What if Jim Ryun had raced in this era?

To equal Jim Ryun someone would have to break the WR at 1500 by 2 seconds at the age of 19 and the mile record by 2 seconds at the age of 20.

Haven't looked through the thread, but just one datum:

Some weeks past his 17th birthday, Ryun ran 3:39.0. That made him then the 10th fastest performer in history.

Cowardly like changing your username from “est un autre” and then denying that you’re the same poster?

Identical writing styles.

3:25.47

If you think a Hobbs Kessler performance nearly 60 years later with modern training, modern shows, on a modern track is better than what Ryun did, then you have no understanding of what is being discussed here.

Kessler got hoovered around the track.. He’s never run fast from the front or winning the race where he’s credited with these fast times. J. I. also had the advantage of rubber/tuned tracks and spring loaded shoes. That’s real evidence…

Ryun did things that should make anyone think he might have run 3:25 under 1998 conditions, and certainly under 2023 conditions. We've seen improvements in the 1500m/mile of 2-3 seconds with the new shoes and increased # of quality-paced efforts in the past several years. The # of 3:29s this year at Oslo (Nardas? Habz???) supports the view that this is a factor (spikes, pacing lights) on the elite level as well. 3:33 with heavy 1967 spikes with a last 1200m in 2:46-47 on a hot day in southern California tells you what kind of a runner he was. He ran 1:44 with a negative split. He closed the last 300m of a 3:38 on dirt in 36 with no one close to him for the last 290 (50 400m, only getting going with 300 to go). The training and his own body type made him special. I wouldn't assume you'd get better results with different training, just a longer career. He had mono in 1968 and wasn't allowed to train much at altitude that year, while Keino was allowed to train all year at altitude. He crushed Keino twice the previous year.

Often he'd get out slowly and finish in 53 or faster. When paced, as in the 3:33, he proved he could finish in 2:46, about as fast as El G got out in his fastest races (he once got through 1200 in 2:44 high), despite the much slower tracks and heavier spikes. Take an unpaced 3:51 mile and take away 2 seconds for no drafting, 2 seconds for poor pacing, and 2 seconds for a slow track and heavy spikes and you can see that it's not incredible to think he'd be close to El G.

On dirt mind you

Jim Ryun 3:33.1 world's record ..July 8/1967
Last 1200 meters 2:46.6.
Last 800 meters 1:51.3
Last 400 meters 53.5

He would have only been a 4:02 miler. He would be spending too much time playing video games, eating junk, following IG and OF accounts, making Tik Toks, and anonymously posting on Letsrun message boards.

This is a (necessary) long off topic post. Please skip over it if you don’t like this kind of stuff!
1. You seem a little butthurt. If you reread my comment about down arrows and “cowardly” I think you will get that I just did some reasoning around the difference between using arrows and posting (one’s criticism openly). I myself have had a thought process around how to post / should I myself start giving up and down arrows (the pros and cons here), and when I wrote what I wrote this was also me thinking aloud about the downside of arrows. I didn’t at all mean that people setting arrows are cowards -why would I mean something that would include my self as a coward (because I could very well myself start using arrows, at least in some cases)! So when I use words like “cloudy”, “manipulativ”, “cowardly” they all refer to the arrows (and not the people behind -who can have a lot of legitimate reasons for their arrow use) -you will see this if you reread that sentence you criticise…! -My point is that arrows can be perceived as “cloudy” and so on, because one doesn’t know exactly (apart from a kind of negative response) what the arrow means. And I felt that the “600”s post had a content that was OK in my view -therefore my words about the arrows. But I didn’t at all mean that he was a victim of some kind of conspiracy (the arrows) or something like that….

Likes / dislikes have been reported as a huge problem in connection with social media (Facebook and so forth). F.ex you write something or post a picture of your self and suddenly you are getting a dislike or a down arrow. The problem then is that you don’t know why. -Does the voter think I’m to fat (and who is the voter?), or that I wrote something stupid, or that I’m too pretentious or self absorbed, or does the voter respect my position but just had a need (in an easy and quick way) to stress a matter of fact disagreeing of something limited and concrete I wrote…?

I myself prefer that people call me stupid (which I sometimes have earned), instead of just a downvote -I can then communicate with the poster and achieve some insight in his reasoning (that can be spot on, or he can even give me some credit, or something in the middle, or we sort out some misunderstandings). Therefore your post here is good -you could’ve restricted your self to name calling or some kind of trolling; but chose instead citations and arguments that I can meet with my explanation and arguments…!

2. So let me be clear: I don’t accuse you, or anybody else, for being manipulative, cowardly or cloudy! Or being idiots for that matter. And even if I could attack you for paradoxically shielding behind unregistered (and maybe multiple) handles when you criticise my choice of (registered) handles, I neither do that -You could have a number of legitimate reasons for choosing your handles as you do…

3. “Identical writing styles” -here you are of course right. -But do you really think I’m so stupid that I don’t see this by myself, stopping one handle at the precise moment I started a new one, and kept on with a very distinct style (extremely long posts, a lot of personal information, using of …, clearly not English as first language, long sentences, and so on and so on.) And that I would lie (in visible writing, for everybody to see) when it wasn’t necessary at all! Because why would it be catastrophic if somebody noticed a change in handles!? And why should I flee from a former handle (that isn’t erased and that I probably will use again) -I’m proud of some of my posts (A guy even called me a -wise, I think -Buddha), and some of my posts not so much. But I fixed everything in the posts in my former handle that I wasn’t too proud of -even apologised distinctly for calling Warholm “a never sub 2 runner in a million years”! (But maybe you think I am fleeing from down arrows -but if so: why the heck do I then under my new handle post long, and too personal, and controversial, and using words I know people don’t like when that gives me the same downvotes (as I will receive for this current massive post…). -I can tell you; I post what I think is interesting regardless of anticipated arrows, and I’m totally capable of collecting up arrows -done that in some of my posts; know what it takes if that was a goal… But I’m too much into myself and my things to prioritise that too much…

4. So to the thing you didn’t get: I don’t use my two registered handles to back each other or communicate with each other as if they were from two different people. Of course one could do this playfully or as a joke, but I’m not there. Or one could do this as a kind of deception (self-deception I would say) but I would not recommend building a (fragile) self esteem in this way…) Anyways -unregistered handles must be better for “trolling”…

You say I’m cowardly denying being “..est un autre”. But how long did you reflect over my answer: “I’m another..”? You should have googled “…est un autre” (or read one of my posts where I explained -on request- what it means) -you would then realised that it means: “I’m another..”! So my answer to the poster under the anonymous handle (if it was you or somebody else) who asked if I am the poster “..est un autre” confirmed that yes, I am that, because “I’m another” means the same thing (as this French username), only in our chosen language of communication, and not a denial or lie as you thought!

I thought it was fun that I could answer this way -if I had written “No, I’m another..” it would have been a lie. And if I had written “Yes, I’m another..” it would maybe been too easy, or over exposed… The way I answered covered also this: It’s a little rude to ask what’s behind someone’s username, but at the same time I thought it was a legitimate and quite polite request, and I’m one of them who like to answer when being asked / commented. So therefore this little riddle -I thought if anybody wasn’t satisfied with my answer they could ask, and I would give a good explanation (giving this idea: google “..est un autre” and see how it aligns with “I’m another..” And maybe at the same time getting some info about Rimbaud..). Anyways -I thought if a poster made a point of piecing together my two handles he could also maybe understand my answer (and certainly after googling). And if people only glanced quickly on the poster’s question and my answer I thought they weren’t interested enough two have noticed the two handle concern at all, and then be it…

5. My new handle “justanothercuriousdude” reminds you about “..est un autre” doesn’t it -why should I leave clues if deception or cowardice was my goal..?

This is a long (necessary) off topic post. Please skip over it if you don’t like this kind of stuff.

I tend to drown my points in words -here is the short version: A poster asks me if I am the former poster “I’m another” (in French “..est un autre” as username). My answer is: “I’m another..” thus confirming the posters suspicion (meaning Yes, I am him)…

A second poster reads this, and thinks my answer is: “I’m another poster..”, and thinks I’m a liar, cause all signs says I’m “…est un autre”….

The second poster doesn’t know Rimbaud’s famous “Je est un autre”; but that’s OK; I didn’t know it before I knew it either..! But I will recommend a google search of user names that puzzles us -would have prevented the poster’s misunderstanding / confusion…

Is this confusion my fault? Sure -but even my wife tells me I’m allowed to have some fun..!

He would most likely be a Joe Rogan fan and be on a Keto/Carnivore Diet and never break 5 minute mile.

Did you actually say anything amongst all that - of course I didn't read it - or were just trying to wallpaper the thread?

I agree with everything you say here except the bit about training at altitude. Most prospective Olympians went to Tahoe for a few weeks before the Trials. But Ryun, George Young, another steeplechaser called Conrad Nightengale, and a fourth guy who I don't remember, MAYBE Tom von Ruden, went to Flagstaff instead. I don't know why but Sports Illustrated did a story about them.

I think people overstate how much the track & shoes make a difference. Ryun did run on a synthetic tartan track for the 1968 Olympics, and his 3:33 WR was set on a brick dust/hard clay track that was known to be quite fast in good weather. As for shoes, well, Nike has done a fantastic job at marketing to convince people that they can improve 5 sec in a middle distance race by changing their spikes. I think Jakob could run sub-3:30 in 1965 spikes.

However, the training makes a huge difference. With modern training, faster training parters, people to chase, and his massive kick… Ryun would be a gold medal contender for sure in this era, and threat to the WR.

The dumbest thing written on this thread.

What's incredible is how people keep spouting this mythical improvement of "2-3 seconds in the 1500m due to the new shoes" despite all the evidence to the contrary. I'll say it as many times as I need to: J. I. age 17 - 3:31 1500m. J. I. age 22 - 3:27.95 1500m.

The shoes were available to pros in 2017. ignoring evidence doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist