Maybe not everyone, but at least everyone among "WR holders from the 1990's - 2000's from 800m to the marathon". When asked "who is clean?", you said "no one".
casual obsever wrote:
Coevett wrote:
I honestly think you seem to be basing your conclusion - that everybody dopes - on the assumption that...everybody dopes.
I stopped reading right there, because I neither concluded nor assumed "that everybody dopes".
Honestly...
casual obsever wrote:
Coevett wrote:
Why the 60's or early 70s when athletes certainly had more opportunity to take steroids than athletes in the 80s had to blood dope (or take steroids)?
1) Because nothing beats blood "doping" (wasn't doping until the mid-80s), see for example doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0156157:
From the summarized literature, it can be estimated that elite athletes may improve performance by up to 3% with blood doping, regardless of method [29–31].
Or
http://features.thesundaytimes.co.uk/web/public/2015/the-doping-scandal/index.html#/Experts say blood doping can improve the performance of a 5,000m runner by about 30 seconds – the difference between first place and last in the men’s final at London 2012. In the 10,000m the advantage could be more than a minute
(With the experts consulted being Ashenden and Parisotto)
2) Because blood "doping" became "widespread" after 68, see doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2003.007195:
HISTORY
The first alleged use of blood boosting in sport was in the 1960s, when a French four times winner of the Tour de France (1961–1964) was named as one of the first cyclists to use the technique. Widespread use among endurance athletes (especially running, cycling, and cross country skiing) started after the 1968 Olympic Games...
Coevett wrote:
I'd be interested to know which 60s/70s records you think were clean.
No idea, but back then, it was at least imaginable that a clean super talent would beat all the doped super talents, when doping was providing much less of a boost.
In the 80s, with up to 3% boost from blood transfusions, plus whatever from roids, no way. Subtract 3% from any such WR, and you see why.
E.g., btt, Aouita's 3:29.46 would turn into a low 3:23, and Coe's 1:41.73 into 1:38:40ish. And that in the 80s, imagine what times that would be on today's tracks with today's spikes.
Or look at that from the other way. Any dirty runner with a clean 3:32 or 1:44 potential could have beaten the WR in the 80s, but it took until 1997, until anyone broke 1:41.73. No one whatsoever has come close to a 3:23 or 1:38, despite all the drug cheats over the last decades and the super talented Kenyans and Brits and Moroccans and the progress in training and nutrition and shoes and tracks.
Is there any evidence that runners in the 1960's such as Herb Elliott, Peter Snell, Murray Halberg, Michel Jazy, Kip Keino or Jim Ryun using steroids or amphetamines?
Almost impossible to prove now.
Coevett wrote:
casual obsever wrote:
1) Because nothing beats blood "doping" (wasn't doping until the mid-80s), see for example doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0156157:
2) Because blood "doping" became "widespread" after 68, see doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2003.007195:
No idea, but back then, it was at least imaginable that a clean super talent would beat all the doped super talents, when doping was providing much less of a boost.
In the 80s, with up to 3% boost from blood transfusions, plus whatever from roids, no way. Subtract 3% from any such WR, and you see why.
E.g., btt, Aouita's 3:29.46 would turn into a low 3:23, and Coe's 1:41.73 into 1:38:40ish. And that in the 80s, imagine what times that would be on today's tracks with today's spikes.
Or look at that from the other way. Any dirty runner with a clean 3:32 or 1:44 potential could have beaten the WR in the 80s, but it took until 1997, until anyone broke 1:41.73. No one whatsoever has come close to a 3:23 or 1:38, despite all the drug cheats over the last decades and the super talented Kenyans and Brits and Moroccans and the progress in training and nutrition and shoes and tracks.
I honestly think you seem to be basing your conclusion - that everybody dopes - on the assumption that...everybody dopes.
So blood doping improves performance by 3%. Herb Elliott ran a practically solo 3:35 in 1960 on a much inferior track than even the Brits had, let alone today's Monaco. He was only 22 and surely still not in his peak (and retired soon after). 3% of 3.35 gives around a 3:28 performance blood doping. ON A 1960's TRACK!! By a 22 year old probably still not at his peak. Quite ridiculous.
Obvious that Herb Elliott was blood doping. But wait a moment. Blood doping only became widespread later in the 60's.
I honestly don't follow your logic. Because Coe ran 1:41, it would mean to suppose he ran it clean, he could have ran 1:38 blood doped, and that proves he did blood dope. I honestly don't see that logic. Yes, maybe he could have ran 1:38 blood doped. In fact I firmly believe that with EPO or blood doping, Coe, Cram, Ovett could have ran that kind of time and 3:25 1500m. I don't see what's ridiculous about that.
Peter Snell also ran what many consider the equivalent of at least a low 1:43, and surely had the potential to run 1:42 on today's Mondo tracks and with better competition to push him. That means he could have ran 1:39 or even 1:38 blood doped today. Unless you think he and Lydiard pioneered the use of blood doping in the 60s in athletics?
I mean what's your logic? 1:38 is absurd because Coe would still be the world record holder and nearly 3 seconds faster than anyone else, and we know there have been a lot of 800m blood dopers and EPO users in the years since Coe? But how we do know that somebody of Coe's talent has been blood doping or taking EPO? You assume that EVERYBODY dopes to prove that EVERYBODY dopes. You also ignore the possibility (or probability) that the introduction of EPO and doping culture in middle-distance actually prevented European talent of the level of Coe emerging (because they made the choice not to dope to compete on a level playing field).
You've criticized me for 'racism' in the past, or at least for giving the impression that I'm racist for focusing on East Africa. The fact that there is no evidence that there is and has been a major doping culture in middle-distance running in the West, aside from perhaps countries like Spain and Italy. Meanwhile, at the risk of appearing racist again, there have been two global Kenyan middle-distance medalists popped in the last 12 months, 3 of the top 21 Kenyan 800m runners from 2017 popped, 3 of the 5 Kenyan male finalists in the middle-distance events in London popped. That strongly indicates that doping is endemic in Kenyan middle-distance running, and unfortunately, that most elite Kenyan runners over the years have been dopers. The fact that Coe and Cram probably ran as fast in the 80's as Kiprop, taking into account the difference in the tracks, doesn't prove they must have been doping as well. It just means that Kiprop, and maybe the best that Kenya has to offer, are naturally about 5 or 6 seconds slower than the best Europeans. Just as the best Nigerian 1500m runners are 10 or 15 seconds slower than the best Europeans.
What age do you think Cram was when he started blood doping? And how did he do it exactly? His parents couldn't even afford to buy him a decent pair of spikes, yet look at the times he was running as a schoolboy. And if Ovett was roiding and blood transfusing before each race, why did he not have any inclination to chase WRs until Andy Norman and the promoters pressurized him to? He really only enjoyed beating the men on the track. I doubt if he would have gotten much satisfaction from that if he knew he was winning just through doping.
This is why no one takes you seriously. When people suggest that Africans are physically/genetically superior, you call it racism, yet you turn around and claim Europeans are physically superior and then wonder why people call you a racist. On top of that, you've stated that an entire region has only been successful due to drug use and in general seem to have a very negative attitude towards Africans.
If Jakob Ingebrigtsen wasn't white, you'd be foaming at the mouth looking for any excuse to denigrate his achievements. You're an intellectually dishonest prick but lack the self-awareness to see it. Sad.
Beethoven wrote:
Is there any evidence that runners in the 1960's such as Herb Elliott, Peter Snell, Murray Halberg, Michel Jazy, Kip Keino or Jim Ryun using steroids or amphetamines?
Almost impossible to prove now.
No evidence aside from that they could have been. At least aside from Kip Keino. Charlie Francis (coach of Ben Johnson) claimed that the IAAF drug tested lots of the athletes at Mexico (just to determine the extent of doping - steroids were not illegal at that time) and found that the entire Kenyan team was roided. Keino was supposedly seriously ill in hospital before jumping out of his bed, running all to the way to the stadium to make the final at the last moment, and running 3:34 at altitude largely solo. Last year he was pretty much convicted of syphoning off millions of dollars intended for young Kenyan athletes into his bank accounts, but got off with it after political pressure from Kenyan MPs.
Further, there is counter-evidence that they did not dope with dangerous drugs, as amphetamines and roids certainly were in the 1960's. Namely, that they are all still here in their eighties, mostly in very good health it seems. Snell suffered a cardiac problem a few years ago and has had a pacemaker fitted, but that's hardly unusual for 80 year old man. Up until that point, he was still an active sportsman competing at world level in several different sports as a master.
Basically, the whole rise of Kenyan athletics has been extremely shady from the beginning. Kenyan runners were invited to be pacemakers at a London meet in the 1950s, and a Dutch sports scientist was in the crowd of spectators. Something clicked and he was on the next plane to Kenya boasting that this people were 'genetically superior runners' and he was going to turn them into Olympic champions. It was he himself who first propagated the idea of East Africans being 'natural born runners'. He quickly became the head of the Kenyan athletics federation and did indeed, start producing elite runners, above all Keino. Then in 68, Keino led a rebellion, accusing the European of being a colonial racist who was taking all the credit. They pushed him out and all of a sudden, Kenyans started performing poorly on the circuit, including Rudisha's father. Nobody gave Kenio a chance in Mexico. At the last moment, they re-instated the Dutch guy as their boss... and the rest is history. As soon as HGH an EPO became widely available in the late 80's, Kenyans were pretty much untouchable apart from similarly doped Moroccans and Ethiopians.
Coevett wrote:
Beethoven wrote:
Is there any evidence that runners in the 1960's such as Herb Elliott, Peter Snell, Murray Halberg, Michel Jazy, Kip Keino or Jim Ryun using steroids or amphetamines?
Almost impossible to prove now.
No evidence aside from that they could have been. At least aside from Kip Keino. Charlie Francis (coach of Ben Johnson) claimed that the IAAF drug tested lots of the athletes at Mexico (just to determine the extent of doping - steroids were not illegal at that time) and found that the entire Kenyan team was roided. Keino was supposedly seriously ill in hospital before jumping out of his bed, running all to the way to the stadium to make the final at the last moment, and running 3:34 at altitude largely solo. Last year he was pretty much convicted of syphoning off millions of dollars intended for young Kenyan athletes into his bank accounts, but got off with it after political pressure from Kenyan MPs.
Further, there is counter-evidence that they did not dope with dangerous drugs, as amphetamines and roids certainly were in the 1960's. Namely, that they are all still here in their eighties, mostly in very good health it seems. Snell suffered a cardiac problem a few years ago and has had a pacemaker fitted, but that's hardly unusual for 80 year old man. Up until that point, he was still an active sportsman competing at world level in several different sports as a master.
British cyclist in the 60s died during a tour stage was on speed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_SimpsonFrom what I understand doctors back in the 60s didn't realize the dangers of speed. And thought they were a cure all. Prescribing them to everyone was common back than. Only later on did they realize the harm.
rekrunner wrote:
Maybe not everyone, but at least everyone among "WR holders from the 1990's - 2000's from 800m to the marathon". When asked "who is clean?", you said "no one".
Correct - but that is a lot less than "everybody".
you're incoherent wrote:
Coevett wrote:
I honestly think you seem to be basing your conclusion - that everybody dopes - on the assumption that...everybody dopes.
So blood doping improves performance by 3%. Herb Elliott ran a practically solo 3:35 in 1960 on a much inferior track than even the Brits had, let alone today's Monaco. He was only 22 and surely still not in his peak (and retired soon after). 3% of 3.35 gives around a 3:28 performance blood doping. ON A 1960's TRACK!! By a 22 year old probably still not at his peak. Quite ridiculous.
Obvious that Herb Elliott was blood doping. But wait a moment. Blood doping only became widespread later in the 60's.
I honestly don't follow your logic. Because Coe ran 1:41, it would mean to suppose he ran it clean, he could have ran 1:38 blood doped, and that proves he did blood dope. I honestly don't see that logic. Yes, maybe he could have ran 1:38 blood doped. In fact I firmly believe that with EPO or blood doping, Coe, Cram, Ovett could have ran that kind of time and 3:25 1500m. I don't see what's ridiculous about that.
Peter Snell also ran what many consider the equivalent of at least a low 1:43, and surely had the potential to run 1:42 on today's Mondo tracks and with better competition to push him. That means he could have ran 1:39 or even 1:38 blood doped today. Unless you think he and Lydiard pioneered the use of blood doping in the 60s in athletics?
I mean what's your logic? 1:38 is absurd because Coe would still be the world record holder and nearly 3 seconds faster than anyone else, and we know there have been a lot of 800m blood dopers and EPO users in the years since Coe? But how we do know that somebody of Coe's talent has been blood doping or taking EPO? You assume that EVERYBODY dopes to prove that EVERYBODY dopes. You also ignore the possibility (or probability) that the introduction of EPO and doping culture in middle-distance actually prevented European talent of the level of Coe emerging (because they made the choice not to dope to compete on a level playing field).
You've criticized me for 'racism' in the past, or at least for giving the impression that I'm racist for focusing on East Africa. The fact that there is no evidence that there is and has been a major doping culture in middle-distance running in the West, aside from perhaps countries like Spain and Italy. Meanwhile, at the risk of appearing racist again, there have been two global Kenyan middle-distance medalists popped in the last 12 months, 3 of the top 21 Kenyan 800m runners from 2017 popped, 3 of the 5 Kenyan male finalists in the middle-distance events in London popped. That strongly indicates that doping is endemic in Kenyan middle-distance running, and unfortunately, that most elite Kenyan runners over the years have been dopers. The fact that Coe and Cram probably ran as fast in the 80's as Kiprop, taking into account the difference in the tracks, doesn't prove they must have been doping as well. It just means that Kiprop, and maybe the best that Kenya has to offer, are naturally about 5 or 6 seconds slower than the best Europeans. Just as the best Nigerian 1500m runners are 10 or 15 seconds slower than the best Europeans.
What age do you think Cram was when he started blood doping? And how did he do it exactly? His parents couldn't even afford to buy him a decent pair of spikes, yet look at the times he was running as a schoolboy. And if Ovett was roiding and blood transfusing before each race, why did he not have any inclination to chase WRs until Andy Norman and the promoters pressurized him to? He really only enjoyed beating the men on the track. I doubt if he would have gotten much satisfaction from that if he knew he was winning just through doping.
This is why no one takes you seriously. When people suggest that Africans are physically/genetically superior, you call it racism, yet you turn around and claim Europeans are physically superior and then wonder why people call you a racist. On top of that, you've stated that an entire region has only been successful due to drug use and in general seem to have a very negative attitude towards Africans.
If Jakob Ingebrigtsen wasn't white, you'd be foaming at the mouth looking for any excuse to denigrate his achievements. You're an intellectually dishonest prick but lack the self-awareness to see it. Sad.
One of many lies and inconsistencies from him that lead to him having no credibility.
spade detector wrote:
you're incoherent wrote:
This is why no one takes you seriously. When people suggest that Africans are physically/genetically superior, you call it racism, yet you turn around and claim Europeans are physically superior and then wonder why people call you a racist. On top of that, you've stated that an entire region has only been successful due to drug use and in general seem to have a very negative attitude towards Africans.
If Jakob Ingebrigtsen wasn't white, you'd be foaming at the mouth looking for any excuse to denigrate his achievements. You're an intellectually dishonest prick but lack the self-awareness to see it. Sad.
One of many lies and inconsistencies from him that lead to him having no credibility.
Lol, no one takes me seriously. I think a few people do, probably a lot of the actual elite athletes who no doubt browse these boards. Seems you take me rather seriously too, given that you seem to spend sleepless nights posting vile comments here about sex with animals and rape. Not sure why at this stage the mods haven't given you an ip ban.
You're the kind of ally that Spade Detector and the like have. Somebody who seems obsessed with sexually abusing animals and such.
When I 'accuse' black supremacists of being racist, I'm throwing back their absurd accusations of racism against me for correctly calling out the Kenyan doping disaster. Doping apologists like you are not calling me racist for claiming that European descent runners are genetically more talented at running than Kenyans, you're just using the race card to deflect from the Kenyan doping horror show. The fact is European descent runners proved that they can run sub 3:30 times, because they did the equivalent before blood doping. East Africans haven't, just as Chinese and Samoans haven't. I didn't make the claim that Europeans are genetically superior at running (like racist doping apologists like you have about Kenyans). Perhaps the infrastructure needs to be better in East Africa or the diet or many other things.
If Jakob was Kenyan then sure I'd suspect him you a$$hat because it's clear that doping is out of control in Kenya, as well as equally well documented age cheating.
I realize you and Spade Detector/Casual Observer must be suffering at this point. But accusing me of racism or animal sex or whatever wont change the fact that yet another elite Kenyan runner has been busted and its very obvious now that the stream of busts are only going to get even more frequent. Keep talking to yourselves and your various handles, and share in your sick sexual fantasies, Kenya is finished as an athletics powerhouse and most of the world thinks it's a good thing that that the fraud is coming to an end.
Coevett wrote:
Beethoven wrote:
Is there any evidence that runners in the 1960's such as Herb Elliott, Peter Snell, Murray Halberg, Michel Jazy, Kip Keino or Jim Ryun using steroids or amphetamines?
Almost impossible to prove now.
No evidence aside from that they could have been. At least aside from Kip Keino. Charlie Francis (coach of Ben Johnson) claimed that the IAAF drug tested lots of the athletes at Mexico (just to determine the extent of doping - steroids were not illegal at that time) and found that the entire Kenyan team was roided. Keino was supposedly seriously ill in hospital before jumping out of his bed, running all to the way to the stadium to make the final at the last moment, and running 3:34 at altitude largely solo. Last year he was pretty much convicted of syphoning off millions of dollars intended for young Kenyan athletes into his bank accounts, but got off with it after political pressure from Kenyan MPs.
Further, there is counter-evidence that they did not dope with dangerous drugs, as amphetamines and roids certainly were in the 1960's. Namely, that they are all still here in their eighties, mostly in very good health it seems. Snell suffered a cardiac problem a few years ago and has had a pacemaker fitted, but that's hardly unusual for 80 year old man. Up until that point, he was still an active sportsman competing at world level in several different sports as a master.
Josy Barthel, the 1952 Olympic champion in the 1500m was accused (rumoured) of using methamphetamine. Barthel died at 65 years of age.
In 2006, Barthel was accused of doping by sports journalist Erik Eggers in the German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel.[2] Eggers cited German physician Oskar Wegener who did research on methamphetamine and other doping substances in the 1950s. Wegener strongly denied saying Barthel had any connection with doping.[3] The use of such substances was neither prohibited nor controlled until the 1960s.[4]
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UtnQisArdUQ/V_pjcTcpkcI/AAAAAAAAAyg/EHKBrXI8fa4hU7n1e1jJZMfov3rZEsfcwCLcB/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Josy%2BBarthel.jpgBeethoven wrote:
Coevett wrote:
No evidence aside from that they could have been. At least aside from Kip Keino. Charlie Francis (coach of Ben Johnson) claimed that the IAAF drug tested lots of the athletes at Mexico (just to determine the extent of doping - steroids were not illegal at that time) and found that the entire Kenyan team was roided. Keino was supposedly seriously ill in hospital before jumping out of his bed, running all to the way to the stadium to make the final at the last moment, and running 3:34 at altitude largely solo. Last year he was pretty much convicted of syphoning off millions of dollars intended for young Kenyan athletes into his bank accounts, but got off with it after political pressure from Kenyan MPs.
Further, there is counter-evidence that they did not dope with dangerous drugs, as amphetamines and roids certainly were in the 1960's. Namely, that they are all still here in their eighties, mostly in very good health it seems. Snell suffered a cardiac problem a few years ago and has had a pacemaker fitted, but that's hardly unusual for 80 year old man. Up until that point, he was still an active sportsman competing at world level in several different sports as a master.
Josy Barthel, the 1952 Olympic champion in the 1500m was accused (rumoured) of using methamphetamine. Barthel died at 65 years of age.
In 2006, Barthel was accused of doping by sports journalist Erik Eggers in the German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel.[2] Eggers cited German physician Oskar Wegener who did research on methamphetamine and other doping substances in the 1950s. Wegener strongly denied saying Barthel had any connection with doping.[3] The use of such substances was neither prohibited nor controlled until the 1960s.[4]
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UtnQisArdUQ/V_pjcTcpkcI/AAAAAAAAAyg/EHKBrXI8fa4hU7n1e1jJZMfov3rZEsfcwCLcB/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Josy%2BBarthel.jpg
So one of the few middle-distance runners to die early from that period was actually accused of taking peds, unlike all the others, and this 'proves' that they were all taking speed and other things?
No it rather proves or counts as circumstantial evidence that most of the top middle-distance guys weren't using amphetamines back then.
Jesus, the logic I have to argue against here.
Coevett wrote:
Beethoven wrote:
Josy Barthel, the 1952 Olympic champion in the 1500m was accused (rumoured) of using methamphetamine. Barthel died at 65 years of age.
In 2006, Barthel was accused of doping by sports journalist Erik Eggers in the German newspaper Der Tagesspiegel.[2] Eggers cited German physician Oskar Wegener who did research on methamphetamine and other doping substances in the 1950s. Wegener strongly denied saying Barthel had any connection with doping.[3] The use of such substances was neither prohibited nor controlled until the 1960s.[4]
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-UtnQisArdUQ/V_pjcTcpkcI/AAAAAAAAAyg/EHKBrXI8fa4hU7n1e1jJZMfov3rZEsfcwCLcB/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Josy%2BBarthel.jpgSo one of the few middle-distance runners to die early from that period was actually accused of taking peds, unlike all the others, and this 'proves' that they were all taking speed and other things?
No it rather proves or counts as circumstantial evidence that most of the top middle-distance guys weren't using amphetamines back then.
Jesus, the logic I have to argue against here.
No. I was just outlining a single case. I did not mention this situation applies to other runners.
Though you have in the past made allegations of runner who have passed away "early" as potential signs of doping for that particular runner. Using that argument you said runners from that country are dopers. Go back a few pages in this thread and you will see your comments.
You are quite well known for your contradictions, when they serve your argument.
Long save Lord Coe!
Beethoven wrote:
No. I was just outlining a single case. I did not mention this situation applies to other runners.
Though you have in the past made allegations of runner who have passed away "early" as potential signs of doping for that particular runner. Using that argument you said runners from that country are dopers. Go back a few pages in this thread and you will see your comments.
You are quite well known for your contradictions, when they serve your argument.
Long save Lord Coe!
Oh hi Casual Observer/Spade Detector.
You seem completely incapable of logic. Yes, I have made allegations that an EPO era runner from East Africa passing away early is a possible indication they doped. Yes, this German guy does sound like he may well have been one of the few guys who doped in that era. This makes me inconsistent? A number of East African runners from the EPO era have died early, including elite runners, including one elite runner (can't remember the name) who I think even the autopsy said was likely due to ped use.
At least have the integrity to post under your registered names of Casual Observer or Spade Detector so I can just ignore you and your cretinous 'logic'.
Not to take away from this excellent exchange, but Josy Barthel was from Luxembourg.
Coevett wrote:
Oh hi Casual Observer/Spade Detector.
You seem completely incapable of logic. Yes, I have made allegations that an EPO era runner from East Africa passing away early is a possible indication they doped. Yes, this German guy does sound like he may well have been one of the few guys who doped in that era. This makes me inconsistent? A number of East African runners from the EPO era have died early, including elite runners, including one elite runner (can't remember the name) who I think even the autopsy said was likely due to ped use.
At least have the integrity to post under your registered names of Casual Observer or Spade Detector so I can just ignore you and your cretinous 'logic'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7UbqROaXaUWe will stay what we are wrote:
Not to take away from this excellent exchange, but Josy Barthel was from Luxembourg.
Coevett wrote:
Oh hi Casual Observer/Spade Detector.
You seem completely incapable of logic. Yes, I have made allegations that an EPO era runner from East Africa passing away early is a possible indication they doped. Yes, this German guy does sound like he may well have been one of the few guys who doped in that era. This makes me inconsistent? A number of East African runners from the EPO era have died early, including elite runners, including one elite runner (can't remember the name) who I think even the autopsy said was likely due to ped use.
At least have the integrity to post under your registered names of Casual Observer or Spade Detector so I can just ignore you and your cretinous 'logic'.
Josy Barthel had a great running action.
Also was a Harvard graduate. This has nothing to do with this topic but pretty 90% of this thread also nothing to do with the OP's question haha.
Harvard wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7UbqROaXaUWe will stay what we are wrote:
Not to take away from this excellent exchange, but Josy Barthel was from Luxembourg.
Josy Barthel had a great running action.
Also was a Harvard graduate. This has nothing to do with this topic but pretty 90% of this thread also nothing to do with the OP's question haha.
Aouita probably could have run slightly faster if O'Mara didn't just run off way ahead of Aouita.
I wonder what Aouita's stride length!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e073u8gkvuA&t=192sCoeuita wrote:
Harvard wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7UbqROaXaUJosy Barthel had a great running action.
Also was a Harvard graduate. This has nothing to do with this topic but pretty 90% of this thread also nothing to do with the OP's question haha.
Aouita probably could have run slightly faster if O'Mara didn't just run off way ahead of Aouita.
I wonder what Aouita's stride length!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e073u8gkvuA&t=192s
Coe could have run faster in his 1986 PB run. The pace maker inhibited Coe.
Coe lost 2 tenths running around the rabbit. At least!
Coe Fan wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsHwft0p99gCoe lost 2 tenths running around the rabbit. At least!
Coe got 2 seconds from running on Rieti track. At least.
just tell the true story wrote:
Coe Fan wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsHwft0p99gCoe lost 2 tenths running around the rabbit. At least!
Coe got 2 seconds from running on Rieti track. At least.
Based on what?
The track was certified and re measured on several occasions as being 400m.
A previous record by Ovett was set on same track and Morceli also broke the record on there. El G ran some fast times there too, but run even faster on other tracks.
Rieti was just held at a time in the season when many athletes were at a peak but more relaxed, just after a major championship.
In that Rieti race in 86, Coe would have been 0.2- 0.3 faster had he not had to run wide to pass Chesire on the bend after the bell. But what isn’t do obvious from the angle behind the runners, and what Coe claimed in his book, is the fact that he had just upped the pace as he was in front approaching the bell, when Chesire decided to sprint past Coe and then slow markedly in the last 30m or so before the bell. Coe was slowed, then decided to go past the pacer on the bend. He believed the incident cost him ‘at least half a second ‘ and the WR.
