WEBB 1:43.85!!!

skeebops the rebops wrote:

what accomplishments were so much better than Webb's? he had US records in the pre-professional era

Are you genuinely serious with those comments? Prefontaine held EVERY U.S. Record between 2,000m and 10,000m, and before his career prematurely ended he has established a new American Record on 14 different occasions.

As for the "pre-professional era" propaganda, that logic is exceedingly weak. Pre had plenty of top-notch U.S. distance runners chasing after both him and his PRs, and during that "era" the U.S. was much more competitive in distance events on the world scene than it has been during Webb's tenure.

You're guilty of the same thing you're getting annoyed about.

You're getting annoyed that people are strictly looking at the times.

You can't just look at where people place in the world either though. Yes, Pre was ranked higher than Webb, but times have changed. There's another THIRTY years of runners that Webb has to measure up against.

This isn't the same track & field that used to be run, at least not in the distance events. Had the East Africans come around 2 decades earlier, Pre wouldn't have the same notoriety he has now.

webb is on his way to becoming the best runner ever, so, pre is going to eventually take a back seat

Black Kettle wrote:

You can't just look at where people place in the world either though.

Where in the world (pun intended) did that comment come from? No offense, but did you actually read my entire post? It really focused upon what Pre accomplished against other U.S. runners, and I didn't think it was particularly difficult to comprehend...

"Prefontaine held EVERY U.S. Record between 2,000m and 10,000m, and before his career prematurely ended he has established a new American Record on 14 different occasions."

Is it really impossible for Webb to get every record from 800 to 10,000? I mean, maybe he won't ever run a 2000, so that record will be safe. But if we were to get all the common distances in between, would that satisfy you?

Faulty memory wrote:

Black Kettle wrote:

You can't just look at where people place in the world either though.

Where in the world (pun intended) did that comment come from? No offense, but did you actually read my entire post? It really focused upon what Pre accomplished against other U.S. runners, and I didn't think it was particularly difficult to comprehend...

"Prefontaine held EVERY U.S. Record between 2,000m and 10,000m, and before his career prematurely ended he has established a new American Record on 14 different occasions."

Yeah my fault on that one. I was replying to your earlier post anyway.

I'll maintain point about Webb having an additional 30 years of people to surpass in order to obtain all the American records though. It gets harder as time goes by. It would take more and more of a 'freak' runner to obtain what Pre did, is what I'm trying to stay.

As far as getting all AR, it seems like the 2000m race is big in France (compared to other countries) when looking over the all-time list. They usually have 1 or 2 a year.

miles of trials wrote:

Is it really impossible for Webb to get every record from 800 to 10,000? I mean, maybe he won't ever run a 2000, so that record will be safe. But if we were to get all the common distances in between, would that satisfy you?

Do you honestly believe that he has the capability to do that? In other words, you feel that he is quicker than Johnny Gray, but he can still break the 10,000m AR?

While I would love to see him do it, the entire scenario is improbable (to say the least). For starters, I am rather confident that Rupp's 10k PR will manage to stay ahead of Webb's.

Faulty memory wrote:

As for the "pre-professional era" propaganda, that logic is exceedingly weak. Pre had plenty of top-notch U.S. distance runners chasing after both him and his PRs, and during that "era" the U.S. was much more competitive in distance events on the world scene than it has been during Webb's tenure.

citing the US's success on the world scene is a weak argument, given that there were only a handful of africans competing on the world scene compared to today. there are three epochs of distance running in world history:

1) everything up to the end of WW2

2) everything from WW2 to the professional era

3) the professional era (the 1980s brits, then the africans)

each era marked an enormous leap in the talent pool and training techniques of the world-class athletes. Pre didn't have the competition that Webb does. that's a simple fact. american records are worth more now than they were then. world records, even more so- do you really think that the 1970's had an equivalent to Geb or el Guerrouj? if so, you're stubborn and wrong. if not, you acknowledge that being world-class requires a greater athlete than it did back then.

p.s. the 2000m AR is a silly stat to keep. the most sensible way to state his accomplishment is to say he held the 3k, 5k, and 10k records at the same time. i'm sure webb could hold the 1200m and 4000m records right now if he wanted, too.

p.p.s. it doesn't even make sense to cite that Pre's career was cut short at 24 when comparing him to an athlete who also only 24.

skeebops the rebops wrote:

american records are worth more now than they were then.

Now, there is an amusing comment. That sound you heard was your credibility walking out the door.

First of all, that statement along is remarkably naive. Every veteran distance runner can tell you that our depth of marks 25-30 years ago was better than what the U.S. has seen since then. If anything, American Records were worth MUCH more during the 70s and 80s than they are now.

However, I am an open-minded soul...I would love to hear the rationale behind that statement.

Pre was very good, but at what point in his career was he world #1 in an event going into August?

skeebops the rebops wrote:

it doesn't even make sense to cite that Pre's career was cut short at 24 when comparing him to an athlete who also only 24.

uh, ya just made your own arguement worse. if youre gonna look at both guys when theyre 24, lets break it down to those american records. how many for webb, and how many for pre?

case closed

god i really hate when someone makes a point and then says 'case closed.'

webb is a lot faster than prefontaine. webb has the greatest range of any american runner ever. he is capable of getting the US record in the 800 (probably the hardest for him to get, but that 143 shows anything is possible). has the mile, capable of 1500, capable of 5k (maybe right now), possibly capable of 10k down the line.

pre was pre, he's always going to have that aura. webb is just another level of runner at a time when track itself has been elevated to another level.

f***, dont u yanks ever get over pre?

yeah he had a lot of records. who else was running in that era?

yeah he may have been unlucky to get beaten by a drug f***ed fin in munich. but he still got beaten

yeah he died prematurely. he died cos he was on the piss and driving.

pre is no more of a figurehead than anyone else. now im an aussie, so im not going to go and bat off about webb, and neither will i bat off about mottrams performances. but webb is far greater than pre. he's run faster times, he's run a greater range of times, and he has beaten significant INTERNATIONAL athletes....as compared to pre beating mainly US runners.

stop living in the pass. and get excited about the future. cos for once, you guys actually have a shot at having a yank up there in the world champs in distance events

2laps wrote:

I May Be Slow But I Am Stupid wrote:

Reed did 1:43 high last year.

"High" on what?

Oh, Wise Guy, eh?

no wrote:

webb is a lot faster than prefontaine.

God, I really hate when someone makes a point with that horrendously flawed logic. Please refer back to my previous post within this thread that referenced the comparison between Wejo and Zatopek. Would YOU say that "Zatopek was never close to this" based upon their PRs? Let's just forget about all of those records and championships, right? LoL!

no wrote:

Webb is capable of getting the US record in the 800...possibly capable of 10k.

I'm sorry, but I really hate it when people drown in their own hyperbole. I'm a Webb fan myself, but anybody who thinks that he will set the AR in both the 800m and the 10,000m really shouldn't drink & type!!

no wrote:

he is capable of getting the US record in the 800 (probably the hardest for him to get, but that 143 shows anything is possible).

Are any of these clowns who are saying this actually 800m runners? It doesn't sound like it! Look again, boys and girls. Webb set a nice new 800 pr, but improving by an additional 1.24 seconds is still a looong way away!!!!!

Webb will need to have 3 films made about him to beat Pre.

Faulty memory wrote:

However, I am an open-minded soul...

yeah, you really sound like it, opening with "that sound you heard was your credibility walking out the door." it's pretty plain that you're not willing to listen to opposing arguments on this topic, that you will side with Pre no matter what. for the benefit of discussion, however, i'd like to dispute some of your claims.

Every veteran distance runner can tell you that our depth of marks 25-30 years ago was better than what the U.S. has seen since then.

every veteran distance runner yearns for days gone by, apparently, because we're not talking about depth. we're talking about the strength of world-class competition. sure, in AMERICA, guys were pumping out the 2:15 marathons and 29:00 10ks in numbers far greater than they have recently (i know that was true a few years ago, not so sure about now). for all that depth, however, how many medals did they win in the 1500? the 5000? the 10000? not a lot.

Pre's 4th place against a Finn, a Tunisian, and a Brit is NOWHERE NEAR as impressive as Bob Kennedy's 5th against the Kenyans. the rise of the Africans changed the game completely- as much or more than the post-WW2 boom- but, i say again, even WITHOUT the countless African world-beaters, how many mid/long-distance medals did the united states get against basically only themselves, south america and europe? not a whole lot. America has never been a superpower at the distance events on the track, and the fact that they're nearly as competitive now as they were in the 70s is a testament to the achievements of today's athletes. the fact that 70's athletes had such heated competition at home, and such depth, and STILL never made a huge mark on the world scene is proof that the Golden Days that your "veteran distance runners" long for weren't really that great anyway.

back to Pre's accomplishments- what major international victories did he have? there was no world championships back then, and i don't know if they had anything like the golden league, so i'll settle for impressive head-to-head victories. anything? as far as i know, his greatest international result was a 2nd place to (i believe it was) Puttemans in a 2mi that was near the world record. Webb, on the other hand, has beaten two STACKED fields in the 1500 (2004 ostrava at the age of 21, and 2007 paris at the age of 24) and another at 800m (2007 heusden).

so neither has any medals, only Webb has any (3) significant international wins, and Pre had more (3) significant ARs than Webb (1). looks to me like they're pretty even. what's more, Webb is still 24 so whatever he does in Osaka can still be compared fairly to Pre. there's a good chance Webb could be markedly better than Pre by the time this season is over.

when you're dismissive of the accomplishments of today's athletes and ignore the additional challenges they face above and beyond what the 70s athletes faced, you are being disrespectful. furthermore, you're going to make people who are fans of Pre AND Webb seem like Pre-haters simply because they take Pre's racing career in perspective. notice that i said Pre's racing career, not his legacy. if we are talking about his influence on the sport in America, then of course Webb doesn't measure up- Pre was a legend. on the other hand, his racing career doesn't live up to his legend; Webb has already matched it and, by the end of the summer, he may well have surpassed it.

run-bike-run wrote:

when you're dismissive of the accomplishments of today's athletes and ignore the additional challenges they face above and beyond what the 70s athletes faced, you are being disrespectful.

While I don't have a bad case of verbal diarrhea like THIS guy, I found this specific sentence more than a little ironic.

How the hell are you going to say something like that, when some genius earlier in the thread who agrees with you tried to make us believe that American Records mean more TODAY than they did back then! I genuinely feel sorry for someone with a warped perspective like that.