A few seconds? You guys talk as if that was nothing. A few seconds faster is El G's records, which no one has surpassed in over quarter of a century. On Letsrun everyone is "a few seconds faster" with better pacing. However the real world with real times shows they were no faster than they were, despite countless races over the distance.
If Cram closed in 53, which is 3:33 mile pace, he could have certainly have run at least 1 second faster with better pacing.
On Letsrun everyone is "a few seconds faster" with better pacing because there are many knowledgeable people on Letsrun who understand pacing differences in a racing scenario.
It is an absurdity to argue that his last lap was a measure of how fast he could run 4. You show that fantasies are the stock in trade of this place. With better pacing he may have run more even laps. With a faster 3rd lap he would have run a slower last lap. He may have improved a few tenths at the finish - but then we will never know. But it can't be stated as a fact that he could have run faster because he didn't.
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
Nick Willis made a comment without much apparent reflection. I would be interested to know how he explains the fact that the records for his distances (and others still standing) were set in old shoes if the modern shoes offer a such an advantage. I assume you can think of yourself - how do you explain it?
The records have been falling. And don't you claim that all records are dirty? Then maybe the shoes are making athletes approach or beat doped up times.
It may surprise you to know but in the 70's we had muesli and low fibre diets (which is what fruit is) and coffee. We also used energy bars and protein shakes. Runners diets haven't changed significantly in over half a century.
Pro runners' diets have changed a lot. Not in what goes on the table but in term of supplements, timing of intake, precise amounts for optimized recovery/performance.
Just because things existed in the 70s, it doesn't mean they were used as they are today.
Why don't you see pros drinking gatorade or isostar anymore?
Diets are basically food. Young athletes who train hard can eat just about anything. The rest is mumbo jumbo.
The records for the 1500/mile haven't been falling. Nor Komen's 3k record. Or the women's E Bloc records or Flojo's. Modern shoes/tracks/nutrition should have put paid to all of those. They haven't.
A few seconds? You guys talk as if that was nothing. A few seconds faster is El G's records, which no one has surpassed in over quarter of a century. On Letsrun everyone is "a few seconds faster" with better pacing. However the real world with real times shows they were no faster than they were, despite countless races over the distance.
Pro runners' diets have changed a lot. Not in what goes on the table but in term of supplements, timing of intake, precise amounts for optimized recovery/performance.
Just because things existed in the 70s, it doesn't mean they were used as they are today.
Why don't you see pros drinking gatorade or isostar anymore?
Diets are basically food. Young athletes who train hard can eat just about anything. The rest is mumbo jumbo.
I didn't know you are a science denier. There's no point trying to have a discussion with you if you deny scientific facts, like the advances in shoe technology and nutrition/hydration.
Pro runners' diets have changed a lot. Not in what goes on the table but in term of supplements, timing of intake, precise amounts for optimized recovery/performance.
Just because things existed in the 70s, it doesn't mean they were used as they are today.
Why don't you see pros drinking gatorade or isostar anymore?
Diets are basically food. Young athletes who train hard can eat just about anything. The rest is mumbo jumbo.
The shoes aren't worth that. The world records for those distances, set over a quarter of a century ago and still standing, were run in old shoes. There are women's records set in the 80's, in old shoes, still on the books. If modern shoes add anything it will be in fractions of a second, not seconds, or all the old records would have been eclipsed. Of course, today's athletes in their modern shoes may not be as good as the best in the past ..
Nick Willis disagrees with you. I will go with Nick's opinion.
It doesn’t matter if fking El G disagrees with him, the shoes are not worth 2 seconds in a 1500. Not even close.
Add 2 seconds to all the times since 2019 and then compare them with previous years and you’ll see how dumb this is. From 2014-18, 3:30 was broken 21 times by 11 different athletes, but in the last 5 years it has only been broken twice by one guy… Yeah, ok lol
In Zurich, Oslo... he would have run something like 3:32.0 on this day.
Because you stated that 3:31.36 was the best he could do.
On a "normal" track, 3:31.36 was the best he could do.
Rieti was a legal track and for sure the times count (Ovett achieved a legal WR on it), but they are not reflective of the athletes capability on a "normal" track.
As said, on non-Rieti track, Ovett would have run something like 3:32.0 on the day.
In his prime with modern training, shoes, nutrition, etc?
I’m thinking that Steve Cram, who ran 3:46, with modern training, shoes and nutrition, could run about 3:45.
He also closed his 3:46 with a 53 last 400 I think, so who knows if he runs a bit more even paced as well. Makes me wonder how much faster Seb Coe's already insane 800 PR would be today too.
Runners would finish a half marathon and head to the nearest pub for greasy food and a few pints. Elite athletes don't do that anymore. It wouldn't be better nutrition that would make Ovett run 3:20 but maybe if his ceiling was 3:29, better nutrition might help him enough in training to allow him to go 3:28
This is what I remember. You trained hard, you ate hard and some drank hard. Yes, there was protein powder and stuff... but nobody counted calories. Nobody ate like birds... except maybe Coe.
I think most runners of that era... if they were running today would be a K or two lighter. And the other thing I notice about today's guys. They are trained in their core a lot more than the guys back then. You see more extremely lean guys with abs showing now. Back then you didn't.
The one thing about all three of those Brits though. If they had been raised in the states... They might not have ever seen the long side of 400 meters. Coaches wouldn't move up guys who were that fast in the 400 to the middle distances. Certainly not past the 800 meters anyway.
Tracks are faster. Gear is better. Shoes are way better. So to me it's not a stretch to think Ovett is worth a second overall on that basis, which puts him at 3:29 high.
Nick Willis disagrees with you. I will go with Nick's opinion.
It doesn’t matter if fking El G disagrees with him, the shoes are not worth 2 seconds in a 1500. Not even close.
Add 2 seconds to all the times since 2019 and then compare them with previous years and you’ll see how dumb this is. From 2014-18, 3:30 was broken 21 times by 11 different athletes, but in the last 5 years it has only been broken twice by one guy… Yeah, ok lol
At least five of those 11 have been either suspended, involved in doping controversy, or had a training partner suspended.
Perhaps more importantly, only Kiprop, busted for EPO, and Kiplagat ran under 3:30 outside of Monaco - once each The 1500m has only been run twice at Monaco since 2019. One of those occasions Tim intentionally slowed it down, and in the other Jakob was sick (still ran 3:28).
In 2014 - 2018 3:30 was broken twice by two athletes outside Monaco. In 2019 - 2023, despite little racing in 2021, 3:30 was broken 31 times outside Monaco, by 12 different athletes.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Because you stated that 3:31.36 was the best he could do.
On a "normal" track, 3:31.36 was the best he could do.
Rieti was a legal track and for sure the times count (Ovett achieved a legal WR on it), but they are not reflective of the athletes capability on a "normal" track.
As said, on non-Rieti track, Ovett would have run something like 3:32.0 on the day.
On a "normal" track, 3:31.36 was the best he could do.
Rieti was a legal track and for sure the times count (Ovett achieved a legal WR on it), but they are not reflective of the athletes capability on a "normal" track.
As said, on non-Rieti track, Ovett would have run something like 3:32.0 on the day.
Diets are basically food. Young athletes who train hard can eat just about anything. The rest is mumbo jumbo.
I didn't know you are a science denier. There's no point trying to have a discussion with you if you deny scientific facts, like the advances in shoe technology and nutrition/hydration.
I don't deny advances. I deny they mean anything like you think they do. If you want to look at the greatest aids to enhancing performance and recovery you need look no further than doping. The athletes know this since it is everywhere in sports now.
So what. So did Snell when he ran a 53x last lap to take the wr in '62. It is a 4 lap race, not 1.
Then Snell could have run faster that day.
If that's the argument then everybody who runs a faster last lap could have run faster. So if Cram could have run faster so could just about everyone else. But he didn't and neither did they.
This post was edited 48 seconds after it was posted.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.