Mr. Obvious wrote:For all the racism I see on here yours is among the worst. You probably don't even see it. You assume all "afro-american" [sic] are the same and succeed off of natural talent while the other people work hard. How degrading and disgusting.
utter drivel
they run 43+/44+ because they train as hard as any other ethnic population but the added on likely genetic bonus makes them 44+ instead of 45+
racism connotations woud only be for a fool unable to read/think
Deanouk wrote:Don't make us laugh. Everyone on here knows that you were formerly Ventolin2 and before that Ventolin and before that Eldrick. It doesn't take a genius to work out that 'Someone had to..' and other posters are also you
nonsense
i'm ventolin^3, not any other name
You fail to answer any of Peer Mediator's points
strange how he posts exact nonsense as yourself
You have yet to provide just one source which questions the validity of the Florence track
i'm questioning it
the ridiculous times run there by so many different guys gives huge cause for concern
how does aouita run a mind-blowing 13'04 in his 1st serious 5k ???
how does caballo run 1'44.88 there & only 1'45.60 in zurich which wouda been peak meet for him in the year ???
The IAAF ratified the time and if they wanted to they could have ratified it as 1:41.6 ht
no
no auto-timing, no wr
it wouda been listed as a 1'41.7ht, as rarely do they ever use fastest hand times for wrs, but usually slower one
it woudn't have been listed as a wr, but an * in lists at end of 1'42.33 list
The claim that Rieti was a short track was proved wrong after Ovett set his WR there. It was measured many times and proven to be accurate
more nonsense
who measured it & when ???
what details ???
cram writing years later questions it :
"In 1983 Steve Ovett was invited to compete at the track at the end of a troubled season and in the twilight of a glittering career. He stunned the crowd and the athletics world by breaking the record for 1500m when most thought those days were over for him...
When Ovett ran that record in September 1983 there was talk of a "short track" or that the race had started from the wrong line. I raced there on a few occasions and in 1986 had a baffling afternoon. First of all I ran a stupidly quick 800m at the end of a tiring season and after a couple of late nights. Half an hour later I watched as Seb Coe smashed his personal best and almost the world record over 1500m. We were all open-mouthed because this was five years beyond his record-breaking year in 1981 and even he looked shocked"
Coe was down to run an 800 in Oslo, and it was going to be a WR attempt, but after the draining run of 3:31 solo earlier in the week and with a blister on his foot he told them he wasn't in the form to go for it. Instead they persuaded him to have a crack at the much weaker 1000m record, to which he obliged at the last moment
utter nonsense
the documented story is that he wanted to run the 800 but the meet promoter asked him to run the 1k instead
clearly the promoter knew there was never going to be anything better than 1'41.7 in oslo or anywhere else that year
That isn't the same as saying he never thought he could run any faster over 800
no
learn to read
i said the meet promoter thought he coudn't run faster over 800 & asked him to switch to the 1k
Peer Mediator wrote:Ventolin's playing with numbers are rarely spot on
no
if you use your brain & consider circumstances, they are good estimates
Most of the time they are off and he always finds away to justify or explain why they were off
name some ?
Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day, and on the rare occasions he has been close to his predictions, he broadcasts it to all and sundry and then rests on his laurels for the next 6 months
utter nonsense
does a "stopped clock" offer possibilty a 5k/10k guy coud run 3'28 off that training ???
In any case most of his calculations are based on athletes who have long since retired, which makes it basically impossible for him to prove, but equally impossible for others to disprove his nonsense. In this catch 22 situation he can claim a success for his extrapolations
nonsense
if there is an interesting athlete worth extrapolating & we have sufficient info, then i will post estimates
here is one
canova coaches caleb & believes he has possible 12'50 endurance & speed of as fast as 48.5
i may offer more like 49.0 as 48.5 is very very fast for 1500/3k/5k guy
12'50 with
49.0 ->1'45.0 , 3'28.5 , 7'22.9
48.5 ->1'44.2 , 3'27.6 , 7'22.2
i'm stating now, that if caleb gets into a fast, well-paced 1500, he can go 3'28 at worst & a 3'27+ is a distinct possibility
said88 wrote:Definitely... and backed up by deep hard mathematics like the well known Euler-Gauss-Newton-Riemann-Wiles-Perelman theorem, that a ??:??.00 time for a specific distance exactly is worth also a ??:??.00 time for the double distance. This theorem was new for me until last week, but since good old venty has stated it as hard mathematics, for sure I'm totally convinced about his accuracy
go try it out before spouting nonsense
check out what it says for women's 800/1500/3k wrs
for women sprinters, check ohurogo's 100/400 bests or koch's 100/200/400
Or: Firenze track must have been short - mainly because Aouita has run a 13:04,78 and not the 13:10 which all thought was his maximum he is capable! I have no idea from which source people could have estimated his potential at all, since he has not raced the distance seriously before and since he was a pure middle distance runner the year before. But for sure, 13:10 was posible, 13:04 not. LA track probably also was short.
you don't seem to have followed track much back then
aouita was a 1500/800 guy in '83
everyone thought he was going to run 1500/800 again in '84 but to come out of nowhere & run an astonishing 13'04 defied belief !!!
13'10 was the big barrier back then if you hadn't noticed & that's why any observer at the time woudn't expect anything better for a debutant who the previous year was a 1500/800 guy
what clocking did you think aouita had in mind when lining up ?
on top of that, i don't even know if he got much pacing help in that rieti run
as for games, go watch it again
he is paced until just 250m from the finish !
longjack wrote:i really can't say much more because i don't know his real 400 speed
it was awesome :
http://kuhistory.com/articles/ryuns-run/at still 18y, at least 1y before his peak, with a 3'55 mile in his legs in a quagmire unfit to sprint on ( lj runway was unfit for purpose ), he runs 46.9 for a 440y anchor making up 20 yards on "proper" 400 guys ( presumably the best guys on anchor )
other evidence of speed is that 36.5 finish in a 3'38.2
people talk a lot of nonsense about finishing sprints but arithmetic tells us that 36.5 is
12.16 average for 100m sustained for 300m & on dirt !!!
a guy keeps droning on about coe's 12.2 finish in his 3'38.4 gold win
well, Ryun averaged same 100m time for 3 times the distance on dirt !!!
that is by far best speed ever shown by a 1500 guy
and i see no evidence that ryan could follow a rabbit
go read about his 3'33.1wr where he smashed wr off a pedestrian start
he chases after keino from 300m, even though keino wasn't a designated pacer, obviously, & trying to win the race
he stays behind him for 900m before unleasing his kick taking ~ 4s out of keino in last 300m !!!
there is your evidence of following a "pacer" with huge results
if ryan could follow the rabbit, then i'd have to give him the 141 and 326
see above
& your estimates are decidely ungenerous
i go with more like 1'39.9/3'24.2
talent wise, like others, i put ryan at #1., well, well beyond and above the epo era fakes.
regardless of your epo beliefs, you are more than correct otherwise
Peer Mediator wrote:
....
Anyone can time the video on Youtube and get something around 1:41.5.
.....
A video is hardly evidence of anything. Especially old videos from tapes .... Tapes run slow and tapes run fast. More so, if someone wanted to mess with things, they could easily modify a video digitally to make it appear anyone ran whatever they wanted it to look like.
There's a video online of some guy playing guitar like crazy which is a good example of how easy it is.
More likely, with older videos, they just aren't accurate. And audio is out of sync with video which only compounds things.
I agree with most of the rest of what you're saying .... But the video doesn't mean the slightest thing at all.
The Rieti track was definitely accurate when Ovett set his WR there in 83. David Miller, Cole's biographer, even measured the track hoping to find it was short. Cram has unhappy memories of running there in 88 injuring himself and putting paid to his Olympic chances. Butcher covers the Ovett Rieti incident in The.Perfect Distance
ventolin^3 wrote:
other evidence of speed is that 36.5 finish in a 3'38.2
people talk a lot of nonsense about finishing sprints but arithmetic tells us that 36.5 is
12.16 average for 100m sustained for 300m & on dirt !!!
a guy keeps droning on about coe's 12.2 finish in his 3'38.4 gold win
well, Ryun averaged same 100m time for 3 times the distance on dirt !!!
that is by far best speed ever shown by a 1500 guy
Completely different types of races. Such a direct comparison is meaningless unless taken in context of the entire race.
Ryun kicked hard with 300 to go and his last 200m was 24.8. Coe kicked with 120m to go and ran the last 100m in 12.1. His last 200 was 25.0, but as he had to run the second half of the last curve wide as he moved up on Straub's shoulder, it was worth more like 24.8 on the inside of lane 1, as Ryun had run in his race. That leaves their last 200m the same intrinsically. Yes, Ryun's 100m from 300 to 200 was much faster, but then his previous 400 to this point had only been 60 secs. Coe had run the same section of his race (800-1200m) in 54.5. That's 5.5 secs faster than Ryun had run the corresponding split. If Ryun's race had been that fast in the lap up to the 300m from home point, then he wouldn't have run 36.5. He was able to do so due to a slow 3rd lap.
There is no evidence that Ryun was faster over 400m than Coe. Or indeed several other milers.
Ryun ran 3 x 440 legs in 67 - 47.0, 48.0, 47.0.
He ran 3 x 440 legs in 66 - 47.9 (according to T&FN, 47.6 in some listings!), 47.0 (according to T&FN/46.9 according to other listings) and 47.8.
The fact that 2 of these splits differ according to which source one uses, reflects badly as to the accuracy of either.
There is no video evidence of these races to back up how accurate they are. You talk about Coe's Florence run having dodgy timing, but at least there is video footage to check it was something around 1:41.5. There is nothing to back up any of these splits from Ryun, and how do you know that these college tracks weren't also less than 440yds!? ;0)
We have an average of Ryun's 440 on dirt as being c. 47.5, or 47.2 for 400m.
Coe ran three 400m relays on the dirt of his Loughborough Uni track in his peak years of 79-81, and was recorded as having run, 46.3 (after running a 400 & 800), 46.4 (after running a 1:45.0 800) and a 46.9 (after running a 200 and 400). That's an average of 46.5, or some 0.7 faster than Ryun's average.
Before you start going on about the atrocious conditions in Ryun's 46.9 leg, you have no evidence that the time was accurate and you have no scientific way of calculating how the conditions affected the time of that 1 specific run. What one can say is that Ryun had several other opportunities to show his 'blazing speed' in better conditions, yet was never capable of breaking 47 secs again. Ever.
That is not the required speed to run a 1:41 let alone the 1:39 nonsense you keep joking about.
And let's not forget that quote from your former self regarding who was the fastest ever miler: -
"that's no big surprise as coe probably had probably the quickest open 400 speed of any 1500 guy in history"
Followed by: -
"- for this topic, his hypothetical open 400 was ~ 45.2 ( meaning no other specific training for 400 that year, but just running a season of 400s that year, a time of ~ 45.2 woud not have been a surprise )
in a slow 1500/mile he'd have slaughtered just about any guy in history over the last lap as he was bringing low-45 speed to the last lap"
Here's the link Venty -
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2459598Isn't it strange that since writing the above in 2008 as Ventolin, you started arguing with me and have consistently made Coe slower ever since. At the same time Ryun has just got faster. In 2009 as Ventolin^2 you wrote: -
"but ryun was likely a 3'27/3'44 guy back in his 1500wr on a '70s track"
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3243021&page=2Since then Ryun has become 3 secs faster over both distance according to you, and you were using your calculator back then too.
You simply re-adjust and manipulate times and the time affects of all sorts of variables, until you get a predicted time that you want.
There is no mathematics or science involved, it is just your jaundiced opinion spun into 'facts'.
longjack wrote:
the idea so and so could go 140 off in comparison to the actual 144 is very far fetched. however, a guy like ryan is far fetched in the first place.
what the heck was he doing? not racing the 8 more, setting the WR with negative splits, running 4 minute pace for the majority of his races and finishing with 51-52 or dirt or what ever?
you can ask any top coach, what time they would have expected out of ryan if you coached him and they'll all say 141 for 800m and WR for the 1500 no doubt (under 326).
at the end of the day, for my money ryan at 142 in he 800m today is a given. And a 346 mile is a given. i really can't say much more because i don't know his real 400 speed and i see no evidence that ryan could follow a rabbit.
if ryan could follow the rabbit, then i'd have to give him the 141 and 326.
talent wise, like others, i put ryan at #1., well, well beyond and above the epo era fakes.
I am fascinated to know your reasoning behind Ryun being capable of 1:41 for 800 based on only one sub 1:45 performance in an unratified race?
There is no video of the race as far as I know, therefore we cannot check the lap times. Even if the 53.0/51.3 split times are correct, and this was hand timed, that still doesn't equate to a 1:41.
Moreover, the track he ran on was synthetic and not dirt, so any adjustment based on that is meaningless.
There have been other more impressive negative splits over 800m, and they can be checked with real footage. His 1:44.3 was never backed up with anything else approaching this time by Ryun.
And to take a 3:33 runner, even on dirt, and knock 7 secs off that to give his true ability, is a very large leap of faith. Especially when you consider that someone who actually achieved 3:26 (and with questionable help) ran many other times within 2 secs of that. Ryun didn't get near it once.
Wtfunny wrote:
Peer Mediator wrote:....
Anyone can time the video on Youtube and get something around 1:41.5.
.....
A video is hardly evidence of anything. Especially old videos from tapes .... Tapes run slow and tapes run fast. More so, if someone wanted to mess with things, they could easily modify a video digitally to make it appear anyone ran whatever they wanted it to look like.
There's a video online of some guy playing guitar like crazy which is a good example of how easy it is.
More likely, with older videos, they just aren't accurate. And audio is out of sync with video which only compounds things.
I agree with most of the rest of what you're saying .... But the video doesn't mean the slightest thing at all.
With all due respect, I have also timed that race using 3 different dvds (one a mass produced one using BBC footage) from 3 different sources, and they all come out at 1:41.5. I doubt there is a conspiracy to speed them up by a second!
Take any well known race over the last 30 years+ and the on screen time is almost always within 0.2 of the official times. Anyone with a stop watch should get within a few tenths of the official finish times. The only time when this isn't the case is if some of the race has been edited out.
In any case, it certainly gives a much clearer and more accurate idea of the actual time than races where there is no tv footage, which no one has seen, and where all timings were hand timed; many with conflicting split times depending on which source you look at. See above post.
Deanouk wrote:
With all due respect, I have also timed that race using 3 different dvds (one a mass produced one using BBC footage) from 3 different sources, and they all come out at 1:41.5. I doubt there is a conspiracy to speed them up by a second!
Take any well known race over the last 30 years+ and the on screen time is almost always within 0.2 of the official times. Anyone with a stop watch should get within a few tenths of the official finish times. The only time when this isn't the case is if some of the race has been edited out.
In any case, it certainly gives a much clearer and more accurate idea of the actual time than races where there is no tv footage, which no one has seen, and where all timings were hand timed; many with conflicting split times depending on which source you look at. See above post.
I don't disagree … my point is that a video on youtube isn't worth much more than a report in a newspaper from 50 years ago.
I doubt there's any conspiracy at all .. but 1 second over 100 seconds isn't much at all if a tape is running marginally faster, or slower.
Seriously though, you guys are all a little bit obsessed with this stuff, and somewhat silly in how precisely you guess at what Coe/Ryun might or might not have run. Nobody can really point to anything more than the times they actually ran.
Deanouk wrote:Completely different types of races
no
slow races overall to bell, both finish in similar time
it comes down to final finish
Such a direct comparison is meaningless unless taken in context of the entire race
i will
Ryun kicked hard with 300 to go and his last 200m was 24.8
after a previous 11.7 !!!
11.7/24.8 !!!
on dirt !!!
how on earth can you not mention the 11.7 as that is most important part by far of his last 300m - it's bedrock
Coe kicked with 120m to go and ran the last 100m in 12.1
no
he was following a fast drawn out finish & put his final kick at that point
his last 100 was 12.2
you can't claim 12.1 as the 100m lane line is not in the shot & no side-on angle & don't claim nonsense about dvd quality, that is the only feed of the race with running clock & no clear 100m lane mark in shot at 3'26+
His last 200 was 25.0, but as he had to run the second half of the last curve wide as he moved up on Straub's shoulder
& he got drafted for 1/2 that bend offering ~ 0.15s
it was worth more like 24.8 on the inside of lane 1, as Ryun had run in his race
no
it's virtually unchanged when the drafting he got for half the bend is considered
That leaves their last 200m the same intrinsically
err...
with ryun's previous 100 being 11.7 v 13.9 !!!
Yes, Ryun's 100m from 300 to 200 was much faster
it was an unbelievable 11.7 !!!
but then his previous 400 to this point had only been 60 secs
utter nonsense
the german account says the 800 split was 2'03.6 & dvd-guy says 1200 split was 3'01.6
that means Ryun's previous 400 had been 58.0 NOT 60.0
Coe had run the same section of his race (800-1200m) in 54.5. That's 5.5 secs faster than Ryun had run the corresponding split
no
it's 3.5s
If Ryun's race had been that fast in the lap up to the 300m from home point, then he wouldn't have run 36.5
you talk nonsense about considering total race & you don't
Ryun's split to 800 was 2'03.6 compared to coe's 2'05.2
Ryun had put in more effort in the initial 800 than coe, 1.6s faster & slower by 3.5s in next 400m
& none of this takes into account that from 1100 - 1200 the accounts say that he had to run wide on the curve as bodo tried to push him wider "impeding" him
nor once again you seem to forget that Ryun's clockings are on dirt
He was able to do so due to a slow 3rd lap
much faster than 60.0 you wrongly said
it was 58.0 including a wide bend
& also the initial 800 had been run faster by Ryun
There is no evidence that Ryun was faster over 400m than Coe. Or indeed several other milers
how dumb are you ???
what on earth do you think a 36.5/50.5 finish in a 3'38.2 indicates ???
you also cannot find any kind of brain to analyse that 46.9r link : only 18y, quagmire, 3'55+ mile in his legs, etc...
Ryun ran 3 x 440 legs in 67 - 47.0, 48.0, 47.0
you forget that one of those 47.0 was after an earlier 4'08 mile & 1'49.1 for 880y
after all that fatigue, he won the relay in 47.0
no account if he already had a big lead & coud cruise around to 47.0
as for the other 47.0 that was after a world class 3'54.7 mile & again no record of how much effort he had to put into that 47.0
He ran 3 x 440 legs in 66 - 47.9 (according to T&FN, 47.6 in some listings!), 47.0 (according to T&FN/46.9 according to other listings) and 47.8
you once again are clueless about importance of t&f news quotes
they do not run any meet or are official timers
the 46.9 was from official uni newsletter account & their guys timed it
he ran 4'02/1'47.9/48.5 in march '66 whilst still tuning up for major part of season, the 46.9 came 1/12 later
in mid-april again prior to 46.9, he went 3'07 for a 1320y & then 47.6
as for what might have been his best relay run in '66 in terms of context :
on 10th june he ran 1'50.9 prelim & when still ill, he ran 1'44.9wr & the next day he ran 4'02 mile & finished with a 47.8 relay !!!
who on earth has run 2 races the next day after running a 800m wr ???!!!
The fact that 2 of these splits differ according to which source one uses, reflects badly as to the accuracy of either
nonsense
you are looking at wrong sources
There is no video evidence of these races to back up how accurate they are
that is a nonsense argument
few if any races apart from most high-profile ones were on tv back then
get a clue, it was the '60s !!!
we take the official times
if you were there & had your own clockings, offer them
You talk about Coe's Florence run having dodgy timing, but at least there is video footage to check it was something around 1:41.5
nonsense
it was "officially" 1'41.73 no 1.41.5
There is nothing to back up any of these splits from Ryun
utter drivel
we had top timers who's life depended on hand-timing accuracy as that was all that was available
if you have your own personal clockings, offer them
and how do you know that these college tracks weren't also less than 440yds!? ;0)
utter nonsense
these were meets which had been run for decades on same track & they were uni tracks meaning they had high grade mathemticians/physicists/etc to check tracks
We have an average of Ryun's 440 on dirt as being c. 47.5, or 47.2 for 400m
nonsense
you don't come up with an "average" especially when he is on record that there were less than a handful of times/y he was ready to run fast
you go with his best clocking
is this concept too difficult for you ?!
Coe ran three 400m relays on the dirt of his Loughborough Uni track in his peak years of 79-81, and was recorded as having run, 46.3 (after running a 400 & 800), 46.4 (after running a 1:45.0 800) and a 46.9 (after running a 200 and 400). That's an average of 46.5, or some 0.7 faster than Ryun's average
more nonsense
coe actually ran open 400s
48.3 for 2nd, a 47.7 & 47.6 all on dirt in '79
why not use a 47.8+ average for actual 400 ability on dirt in '79 ???
Before you start going on about the atrocious conditions in Ryun's 46.9 leg, you have no evidence that the time was accurate
that must be dumbest comment ever posted here !!!
http://kuhistory.com/articles/ryuns-run/only a complete fool woud doubt the timings or conditions of that meet
they did not write relevant paragraphs nearly 50y ago expecting some nobody in today's day'n'age to dispute
if you have some alternative account of that day, offer it
why are you not offering some dispute of the 3'55.8 there ???
and you have no scientific way of calculating how the conditions affected the time of that 1 specific run
err...
i possess a brain & use it
what about lj runway unfit to be able to run on that they had to import a conveyor belt as runway ???
what does that tell your brain about the state of the running track ???
What one can say is that Ryun had several other opportunities to show his 'blazing speed' in better conditions, yet was never capable of breaking 47 secs again. Ever
err...
the concept of "peaking" clearly seems beyond you ?!
Ryun never ran a relay at his peak in july/august '67
how about coe running 48.3 or 47.6 on dirt for an actual 400 in '79 ?!
where was his "blazing" speed in a rubbish 48.3 which unsurprisingly he lost
That is not the required speed to run a 1:41 let alone the 1:39 nonsense you keep joking about
that kansas run indicates close to 45-flat speed for a rested open 400 & he was much better an athlete at 20y v 18y
with his crushing endurance, those are requirements to dip into 1'39s
And let's not forget that quote Since then Ryun has become 3 secs faster over both distance according to you, and you were using your calculator back then too...
it seems you really can't read
where do you see ventolin^3 associated with those posts ???
You simply re-adjust and manipulate times and the time affects of all sorts of variables, until you get a predicted time that you want
nonsense
i use as much available info to come up with best possible estimate
the estimates for Ryun '67 come out as
45.0/1'39.9/3'24.2
There is no mathematics or science involved, it is just your jaundiced opinion spun into 'facts'.
no
it is an impartial opinion with best numbers available, not nonsense like being 2s out with Ryun's 800 - 1200 split in dusseldorf
perfect distance wrote:The Rieti track was definitely accurate when Ovett set his WR there in 83. David Miller, Cole's biographer, even measured the track hoping to find it was short
interesting but laughable
i'd like to know what surveying qualifications he had
did he measure it 30cm from the kerb all the way around ?
Cram has unhappy memories of running there in 88 injuring himself and putting paid to his Olympic chances. Butcher covers the Ovett Rieti incident in The.Perfect Distance
& he ran a 1'43.19 there in '86, his 2nd ever best time
he didn't seem unhappy with rieti that day or in article years later describing track
Deanouk wrote:I am fascinated to know your reasoning behind Ryun being capable of 1:41 for 800 based on only one sub 1:45 performance in an unratified race?
drivel
nothing unratified by it
his 1'44.9 was ratified as the 880y wr
& get a clue, you have been told enough times that Ryun said he was ill running that meet & even had a 1'50.9 prelim in his legs
he was much better runner in '67
that day in '66 on a proper synthetic track, rested & not ill, he was capable of a 1'41-low
he trained on/matured for much better ability in '67
There is no video of the race as far as I know, therefore we cannot check the lap times
as there weren't for many of the races of the '60s
where are the vids for keino's 7'39.6 or ron's epic 27'39 ???
give us your reasons for doubting those ???
what objections ???
Even if the 53.0/51.3 split times are correct, and this was hand timed
fool
they only had hand times other than olympics & trials races
what are your doubts of keino's 7'39 & ron's 27'39 which were also hand times ???
that still doesn't equate to a 1:41
ill & prelim before
he shoudn't have even been running that day :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkTPCspfwCIlet alone following day with a 4'02 & 47.8 relay
Moreover, the track he ran on was synthetic and not dirt, so any adjustment based on that is meaningless
no
it was grasstex which was a semi-synthetic mulch of dirt/tyre shreddings
it was meant only for low maintenance not speed & guys who have run on those tracks have commented it gave them no better speed than dirt
if you can offer the huge pbs in the 880 behind Ryun you have some semblance of an argument about better speed
where were those huge 880pb behind Ryun ???
Ryun's had 1'44.3 for 800 & he ran that off nonsensical -ve splits
that is 1'42.3 for the track at 1s/lap
& he can have at least 1s for illness/prelim run before
that's getting him 1'41-low & that's being decidely ungenerous for an illness where he shoudn't even have been running & fact we haven't accounted for -ve splits, where he couda expected better off +ve ones
it's the only 800/880y wr ever run off -ve splits
There have been other more impressive negative splits over 800m, and they can be checked with real footage
find them
cram had marginal -ve split of 51.7/51.5 in his 1'43.2 in '86
the only one other i recall is wilson -ve splitting a 1'42-high & he was in 1'41 shape
based on wilson alone, a serious -ve split 800 of more than 1s difference shouda be at least 1s faster if +ve split by 1s+
that alone indicates Ryun's 1'44.3 shoud be more like 1'43.3 if +ve split & he was ill + prelim !!!
His 1:44.3 was never backed up with anything else approaching this time by Ryun
you really are clueless
the 800 was a nothing event back then
the only gold or wr that counted was 1500/mile for americans
Ryun's only ran 1 880 after that 1'44.9 in '66, a 1'46.2 which hardly indicates much effort for a guy with 1'44.9wr
he didn't run any 880/800s at his absolute peak in july/august '67
And to take a 3:33 runner, even on dirt, and knock 7 secs off that to give his true ability, is a very large leap of faith
nothing to do with faith
it's the logical conclusion based on impartially analysis the numbers/circumstances
something you are clearly incapable of
Especially when you consider that someone who actually achieved 3:26 (and with questionable help) ran many other times within 2 secs of that. Ryun didn't get near it once
err...
clueless again
the 3'26 guy had 6y good years of uninterrupted, near peak form from '97 - '03
Ryun had an absolute peak of just 2/12 back in late '67
'after a previous 11.7 !!!
11.7/24.8 !!!
on dirt !!!
how on earth can you not mention the 11.7 as that is most important part by far of his last 300m - it's bedrock'
Video of this race not some BS report which was put up before?
What happened to Ryun in the 800m 72 trials. Pretty poor performance for a 1:39 runner. He was lucky to trip in the 72 1500m heats off that form!
ventolin^3 wrote:
no
it was grasstex which was a semi-synthetic mulch of dirt/tyre shreddings
it was meant only for low maintenance not speed & guys who have run on those tracks have commented it gave them no better speed than dirt
if you can offer the huge pbs in the 880 behind Ryun you have some semblance of an argument about better speed
where were those huge 880pb behind Ryun ???
Ryun's had 1'44.3 for 800 & he ran that off nonsensical -ve splits
that is 1'42.3 for the track at 1s/lap
& he can have at least 1s for illness/prelim run before
that's getting him 1'41-low & that's being decidely ungenerous for an illness where he shoudn't even have been running & fact we haven't accounted for -ve splits, where he couda expected better off +ve ones
it's the only 800/880y wr ever run off -ve splits
[quote]There have been other more impressive negative splits over 800m, and they can be checked with real footage
find them
cram had marginal -ve split of 51.7/51.5 in his 1'43.2 in '86
the only one other i recall is wilson -ve splitting a 1'42-high & he was in 1'41 shape
based on wilson alone, a serious -ve split 800 of more than 1s difference shouda be at least 1s faster if +ve split by 1s+
that alone indicates Ryun's 1'44.3 shoud be more like 1'43.3 if +ve split & he was ill + prelim !!!
[quote]
Vent pretty poor that you forgot this one
Sri Ram Singh of India led the first lap in 52.3. "Slow," said Walker. "Why isn't Boit going out?" The reason was that Boit had had a fright. "After the first 100 meters I felt a strain," he said later. "I thought I was going to pull my right hamstring. By the time I passed 200 I felt better. My plan was to try to kick with 300 to go. But if Juantorena was going fast, I was not going to pass him."
As it happened, Juantorena was just pounding into the lead with 300 to go. Boit followed, running lightly, waiting. It seemed a mistake. "He's playing into Juantorena's hands," said Walker. "He can't kick with him." But off the turn Boit came on, gaining. Juantorena looked over and strained to accelerate, his arms describing great, arhythmic arcs. With 70 meters to go, Boit was slightly ahead. "Then he came up on me again," said Boit. "We were together 10 meters from the finish." Both were staggering. Juantorena won as Boit relaxed, slipping back a meter at the end, his face passive in resignation. "You couldn't say Juantorena won going away," said Walker. "Neither one of them went much farther than the finish line." The times were 1:44.0 and 1:44.1. Juantorena had run the last lap in 51.5—faster than his first, a rarity. "It was my hardest race," said Boit. "I return the compliment," said Juantorena. "It was great competition."
ventolin^3 wrote:
Deanouk wrote:[quote]and how do you know that these college tracks weren't also less than 440yds!? ;0)
utter nonsense
these were meets which had been run for decades on same track & they were uni tracks meaning they had high grade mathemticians/physicists/etc to check tracks
Awesome, we know the tracks are accurate because surely the math and physics departments have the best men out there measuring them. This may be my favorite Ventolin argument since the "Oxygen enriched atmosphere" adjustment based on the track being surrounded by trees. You can't make this stuff up (I mean Venty can).
You're a delusional fool. And a misinformed one at that.
"how about coe running 48.3 or 47.6 on dirt for an actual 400 in '79 ?!
where was his "blazing" speed in a rubbish 48.3 which unsurprisingly he lost"
NO, he never run 48.3 on dirt. Check your facts. He ran a 48.3 in April at Crystal Palace, which is synthetic. Unlike Ryun, who would have needed to be in some type of peak form in the Spring for all his College races, that was Coe's first outing of the year on the track.
Why did I choose Coe's relay splits on dirt for comparison?
Really? Is that a serious question? Probably due to the fact Ryun never ran any open 440s on dirt (or on anything), so I'm comparing like for like. Had Ryun ran some open 440s on dirt then I would compare them with Coe's.
The 47.6 he ran at Cleckheaton was also synthetic, not dirt.
The only open 400 he ran on dirt in 79 was the 47.7 he ran at Loughborough.
He won the 400m in a "relaxed" 47.7, beating Andy Kerr by 1.4secs. He then won the 800 with a 23 sec last 200m, ahead of Garry Cook, and finished with a 46.3 winning relay leg.
So he did no more than was required to win the open 400m. He clearly needed to put in more effort in the relay. Thus his relay legs are the only comparison to Ryun's relay legs.
Coe also ran a 45.5 and a 45.6 relay legs on synthetic. Ryun's 46.9 doesn't come close to that or Coe's 46.3 on dirt.
"we had top timers who's life depended on hand-timing accuracy as that was all that was available
if you have your own personal clockings, offer them"
Can you not see the irony of these ramblings? Clearly not.
So you believe (and state as facts) tracks in Italy during the 1980's to be short and have inaccurate timings, despite video footage, electronic timing devices, photo cells, world class fields, etc, but you can state categorically that all the small college meets in the US, with college athletes, hand timed stop watches (which often differ) and no video footage are 100% bona fide accurate?
That is laughable.
"on 10th june he ran 1'50.9 prelim & when still ill, he ran 1'44.9wr & the next day he ran 4'02 mile & finished with a 47.8 relay !!!"
He couldn't have been that ill if he ran 2 races the next day. It's a stupid comment to make.
"you forget that one of those 47.0 was after an earlier 4'08 mile & 1'49.1 for 880y
after all that fatigue, he won the relay in 47.0"
No he didn't win. He came 3rd in that relay.
"he ran 4'02/1'47.9/48.5 in march '66 whilst still tuning up for major part of season, the 46.9 came 1/12 later"
Yeah, and he came 4th in the relay. One would expect him to have been all out to try and make up the deficit, no?
"in mid-april again prior to 46.9, he went 3'07 for a 1320y & then 47.6"
Is this supposed to be impressive? A 4:10 + Mile equivalent and then another 4th place in the relay.
"the next day he ran 4'02 mile & finished with a 47.8 relay !!!"
This time for 3rd place.
"you can't claim 12.1 as the 100m lane line is not in the shot & no side-on angle & don't claim nonsense about dvd quality, that is the only feed of the race with running clock & no clear 100m lane mark in shot at 3'26"
12.1 was the official split given at the time and repeated in countless books and websites since. There is a clear line on my copies of the race.
"& he got drafted for 1/2 that bend offering ~ 0.15s"
Rubbish. Coe ran wide on Straub's shoulder that entire last lap. With 200 to go he was more than 2m behind and the face on shot shows he is wide of Straub. He purposely ran wide all that bend in order to make Ovett run wider still to pass him. He was too wide and too far back to get full drafting. He probably ran more like 2m extra, which is more like 0.25secs.
"that means Ryun's previous 400 had been 58.0 NOT 60.0
Coe had run the same section of his race (800-1200m) in 54.5. That's 5.5 secs faster than Ryun had run the corresponding split
no
it's 3.5s"
3.5 secs difference on the penultimate lap is a huge difference. The immediate pace before the last 300m was significantly faster in Coe's race compared to Ryun's.
Wtfunny wrote:
Peer Mediator wrote:....
Anyone can time the video on Youtube and get something around 1:41.5.
.....
A video is hardly evidence of anything. Especially old videos from tapes .... Tapes run slow and tapes run fast. More so, if someone wanted to mess with things, they could easily modify a video digitally to make it appear anyone ran whatever they wanted it to look like.
There's a video online of some guy playing guitar like crazy which is a good example of how easy it is.
More likely, with older videos, they just aren't accurate. And audio is out of sync with video which only compounds things.
I agree with most of the rest of what you're saying .... But the video doesn't mean the slightest thing at all.
I don't agree with you on that one. The vast majority of races you see on Youtube are taken directly from the live screening of the races. They will be exactly the same speed as they appeared on a live transmission.
Have a go at timing some and I bet you're not out by more than the standard 0.2/0.3, if you're a decent time keeper.
The point I was making is that Ventolin is wrong when he states that the timing of Coe's Firenze run cannot be guaranteed as legit. All the versions of the race will yield a sub 1:42 time. And quite a bit lower. I get 1:41.4 & 1:41.5. The on screen clock of the Italian version of the race has him crossing the line at 1:41.42.
ventolin^3 wrote:
it was grasstex which was a semi-synthetic mulch of dirt/tyre shreddings
it was meant only for low maintenance not speed & guys who have run on those tracks have commented it gave them no better speed than dirt
if you can offer the huge pbs in the 880 behind Ryun you have some semblance of an argument about better speed
where were those huge 880pb behind Ryun ???
Ryun's had 1'44.3 for 800 & he ran that off nonsensical -ve splits
that is 1'42.3 for the track at 1s/lap
& he can have at least 1s for illness/prelim run before
This is pure fantasy and speculation. There is no way of quantifying how ill someone is and there is equally no way of converting illness to time deducted.
There is no way of measuring what a 1:50+ earlier in the day would have affected him later that day. To be honest it should be nothing at all, as it was practically a jog for him.
Have you conducted several tests on the difference between grasstex, synthetic and cinders? No, I thought not. In that case deducting a second per lap is not backed up with any legitimacy. You have simply plucked the figure from somewhere not very nice.
Then there is the issue of it being hand timed. That makes it more likely a 1:44.5 FAT.
So you have taken 3 secs off his time based on nothing which can be backed up scientifically. You do not know that grasstex synthetic slowed him down by 2 secs.
ventolin^3 wrote:
find them
cram had marginal -ve split of 51.7/51.5 in his 1'43.2 in '86
the only one other i recall is wilson -ve splitting a 1'42-high & he was in 1'41 shape
based on wilson alone, a serious -ve split 800 of more than 1s difference shouda be at least 1s faster if +ve split by 1s+
Let's see.
Cram - 51.7/51.5 1986 Commonwealth
Juantorena - 52.6/51.4 1977 World Cup
Kipketer - 52.0/50.7 Monaco 1997
Rudisha - 51.6/51.2 Nairobi 2010
Ovett - 54.8/50.5 Moscow 1980
Coe - running 810m in the Moscow final would have split 54.9/49.7 with a clear run on the inside.
Coe- 52.7/51.8 1986 Europeans. Again, he was wide on every bend and covered more like 811m. It was worth more like 52.4/50.8 if he'd been running in lane 1 all the way.
So, a negative split in a 1:44 type race is not that rare.