Most Talented Runner in History? Daniel Komen or Kenenisa Bekele?

John Wesley Harding wrote:

See, I’m not sure that Bekele has been grinding for 20 years straight—religiously regimented seems more like Kipchoge’s M.O., or even Geb’s. There have been anecdotes about Bekele taking time off and fattening up on more jelly rolls than Van Morrison could poke a stick at. The fact that when he manages to straighten up for a few months he can run 2:01:41 at age 37 is one of the reasons he may be the most talented ever.

Good point, although I think everyone tends to exaggerate when they talk about Bekele taking time off and getting out of shape. Yes, maybe he gains a little weight and loses fitness, but perhaps that's also what has allowed him to have such a long career - he's not ALWAYS punishing his body in training.

The big 3 without a doubt:

Bekele, Haile and El Guerrouj.

El G unfortunately retired very young and ran only few times the 5K still ran amazingly well and even defeated Bekele in the Olympic final with a 51 sec last lap.

ex-runner wrote:

Coevett wrote:

Cliff notes for this thread.

All the most talented runners of the last 150 years were born in 2 or 3 doping hotspots and at their peak within 5 years or so of the height of the EPO era.

Personally, I think the most talented runners of the last 150 years were all born in England a couple years apart and around their peak in the period where doping was legal with steroids and blood transfusions and there was no testing.

You have been corrected on this blatant lie several times, but keep peddling it.

Steroids were banned in 1975 and there was a reliable test for them from that point. Doping was not legal. There was in competition testing from that time and all world records had to be ratified with a negative drug test. British athletes (and other European nations) introduced random out of competition testing for their athletes from the early 1980's and out of season random testing in 1985.

Blood transfusions were banned in 1985. The only evidence of athletes that used them before this period are a small group of distance (predominantly 10k) athletes from Finland and Italy. There is no evidence of any middle distance athletes having taken them during this time.

Kenya, Ethiopia and Morocco would not have tested their own athletes, randomly or otherwise, during the period referred to with regards to Bekele, El G, Ngeny, etc. We know for a fact that it was only a few years ago that Kenya was forced to create their own testing lab, and look at how many have been caught doping since then! Beforehand, for decades, we were constantly told that many 'poor' countries in Africa (and doubtless some other areas) couldn't afford to test their athletes, and that we should just accept that!

We know that even today, athletes like Amos and Kiprop have been called and warned that drug testers were going to arrive the next day, so that they could make their excuses and head off for some training in a remote mountain area of the country where testers couldn't or didn't want to bother to reach them.

It is laughable to suggest that the likes of EL G, Komen, Ngeny et al were not using EPO at a time when there was no test for it. There wasn't a semi reliable one available until 2006. The idea that so many of the world records and many of the fastest times ever for middle and distance events, were set en masse in that 12 year period between 1994 and 2006. The evidence is overwhelming, not least the fact that no one has appoached those times in any event longer than 1000m in the 14 years since, with the acception of Kiprop, who (surprise, surprise) was busted a few years later for EPO.

I am sure the likes of Bekele, Geb, El G, etc were hugely talented athletes, but let us not be so hypocritical to hail them as the greatest ever, without at least acknowledging the strong likelyhood they were doping in a 'free for all' era. Trying to justify their actions or deflect by insinuating that those from other periods 'might have been doping' too, despite no evidence at all, is not a valid argument either.

Looking at the evidence, there were many sprinters, throwers and female athletes busted for drug use in the 70's and 80's, but no elite male middle distance runners I can think of. They were all subject to the same scrutiny and testing procedures, so why the discrepency? If you were around in those days, or even if you read literature on the subject written at the time, steroids were really only being used for strength and power events. They were not considered (which is not the same as stating they were not effective) at the time to be of any use for middle and long distance runners, hence the logical conclusion is that none, or at least very few, ever used them.

How has no one mentioned Peter Snell?

birdbeard wrote:

Probably Bekele, but Ngeny is up there IMO. Amos might have the best engine (matched only by his horrific form). El G if we suspend belief on his usage..

Really!

Are you naive enough to put a question mark against El g's exploits but accept Ngeny's and Bekele's performances at face value!? LOL.

Ngeny beat EL G (who you believe was on EPO?) at the biggest event, ran practically the same times (3:43 mile - not approached by anyone in 20 years since) and apparently arrived as a world beater after a couple of years since starting to run! He then gets pulled from the 2001 World Champs at the 11th hour, with no explanation, only for him to then be involved in a 'career destroying' car accident later that year, which enabled him to return as a 3:32 runner, but prevented him for ever approaching his former times thereafter. His career trajectory is as fishy as Komen's. At least El G was a teenage prodigy and maintained a long, consistent career.

Little Mary Decker.

Vanillanova wrote:

How has no one mentioned Peter Snell?

Cause he lost to a HS Jim Ryun:) Snell is undoubtably one of the all time greats but he just doesn't come across as an insane talent they way starting running and 2 years later 3:39 and being an olympian does. If you go much before them, the times are so slow it is hard to be too impressed.

In the end we have no way of knowing who maxed their talent out the most. Telling who got 99.9% versus 99.8% isn't something we can measure.

Vanillanova wrote:

How has no one mentioned Peter Snell?

Good point. Snell, along with Coe, is arguably the greatest ever exponent of the classical middle distance events.

I don't think, unlike the majority on this thread, that 'most talented' necessarily has to be the one with the 'greater range'. In fact I think the 800/1500 double is far more difficult to achieve than the 5/10k double at the Olympics. Several have done the latter, made all the easier in recent times with no heats in the 10k at all, but only 1 person has achieved the 800/1500 double at the Olympics since WW2.

Deanouk wrote:

Looking at the evidence, there were many sprinters, throwers and female athletes busted for drug use in the 70's and 80's, but no elite male middle distance runners I can think of. They were all subject to the same scrutiny and testing procedures, so why the discrepency? If you were around in those days, or even if you read literature on the subject written at the time, steroids were really only being used for strength and power events. They were not considered (which is not the same as stating they were not effective) at the time to be of any use for middle and long distance runners, hence the logical conclusion is that none, or at least very few, ever used them.

Martti Vainio comes to mind instantly. As does Waldemar Cierpinski. Frankly I can't think of many steroid drug busts against sprinters in the 70s and 80s either. Sure there was Ben Johnson and I am sure a few I forgot.

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

Vanillanova wrote:

How has no one mentioned Peter Snell?

Cause he lost to a HS Jim Ryun:) Snell is undoubtably one of the all time greats but he just doesn't come across as an insane talent they way starting running and 2 years later 3:39 and being an olympian does. If you go much before them, the times are so slow it is hard to be too impressed.

In the end we have no way of knowing who maxed their talent out the most. Telling who got 99.9% versus 99.8% isn't something we can measure.

Talent is not synonymous with teen prodigy, meteoric ascendency or times alone.

Talent is achieving things that no one (or very few) else has achieved. If someone is great at 20 and then achieves little or nothing after, then he/she clearly doesn't have the talent to continue working and training at such high levels.

Snell achieved something (800 and 1500 golds at the same Olympics) that no one else has, and held world records at 800m, 1000m and 1 mile, which only 1 other athlete has manged in the modern era.

If your only criteria is fastest times, then the GOATs will always be the current world record holders. This will give a skewed conclusion as the spikes and tracks EL G and Bekele ran with/on would be superior to those used in 1980 and significantly superior to those used in 1964.

Snell's 1:44.3 (grass) and 3:54.1 (cinders) would be worth in the region of 1:43 flat and 3:50/3:51 if run on synthetic, and more like 1:42 mid and 3:48/3:49 on current mondo tracks with carbon plated spikes amongst the competition around today. That would still make him amongst the favourites to win medals today, and he was competing 60 years ago.

Coevett wrote:

Cliff notes for this thread.

All the most talented runners of the last 150 years were born in 2 or 3 doping hotspots and at their peak within 5 years or so of the height of the EPO era.

I generally despise your posts but that was pretty funny.

Although, responding well to PEDs is a talent.

Deanouk wrote:

Vanillanova wrote:

How has no one mentioned Peter Snell?

Good point. Snell, along with Coe, is arguably the greatest ever exponent of the classical middle distance events.

I don't think, unlike the majority on this thread, that 'most talented' necessarily has to be the one with the 'greater range'. In fact I think the 800/1500 double is far more difficult to achieve than the 5/10k double at the Olympics. Several have done the latter, made all the easier in recent times with no heats in the 10k at all, but only 1 person has achieved the 800/1500 double at the Olympics since WW2.

The vast majority of informed fans would agree with you.

Bekele. WR at 5 and 10. Ya can’t beat that.

Yes, but Vainio and Cierpinski (who I don't think was caught, maybe implicated by Stasi files!) were both distance runners, and supports the point I was making about a lack of middle distance (800/1500) males being caught.

John Wesley Harding wrote:

Deanouk wrote:

Good point. Snell, along with Coe, is arguably the greatest ever exponent of the classical middle distance events.

I don't think, unlike the majority on this thread, that 'most talented' necessarily has to be the one with the 'greater range'. In fact I think the 800/1500 double is far more difficult to achieve than the 5/10k double at the Olympics. Several have done the latter, made all the easier in recent times with no heats in the 10k at all, but only 1 person has achieved the 800/1500 double at the Olympics since WW2.

The vast majority of informed fans would agree with you.

Sure, but Makloufi went double silver in that along with a prior 1500 gold, and I'm pretty sure he makes no list at all for greatest distance runners.

To be greatest I think you need range.

It was until recently obvious win for Geb, 3:31 to 2:03:59 (non-clown shoe aided), but now with both Kipchoge and Bekele having 1500s of 332/333 and virtually the same 2:01:40 marathon (clown shoe aided though), it's a real decision to be made.

I guess Bekele on strength of all those XC wins as well, although I'm sure that Geb with the AlphaFly back in 2007 or 8 would have also been sub 202.

Dr. Van Nostrand wrote:

Bekele. WR at 5 and 10. Ya can’t beat that.

Well, Zatopek, Kuts, Iharos, Clarke, Viren, Rono and Geb have all matched that since WW2.

And Iharos and Rono also broke the 3000m world record, something Bekele never managed, despite several attempts.

In the same time only 3 men have held the 800m (or 880yds) and 1 mile simultaneously - Snell, Ryun and Coe.

That proves it's rarer to dominate over the 2 middle distance events than the 2 longer ones.

Oh Please wrote:

John Wesley Harding wrote:

The vast majority of informed fans would agree with you.

Sure, but Makloufi went double silver in that along with a prior 1500 gold, and I'm pretty sure he makes no list at all for greatest distance runners.

To be greatest I think you need range.

It was until recently obvious win for Geb, 3:31 to 2:03:59 (non-clown shoe aided), but now with both Kipchoge and Bekele having 1500s of 332/333 and virtually the same 2:01:40 marathon (clown shoe aided though), it's a real decision to be made.

I guess Bekele on strength of all those XC wins as well, although I'm sure that Geb with the AlphaFly back in 2007 or 8 would have also been sub 202.

There is a difference between greatest 'talent' and greatest 'range'.

Bekele and Geb are definitely at the forefront of any debate over greatest range (1500 to marathon), despite the probable aid they had. Although if you move that range down a bit, it could be argued that Aouita (800 - 10k) had an equally impressive range.

This is not the same as talent. Of course such range requires exceptional talent, but what Ed Moses achieved over just 1 event makes him as equally talented as an athlete. If they'd had a 250mhurdles, a 300m hurdles and a 600m hurdles, then I'm sure Moses would have held world records and won medals at those events too. It is all relative.

Coach Canova thinks Bekele for just pure talent. 6:20 into this interview

Usain Bolt.

Maybe Barry Sanders.