You have listed 9 all-time great middle distance runners who all set WRs or set faster (or equivalently faster) times on other tracks, so one would expect them to run quickly on any track where they were at or near a peak and chose to have an attack at a WR or fast time! What would have been more useful is if you were to list the athletes (and their times) that came after them in the race. Then you would find that the sheer depth ion number of fast times in any specific race, is far greater in Monaco than Rieti.
Puica ran a faster mile at Zurich. The 2nd athlete behind her in Rieti was 8 secs behind.
Ovett ran a slew of 3:31's off some dire pacing and the only unexpected thing about his WR in Rieti was that he hadn't run faster than that time a lot earlier in his career. Second in that race was Deleze ( a 3:31 runner at his best) almost 4 secs behind, who had run a quicker 3:32 high in Zurich a week or so before. So if Rieti is such a favoured track, then why did he run slower in Rieti?
Cram ran only 0.03 faster than he did in winning the Commonwealth title the same year, off a faster 1st lap in Rieti. He also ran a faster time at Zurich the year before, so 1:43.19 was hardly beyond his compass.
Coe was capable of sub 3:30 from 1979, yet the few attempts he's had at the WR were ruined by dreadful pacing. His 3:32.03 WR in 79 was certainly representative of at least a 3:30, considering he went through 400m in 53 high (the clock stopped in the wrong position showing 54 low for the pacer)and ran solo from 700m off very erratic laps. And anyone who can finish a 3:32.3 with a last 200m of 25.7 and last 100m of 12.4, is certainly not represented by a 3:31.9 pb.
Second to Coe was Maree in 3:33.34, more than 3.5 secs behind. He was a 3:29 guy at his best and had run a 3:32.5 a couple of weeks prior. So again, the 'magical' Rieti track didn't help him run a pb!
Morceli came 7th in the Olympics in 92 because he was baulked on the back straight and ran a dreadful race. His Rieti WR attempt was a consolation effort for running so below par in Barcelona when he was the favourite. He went on to run 3 times quicker on other tracks: 2 times at Monaco and 1.5 secs faster in Nice. 2nd in that Rieti race was 3secs + behind.
Kipketer ran faster than his best time at Rieti on 3 occasions, including 2 WRs, and by 0.7secs. 2nd in his 1:41.8 race was a distant 1.6secs behind.
Komen and Ngeny had very meteoric rises and equally swift declines after a couple of seasons, slap bang in the middle of the era when EPO was rampant and there was no test for it. They both ran similar out of this world times in other events too, Komen in the 2 miles and Ngeny with a 3:43 mile.
Rudisha ran sub 1:42 7 times, and 3 of those were faster than he produced at Rieti. His times on the Italian track were hardly anomolies for him at the time.
I'm not doubting that Rieti didn't produce some very fast times in its heyday, but (Komen apart), none of those listed were outlier performances from the athletes who produced them. The meet came at the end of the season, about 2 weeks after the Champs, when athletes would have expected to be at their best. Coupled with the fact it usually had a very relaxed atmosphere, great weather and some decent fields, then it was in a good position to produce fast times. But it doesn't have the sheer depth in numbers of fast performers as Monaco has. And many of the fast times set at Monaco by some athletes are way beyond what was expected of them, far faster than they ran before or after and anywhere else. E.g Wheating (3:30.9 Monaco, 3:34.3 elsewhere), Farah (3:28.8 Monaco, 3:34.1 elsewhere), Iguider (3:28.7 in Monaco, 3:31.4 elsewhere; and he never looked like he was capable of sub 3:30 in any of his non-Monaco races), Tuka (1:42.5 Monaco, 1:43.8 elsewhere), Kiprop (3:26.6 at Monaco, 3:29.3 elsewhere), Kiplagat (3:27.6 in Monaco, 3:29.6 elsewhere), Willis (3:29.6 at Monaco, 3:32.1 elsewhere), Makhloufi (3:28.7 Monaco, 3:30.4 elsewhere), Bosse (1:42.5 Monaco, 1:43.4 elsewhere), and so on....
Year in and year out Monaco throws up the majority of the fastest times for the year in the middle distances. I think I posted a more in depth analysis of the sheer numbers per season earlier on in this thread, if you care to take a look. I'm sure the weather conditions (talk of there being no wind down the back straight due to the construction of the stadium), large sums of appearance money and decent pacing help, but it's not even positioned particularly advantageously in a season. It's usually early July, and most of the major champs the athletes are aiming for are normally at least a month or more away. So the suggestion athletes are at a peak for Monaco is a bit of a red herring. They shouldn't be if their aim is to win medals 4 to 6 weeks later. Taken all into consideration, the sheer volume of fast times and pbs set on a regular basis at Monaco is more of an anomaly than the one or two performances from the elite athletes set back in the day at Rieti.