how is the AT list doing 16 years later? Nope just Lagat who drafted behind him in a perfect race in the same EPO era, who then failed an A sample only to then get a negative B sample. The only other Postive A sample/negative B sample people were marion jones and some other busted spaniard. Not a good look! Let's go to the next second. Lagat again runs 3:27.4 behind El G + 3:27.9 and Kiplagat 3:27.64. Now...I don't know about you but if someone runs 3:27.64, I'd be excited for them as a potential prospect for the WR or even getting close it like Cruz did....but he ran that time behind a doped up Kiprop and never ran close to it again. So why has nobody cracked El G times? You fast forward to 2023 and it took the first guy in a supershoe, bicarb, wavelight, threshold training since child athlete to finally crack 3:28? Nearly 25 years later? Fast forward to today and we are seeing more athletes in the era I described cracking 3:28, especially in an Olympic final where everything is on the line, in a race which very well could be their peak? Why does it take so many improvements to just barely approach the mark set by someone nearly 30 years later? Ingebrigtsen ran 3:26.73 and I wouldn't say that is close to 3:26 flat, and it is far from a given that he'll even break it. It isn't hypocritical at all to think that El Guerrouj had something assisting him. It just isn't the same as Coe's mark. There is literally no rational reason I can think of for how he achieved those times. Were the shoes and tracks that much different from Cram who ran 3:29 a decade beforehand? Or Morcelli? Was there just a huge hole in talent in the 1500m for nearly 20 years? I doubt it given that it is a premier distance. Did nobody take time trialing seriously? I doubt it too...the fastest guys who succeeded in time trials either got banned (Kiprop) or did it in one offs being paced the whole way. This is the whole point of Stitchmo's argument. El G was so far ahead in comical proportions that there is no rational reasoning for it. Thanks for reading.
Yes, agree.
Look in a nutshell, if you want to believe El G's times were legit (and believe me I did and still want to!), it's not about believing he was better over the distance than the best we have today (Jakob), it's about believing he was markedly better - like a totally different plateau. Because taking the El G as we knew him (without assuming anything) and giving him access to even just wavelight in those sub 3.27 races, I guarantee you one of them would have been in the 3.24's. That just can't be. And to be honest it's almost the same with Lagat on his 3.26.34 day back in 01 - is he just naturally so much better than J.I? I don't see it but that's just me. Better, sure (Jakob is really a 3000m runner that is also elite over 1500 and 5000m) - not by that much. Nope.
With respect to the guy waxing on about the 800m and Coe - the events were in different places. Coe being "ahead of his time" is a different issue to the obliteration of time/records and rapid one time jumps at certain performance levels. More than one thing can be true at the same time.
Coe taking the record from 1.43.4 to 1.42.33 is the same as taking the 1500m record from 3.31.6 to 3.29.2. Taking the 800m record from 1.42.33 to 1.41.73 is the same as taking the 1500m record from 3.29.2 to 3.27.84. What El G did was the equivalent of going from 1.42.2 to 1.40.9 with no interim steps (except the 800m of course went to 1.41.73, 1.41.24, 1.41.11, 1.41.09, 1.41.01 and then 1.40.91 and that last 0.30 of a second or so took 16 years). For direct context v the 800m he also took his PR level from 1.42.2 to 1.40.87. In one race. Think about how good Rudisha and Kipketer were - they progressed nothing like that. It took Rudisha 4 seasons to go from 1.42.01 (2009 best) to his pinnacle mark of course set in 2012. Kipketer similar (3 seasons) from 1.42.87 in 1995 to his pinnacle mark set in 97.
Enough said really.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
Look in a nutshell, if you want to believe El G's times were legit (and believe me I did and still want to!), it's not about believing he was better over the distance than the best we have today (Jakob), it's about believing he was markedly better - like a totally different plateau. Because taking the El G as we knew him (without assuming anything) and giving him access to even just wavelight in those sub 3.27 races, I guarantee you one of them would have been in the 3.24's. That just can't be. And to be honest it's almost the same with Lagat on his 3.26.34 day back in 01 - is he just naturally so much better than J.I? I don't see it but that's just me. Better, sure (Jakob is really a 3000m runner that is also elite over 1500 and 5000m) - not by that much. Nope.
With respect to the guy waxing on about the 800m and Coe - the events were in different places. Coe being "ahead of his time" is a different issue to the obliteration of time/records and rapid one time jumps at certain performance levels. More than one thing can be true at the same time.
Coe taking the record from 1.43.4 to 1.42.33 is the same as taking the 1500m record from 3.31.6 to 3.29.2. Taking the 800m record from 1.42.33 to 1.41.73 is the same as taking the 1500m record from 3.29.2 to 3.27.84. What El G did was the equivalent of going from 1.42.2 to 1.40.9 with no interim steps (except the 800m of course went to 1.41.73, 1.41.24, 1.41.11, 1.41.09, 1.41.01 and then 1.40.91 and that last 0.30 of a second or so took 16 years). For direct context v the 800m he also took his PR level from 1.42.2 to 1.40.87. In one race. Think about how good Rudisha and Kipketer were - they progressed nothing like that. It took Rudisha 4 seasons to go from 1.42.01 (2009 best) to his pinnacle mark of course set in 2012. Kipketer similar (3 seasons) from 1.42.87 in 1995 to his pinnacle mark set in 97.
Enough said really.
I think it's completely fine to believe his times were legit. I mean, he never got caught and never will. BUT, there is ultimately, I think, no rational argument for how his WR and ultimately his times (he still owns 6 of the top 10 fastest times) hold up by a huge, comical margin today. The 800m since Coe has had two GOATs plummet Coe down the AT list and Cruz showed this was possible through his 1:41.77. We are seeing even more athletes now run under 1:41.7. Who though has made a serious assault on 3:26 other than Jakob who wasn't implicated in some doping related scandal? Kiprop banned, Kiplagat on fancy bears leak (although that is probably just Russian propaganda so a bit unfair), Lagat, no way? Habz seems to be fine but dropping all those seconds at 30 isn't very promising, I guess Koech is the next Kiplagat but maybe he keeps it going. Even with all these advances people love to tout on here as adding seconds to the 1500m, how is it that nobody has even gone under 3:27 other than the Gjert Ingebrigtsen's 'double threshold' science experiment? El Guerrouj was just on another stratosphere and with the wavelights today probably runs even a second faster. It defies all belief.
I think it's completely fine to believe his times were legit.
Yeah but in all honesty even though I want to, just too much time has passed without any real serious contender for that record - even the 3.26.14 (and no, not even 3.26.74 is serious pressure - same as it wasn't with Kiprop). It just hasn't held up well to history (in an ironically backwards way). So sitting here and believing it was all legit would be on the same level as how a lot of people sat around in the early 2000's and would basically fight you to the death contending Armstrong was clean.
Another way to think about this is if we teleported Jakob back to 1998 and he had to run races going out in under 55, without his spikes and safety (wave) lights, is he a 3.28 flat guy with El G pummeling him by a few seconds at their respective bests? I don't think so. Anyway that's enough on this specific El G topic for me, not the most fun one to have to think about.
There is a huge difference between Coe and El G that you're missing. You even said it in your post. Someone ran 1:41.77 WITHOUT Coe in the race within 4 years after he set it. That is extremely close. That showed that it was possible to break the mark on a good day, it was a shame after 1985 Cruz was riddled with injuries. The biggest thing here is there was a rational reason to believe this mark could be bettered. Why? Because someone just ran within hundreths of a second of the mark in their own time trial. Another huge thing that you're missing: his mark was bettered 16 years later by kipketer, who by the way ran under 1:42 four times alone. Cruz showed it was possible to go under 1:42 and Kipketer was able to do it multiple times within 16 years. Another 13 years and Rudisha further puts Coe down the all time list. Another big thing you are missing, just because someone is not in the sub 1:42 club doesn't mean that they weren't close. Sammy Koskei ran 1:42.28 behind Cruz and I wouldn't say thats not close to 1:41.73.
The point here is that (a) runner A showed that running close to and breaking the mark was possible (b) runner B did it 16 years later (c) close to 30 years later (similar in time length to El G) the mark is now only 9th AT. Lastly, EPO didn't exist in 1981 so was Coe blood doping? Probably or probably not. But the point is that, he was a generational athlete but there was a rational reason to believe his mark could be bettered. Just like there was a rationalreason for other marks to stand for as long as his did. You keep repeating field event world records as valid comparisons but World Athletics doesn't care about the wind conditions so what do you get if you're a thrower and you get extremely lucky conditions? An insane mark. That is a rational reason for those records. Majority of those old sprint records you also cited from the 60's/70's were run in Mexico City, at altitude. As we all know it is a benefit to sprinters. So.....again we have a rational reason for those records. The rest were run in the same era as El G but even then, they weren't as astonishing as his really.
OK....so how about the 1500? El G ran an astounding 3:26 and then preceded to run under 3:27 five times. So how is the AT list doing 16 years later? Nope just Lagat who drafted behind him in a perfect race in the same EPO era, who then failed an A sample only to then get a negative B sample. The only other Postive A sample/negative B sample people were marion jones and some other busted spaniard. Not a good look! Let's go to the next second. Lagat again runs 3:27.4 behind El G + 3:27.9 and Kiplagat 3:27.64. Now...I don't know about you but if someone runs 3:27.64, I'd be excited for them as a potential prospect for the WR or even getting close it like Cruz did....but he ran that time behind a doped up Kiprop and never ran close to it again. So why has nobody cracked El G times? You fast forward to 2023 and it took the first guy in a supershoe, bicarb, wavelight, threshold training since child athlete to finally crack 3:28? Nearly 25 years later? Fast forward to today and we are seeing more athletes in the era I described cracking 3:28, especially in an Olympic final where everything is on the line, in a race which very well could be their peak? Why does it take so many improvements to just barely approach the mark set by someone nearly 30 years later? Ingebrigtsen ran 3:26.73 and I wouldn't say that is close to 3:26 flat, and it is far from a given that he'll even break it.
It isn't hypocritical at all to think that El Guerrouj had something assisting him. It just isn't the same as Coe's mark. There is literally no rational reason I can think of for how he achieved those times. Were the shoes and tracks that much different from Cram who ran 3:29 a decade beforehand? Or Morcelli? Was there just a huge hole in talent in the 1500m for nearly 20 years? I doubt it given that it is a premier distance. Did nobody take time trialing seriously? I doubt it too...the fastest guys who succeeded in time trials either got banned (Kiprop) or did it in one offs being paced the whole way. This is the whole point of Stitchmo's argument. El G was so far ahead in comical proportions that there is no rational reasoning for it.
Thanks for reading.
Thanks for writing.
I don’t think it matters that Cruz ran his 1:41 without Coe whereas Lagat ran his 3:26 behind El G. Both Cruz and Lagat ran close to the respective world records within a few years of them being set, showing it was possible.
Speaking of Lagat, his accomplishments from his mid-30s and up, including finishing fifth in the Olympics at age 41, show that he was a fantastic runner in his own right.
I reiterate: El G lost in the 2000 Olympics and almost lost again in 2004. He wasn’t untouchable.
As I mentioned, most of the field event record breakers backed up their performances elsewhere, so their marks cannot be dismissed as weather-aided anomalies.
Not sure how you can believe that Bolt’s and MJ’s records weren’t as astonishing as El G’s. I know for certain that a lot of people were astonished by those records. I know people were also astonished by Rudisha. And Moses. And Mondo. And so on. That’s what generational athletes do. They astonish us.
In response to your questions, I ask:
What is the rational reason for Coe to be the only male track athlete other than Moses who was born before 1960 and still enjoy a spot as a top 10 performer on the world all-time list today in an outdoor championship track event?
What is the rational reason that three Brits took over the 1500m and mile records in the 1980s? What was going on in that country at that time?
What is the rational reason that nobody since Coe has broken the world records in both the 800m and 1500m?
What is the rational reason that Coe remains the only man in history to repeat as Olympic 1500m champion?
What is the rational reason for Coe’s 1:41 to still be his country’s national record 44 years later?
Coe was an exceptional generational runner. So was El G.
No necessarily. But yeah, the older he gets the less chance it happens. Jakob started serious training at a very young age so his upside is going to be less than most athletes. 25 for Jakob is probably the equivalent of 27 for athletes who went through the US collegiate system. (Josh Kerr is 27 btw.)
El G. is an output of the domination started by Aouita in the 80s and the competition (rivalry) Morocco vs Algeria that started at that the 90s.
If you were living at that era you can understand, if not just leave "Jeezus" away.
Morocco a double World Cross Country since the 90s, first African that won a World Cross Country (1960 and 1964).
A country with elevation, 10 mountains peaks around 4000 meters.
What have USA/GBR since the Golden era? ... everything ended after 1974.
Morocco is a very well endowed nation, from laid back Tangiers in the Northern tip overlooking Spain to Marrakesh in the south. Huge amount of natural untouched solutions such as high mountains and deep valleys and those by the sea coasts ensures a huge breadth of human physical talent for sport as these mountains provide a battery charge full of energy for sport. It wasn't EPO, it was jealousy from white nations. They couldn't believe a skinny El g could run rampant on the circuit. 3 worlds IAAF world athletes of the world, favorite son of Antonia Samaranch the former IOC chief. Seb Coe loved him to no words.
i loved the description of Morocco here, and have to put it on my bucket list. this is the main point here. onto the running.
after the gem description of morocco, it is all BS
Morocco and Atlas mountain runners came and went from the scene with PEDs.
i said something, documentation is there, the net did not catch all the fish.
i do think El G was a legit talent capable of an old school 332, and with the juice he should have run 324, that's what full on EOP does, and if you're a hyper responder, you go from journeyman to olympic champ.
especially with women, a very mediorcre hyper responder can run 10.7 or less in the 100,
and that progression, is typically , 11.5 ish 100m till age 23 or 25 as the case may be, and then bang. 10.7
etc etc.
somebody can write a book on it and we can refer to it, in these cases rather than discuss to nauseum.
No necessarily. But yeah, the older he gets the less chance it happens. Jakob started serious training at a very young age so his upside is going to be less than most athletes. 25 for Jakob is probably the equivalent of 27 for athletes who went through the US collegiate system. (Josh Kerr is 27 btw.)
One of the things we don't really know about is the effect of "double threshold" on the body long term - especially with respect to injury. That's because it's really only become popular en masse in the last 3-4 years.
But already we are seeing the OAC group kind of teter except for uber-talent Nuguse, nobody can seem to stay healthy - could that be related to running twice a day 4 days a week "at your threshold"?
People seem to have this POV that it's easier on the body than the older school anaerobic interval work but really that's not the case. The intensity of that work actually limits the volume you can do. So sure, you are never fatigued in the same way post a "threshold workout" but cumulatively (and I'm talking 2,3,4 seasons) we still don't know a lot.
Could that be a reason for Jakobs problems? I think it's a fair hypothesis. You can't run 3.26/7.17 and be as good over 5000m as he is without some serious volume of high intensity running, especially when your volume of work anaerobically is so limited. We are seeing with him a trend of the same injury now happening in back to back seasons and taking longer to recover each time. I felt he had this year and the next to chase either the 1500 or 5000m - maybe some extended time off helps him actually for next season if he can remain healthy over the winter, but I agree with you - the volume of work he does and for how long we know he's been doing it? He's taken a lot of tread off his tires for a 24 year old that turns 25 in a few months.
There is a huge difference between Coe and El G that you're missing. You even said it in your post. Someone ran 1:41.77 WITHOUT Coe in the race within 4 years after he set it. That is extremely close. That showed that it was possible to break the mark on a good day, it was a shame after 1985 Cruz was riddled with injuries. The biggest thing here is there was a rational reason to believe this mark could be bettered. Why? Because someone just ran within hundreths of a second of the mark in their own time trial. Another huge thing that you're missing: his mark was bettered 16 years later by kipketer, who by the way ran under 1:42 four times alone. Cruz showed it was possible to go under 1:42 and Kipketer was able to do it multiple times within 16 years. Another 13 years and Rudisha further puts Coe down the all time list. Another big thing you are missing, just because someone is not in the sub 1:42 club doesn't mean that they weren't close. Sammy Koskei ran 1:42.28 behind Cruz and I wouldn't say thats not close to 1:41.73.
The point here is that (a) runner A showed that running close to and breaking the mark was possible (b) runner B did it 16 years later (c) close to 30 years later (similar in time length to El G) the mark is now only 9th AT. Lastly, EPO didn't exist in 1981 so was Coe blood doping? Probably or probably not. But the point is that, he was a generational athlete but there was a rational reason to believe his mark could be bettered. Just like there was a rationalreason for other marks to stand for as long as his did. You keep repeating field event world records as valid comparisons but World Athletics doesn't care about the wind conditions so what do you get if you're a thrower and you get extremely lucky conditions? An insane mark. That is a rational reason for those records. Majority of those old sprint records you also cited from the 60's/70's were run in Mexico City, at altitude. As we all know it is a benefit to sprinters. So.....again we have a rational reason for those records. The rest were run in the same era as El G but even then, they weren't as astonishing as his really.
OK....so how about the 1500? El G ran an astounding 3:26 and then preceded to run under 3:27 five times. So how is the AT list doing 16 years later? Nope just Lagat who drafted behind him in a perfect race in the same EPO era, who then failed an A sample only to then get a negative B sample. The only other Postive A sample/negative B sample people were marion jones and some other busted spaniard. Not a good look! Let's go to the next second. Lagat again runs 3:27.4 behind El G + 3:27.9 and Kiplagat 3:27.64. Now...I don't know about you but if someone runs 3:27.64, I'd be excited for them as a potential prospect for the WR or even getting close it like Cruz did....but he ran that time behind a doped up Kiprop and never ran close to it again. So why has nobody cracked El G times? You fast forward to 2023 and it took the first guy in a supershoe, bicarb, wavelight, threshold training since child athlete to finally crack 3:28? Nearly 25 years later? Fast forward to today and we are seeing more athletes in the era I described cracking 3:28, especially in an Olympic final where everything is on the line, in a race which very well could be their peak? Why does it take so many improvements to just barely approach the mark set by someone nearly 30 years later? Ingebrigtsen ran 3:26.73 and I wouldn't say that is close to 3:26 flat, and it is far from a given that he'll even break it.
It isn't hypocritical at all to think that El Guerrouj had something assisting him. It just isn't the same as Coe's mark. There is literally no rational reason I can think of for how he achieved those times. Were the shoes and tracks that much different from Cram who ran 3:29 a decade beforehand? Or Morcelli? Was there just a huge hole in talent in the 1500m for nearly 20 years? I doubt it given that it is a premier distance. Did nobody take time trialing seriously? I doubt it too...the fastest guys who succeeded in time trials either got banned (Kiprop) or did it in one offs being paced the whole way. This is the whole point of Stitchmo's argument. El G was so far ahead in comical proportions that there is no rational reasoning for it.
Thanks for reading.
Thanks for writing.
I don’t think it matters that Cruz ran his 1:41 without Coe whereas Lagat ran his 3:26 behind El G. Both Cruz and Lagat ran close to the respective world records within a few years of them being set, showing it was possible.
Speaking of Lagat, his accomplishments from his mid-30s and up, including finishing fifth in the Olympics at age 41, show that he was a fantastic runner in his own right.
I reiterate: El G lost in the 2000 Olympics and almost lost again in 2004. He wasn’t untouchable.
As I mentioned, most of the field event record breakers backed up their performances elsewhere, so their marks cannot be dismissed as weather-aided anomalies.
Not sure how you can believe that Bolt’s and MJ’s records weren’t as astonishing as El G’s. I know for certain that a lot of people were astonished by those records. I know people were also astonished by Rudisha. And Moses. And Mondo. And so on. That’s what generational athletes do. They astonish us.
In response to your questions, I ask:
What is the rational reason for Coe to be the only male track athlete other than Moses who was born before 1960 and still enjoy a spot as a top 10 performer on the world all-time list today in an outdoor championship track event?
What is the rational reason that three Brits took over the 1500m and mile records in the 1980s? What was going on in that country at that time?
What is the rational reason that nobody since Coe has broken the world records in both the 800m and 1500m?
What is the rational reason that Coe remains the only man in history to repeat as Olympic 1500m champion?
What is the rational reason for Coe’s 1:41 to still be his country’s national record 44 years later?
Coe was an exceptional generational runner. So was El G.
EPO is a red herring. GB had major steroid abuse in the 1980s and one could scientifically argue steroids have a great performance effect over 800/1500m than EPO.
Anyone hating on El G or disrespecting his name or legacy simply has not followed the sport, nor saw him run. Absolute domination for well over a decade with lasting impact. He retired from the sport at 32, well past when EPO testing was occurring, and after five (5) world gold medals over 1500m. He was simply a winner. We are arguing about Jakob or Kerr yet combined they only have 2 golds over 1500m.