Peer Mediator wrote:
extreme bias wrote:
It was also the home track of the IAAF’s official statistician, Roberto Quercetano, who was present that night and so I’m pretty sure everything was in order.
Everyone knows that elite 800 and 1500 guys run about 1 (800) or 2 (1500) seconds faster at Monaco than anywhere else. Regardless of why that is, all top meet track today would be of the latest Mondo material, which are certainly faster than those synthetic ones from 1980.
Quercetani was IAAF's "official statistician"? Can you please give a source for this?
OK, let's add a second to Monaco 800m times and compare the winning times to the completely normal Rieti times:
Monaco 1:44.50 / Rieti 1:42.01
Monaco 1:44.11 / Rieti 1:41.01
Monaco 1:43.63 / Rieti 1:41.33
Monaco 1:44.13 / Rieti 1:43.74
Monaco 1 :44.72 / Rieti 1:43.93
Monaco 1:43.46 / Rieti 1:43.83
Monaco 1:44.09 / Rieti 1:42.64
According to this rule, the best times ever: Monaco 1:42.89 / Rieti 1:41.01.
Monaco has had always close to perfect pacemaking in the 800m (always mid 49 at 400 for the PM) . Last year for Rieti was 2015 with already weak (even for Rieti standards) fields.
So, the winning times from Rieti from the period 2009-2014 would be whopping 1.43 seconds faster than from Monaco - good that everyone knows that a second must be added.
For the 1500m lets add the two seconds to the winning times:
Monaco 3:31.16 / Rieti 3:31.44
OK, the two second rule seems to make sense - if we just totally ignore that Monaco is one of the biggest meetings in the calendar and Rieti just was a (at best) 2nd rate meeting.
But, what's the origin of this rule at all? Why 1/2 seconds? Why not 1.5/3 or 2/4 or 2.5/5 or ... or 0/0?
This rule is just complete nonsense and not "everyone" knows it.
Monaco has seen great times in the last decade, especially in the 1500m. The most likely explanation for me is , that they have had the best pacemaking, regularly the by far deepest field of the season, top weather and maybe most important at all: some psychological effect. Athletes focus on this meet while they have seen the great results from others in the previous years.
To state as some fact, that the times in the 800m/1500m are 1/2 seconds faster than anywhere else is just made up and not rational.
Monaco is just the best example of the standard of current mondo tracks on the circuit compared to the synthetic ones of the 80's. It does not necessarily mean that Monaco is 1 sec faster over 800m than other tracks currently being used, but rather it is about that much faster than the elite tracks of the 80's.
If you make a list of the top 10 athletes who set their 800m lifetime personal best in Monaco and compare their best time not on the Monaco track, you get a mean average difference of 0.452secs. (best non Monaco time in brackets): -
- Tuka 1:42.51 (1:43.84), Bosse 1:42.53 (1:43.41), Cheruiyot 1:42.54 (1:43.14), Kamel 1:42.79 (1:43.11), Souleiman 1:42.97 (1:43.08), Rotich 1:43.13 (1:43.15), Kiprop 1:43.15 (1:43.17), McBride 1:43.20 (1:43.90), Berian 1:43.34 (1:43.84). Singoei 1:43.38 (1:43.42).
So based on the fastest 10 men who have set pbs on either track, those doing so on Rieti have run times on other tracks closer to their Rieti pb than those doing the same thing in Monaco.
Another consideration is the fact that the likes of Brussels and Zurich have been the location of many Diamond League finals in recent years, and they have been as much about winning (the prize) as running a fast time. That will obviously affect the numbers of fast times over a long period. Rieti was always a more relaxed setting geared up for fast times in the middle distances.
Let's now look at another event, the 1500m, and the unsubstantiated suggestions made against the reliability of Coe's and Ovett's times on the Rieti track.
I looked at the fastest 10 individual performers on each of the following 4 tracks: - Rieti, Brussels, Zurich and Monaco.
Rieti - El G (3:26.96), Morceli (3:28.86), Lagat (3:29.3), Coe (3:29.77), Kiplagat (3:30.13), Ngeny (3:30.42), Kiprop (3:30.46), Bile (3:30.55), Kipkurui (3:30.73) & Ovett (3:30.77).
The mean average of these 10 times = 3:29.80
Brussels - El G (3:26.12), Lagat (3:26.34), Baala (3:28.98), Niyongabo (3:29.18), Ngeny (3:29.19), W. Chirchir (3:29.29), Cram (3:30.15), T. Kiptanui (3:30.24), Heshko (3:30.33), A. Kipchirchir (3:30.46).
The mean average of these 10 times = 3:29.03
Zurich - El G (3:26.45), Lagat (3:27.40), Ngeny (3:28.12), Cacho (3:28.95), Niyongabo (3:29.43), Rotich (3:29.91), Morceli (3:30.06), Kibowen (3:30.18), T. Cheruiyot (3:30.27), D. Komen (3:30.49).
The mean average of these 10 times = 3:29.13
Monaco - Kiprop (3:26.69), El G (3:27.34), Morceli (3:27.52), Kiplagat (3:27.64), Lagat (3:27.91), T. Cheruiyot (3:28.41), Makhloufi (3:28.75), Iguider (3:28.79), Manangoi (3:28.80), Farah (3:28.81).
The mean average of these 10 times = 3:28.07
Clearly Monaco is significantly faster than Brussels, Zurich and Rieti. In addition, both Zurich and Brussels are c. 0.70 faster than Rieti! If the 800 athletes all flocked to run at Rieti because it was somehow a dodgy track, then why didn't the 1500m runners who raced there experience this advantage over Zurich and Brussels ?
I did the same analysis for the 4 tracks above over 1500m, but this time just taking the 10 best performances. So, for example, 6 of the fastest 10 times run at Zurich were by El G. I haven't the time to type the individual breakdown of athletes and times (but I have it, so can type it up another time if I can be bothered), but I will give the average time for each track:-
Rieti - 3:29.37;
Brussels - 3:28.51;
Zurich - 3:27.87;
Monaco - 3:27.84.
Again, this shows that Rieti is on average c. 0.8 secs slower than Brussels for 1500m, and c. 1.5 secs slower than Zurich and Monaco. Though the difference between Zurich and Monaco is negligible, it is worth noting that whereas Zurich (along with Brussels and Rieti) comes towards the end of season, just after the major champs, when one would expect athletes to be near to peak condition, at least in a Championship year, Monaco stands alone in being in the middle of the season (usually early July) and invariably about 3 weeks before a major champs; when athletes should yet to reach their season peaks.
There is nothing sceptical or anomalous about Rieti compared to Zurich or Brussels; indeed it seems somewhat slower for 1500m races. The biggest anomaly by far is Monaco.
Not going on a single point which was addressed to you.
"Everyone knows that elite 800 and 1500 guys run about 1 (800) or 2 (1500) seconds faster at Monaco than anywhere else."
That's what you have written. So, you were wrong? Than maybe you should clarify that.
Quercetani was the "official IAAF statistician" back in the day? What's the meaning of this at all, can you please give some confirmation? Or just admit that it completely was made up by you.
All of your post gives no sense at all - maybe you re-read it?
Your statistics are wrong.
Tuka (1:43.47) and McBride (1:43.51) have run faster outside Monaco, Tuka while winning a silver a the worlds - maybe you havn't seen this one, because it doesn't fit your theory?
But what's the point at all of a comparison monaco 800m / non Monaco 800m which lists only athletes which have set their PB in Monaco? It's almost useless.
Sp, you are really making the point that Rieti times are fast BECAUSE it's a low key, non pressure meeting? Ludicrious. The 1500m races usually were filled with local italian runners, Zurich always has had the best possible lineup.
The times from Rieti are the biggest anomaly in top athletics in the last 40 years, EVERYONE knows it.
So, your laughable stats CLEARLY SHOW that Monaco is significantly faster than Rieti in the 1500m? But slower in the 800m, why is that? Have you checked any other event? Have you compared the lineups every year?
You have contraticted yourself in this post. Is Monaco clearly faster than any other track or not?
I adressed all the 'points' you made re the Monaco track, but you clearly didn't read clearly what I originally wrote.
Deanouk wrote:Everyone knows that elite 800 and 1500 guys run about 1 (800) or 2 (1500) seconds faster at Monaco than anywhere else. Regardless of why that is, all top meet track today would be of the latest Mondo material, which are certainly faster than those synthetic ones from 1980.
I have highlighted the word, 'about', to show a rough, non specific time; an estimate. I then backed this up in my subsequent post by showing that from stats (up to about Aug 2019, hence the lack of updated info on Tuka) of the fastest 10 men on the Monaco track ever over 800m, the average time faster they have run there than any other track in their careers is 0.45secs. If one goes on to looking at the top 20 fastest men at Monaco, or looking at the mean average difference between what any athlete ran at Monaco compared to their best time on any other track in any specific season, then you would get more data with which to compare.
Your stats looked at just 5 or 6 years at the beginning of the last decade and compared just 2 tracks; Monaco and Rieti. I never even mentioned Rieti in my original post, that was your choice to include a track that hasn't even held a meet in the last 5 years or so.
Moreover, I never stated that, 'Monaco was 1 secs faster than Rieti between 2009 and 2015', which is the statement your stats seem to be trying to contradict!
I have also highlighted the phrase, 'Regardless of why that is,' to express lack of explanation for why Monaco throws up very fast times in the middle distances. Hence I have not dismissed or questioned the possibility the faster times are not indeed the result of several factors, including weather conditions, prize money, great weather, pacing, etc. The only thing I claimed as a fact is that the 'latest Mondo material, which are certainly faster than those synthetic ones from 1980. '. Which is the relevant part in the discussion on this thread about expectations of Brazier running a 1:41 (seemingly with ease) on Monaco.
I then provided evidence (as of Aug 2019) supporting the suggestion (for whatever reason) that times run on the Monaco track over 1500m tend to be "about" (see definition above) 2 secs faster than on other top tracks. For this I didn't provide 1 track as comparison or just a narrow 6 year period, I took the top 10 performers on what many would consider the top 4 meets in producing fast times over the last few decades; Rieti, Brussels, Zurich and Monaco; and calculated the mean average for each. These 4 tracks have all consistently produced good pacing and top names running in the 1500m. The results showed that Monaco was a second faster than any of the other tracks and 'about' 1.5secs faster than the average of the other 3.
extreme-bias wrote:But what's the point at all of a comparison monaco 800m / non Monaco 800m which lists only athletes which have set their PB in Monaco? It's almost useless.
No, it makes perfect sense, as only the very top athletes are invited to Monaco, and many are not able to run there, so they are unable to produce data to be compared. Almost every Diamond League race lays on a 49/50 sec ist 400m in the elite 800 races, so it is actually making the odds far better for any athlete running in Monaco, to produce a faster time in any one of a number of other races at other venues. I never said it was fullproof, but if Monaco wasn't faster than other tracks, then one would expect to see elites running very close to their Monaco pbs elsewhere!
extreme-bias wrote:Sp, you are really making the point that Rieti times are fast BECAUSE it's a low key, non pressure meeting? Ludicrious. The 1500m races usually were filled with local italian runners, Zurich always has had the best possible lineup.
No, I was actually making the point that Rieti was SLOW compared to Monaco. Traditionally Brussels, Zurich and Rieti were always held after any major champs that may have been held in any given year, and were invariably furnished with very good pacing. Yes, the overall depth was always better in Zurich and Brussels, but Rieti regularly had 2 or 3 top athletes in any race that followed a good pace.
extreme-bias wrote: The times from Rieti are the biggest anomaly in top athletics in the last 40 years, EVERYONE knows it.
No. Well certainly not as anomalous as Monaco or Zurich or Brussels.
extreme-bias wrote:So, your laughable stats CLEARLY SHOW that Monaco is significantly faster than Rieti in the 1500m? But slower in the 800m, why is that?
No, I produced no stats that showed Monaco was slower than Rieti over 800m.
extreme-bias wrote: "Everyone knows that elite 800 and 1500 guys run about 1 (800) or 2 (1500) seconds faster at Monaco than anywhere else."
That's what you have written. So, you were wrong? Than maybe you should clarify that.
OK. Let's start with the fact that Monaco was re-layed in 2010 (prior to the meet there that year), and the purpose was to make it fast and top of the range.
This is an interesting exert: -
"The work will focus on the resurfacing of the areas concerned: the first few centimetres of the upper layer of the track will be scraped off, then replaced by rubber resin, cast in one jointless block. This is made possible due to the physico-chemical compatibility between the new and old resin. The track will be faster and therefore conducive to new records, including at the next Herculis athletics meeting - Diamond League on Thursday 22nd July 2010."
The Monaco meet was ranked No.2 in 2009 (probably behind Zurich), but was already an established meet, with Baala running 3:30.96 in 2009.
But the fast times en masse didn't start until.... 2010!
Below you will find a comparison between what many of the elite athletes ran the 1500m on the new track of Monaco, compared with their best time run ANYWHERE else that same season, not compared to just 1 specific other meet as you provided. This is something I analysed some time ago, so it is only for the 5 seasons between 2010 and 2015. I'm sure that something similar would also be seen if done with the subsequent years that followed.
In 2010 the 5 fastest men all set their times in Monaco. I did a bit of research and I've put their time in Monaco followed by their non Monaco season's best time:
1. Kiprop ~ 3:29.27 (3:30.61) difference - 1.34
2. Laalou ~ 3:29.53 (3:32.75) " - 3.22
3. Choge ~ 3:30.22 (3:31.81) ' - 1.59
4. Wheating ~ 3:30.90 (3:37.52! - although he ran a Mile in 3:51.74 which = 3:34.57, so I'll take that) - 3.67
5. Gregson ~ 3:31.06 (3:35.42) difference - 4.36.
That's an average difference of 2.84 secs faster at Monaco for those athletes. The fastest non Monaco performance in 2010 was Kiplagat's 3:30.61 in Berlin.
2011 was a bit of a down year, but the meet still produced 4 times in the top 10 for the year.
2. (second fastest that year) Kiplagat ~ 3:30.47 (3:31.39) difference - 0.92
6. Chepseba ~ 3:31.74 (3:30.94) difference + 0.80 * The only athlete in the past 6 seasons (5 if not counting this season) listed here that has run a faster time on another track other than Monaco .
7. Kaki ~ 3:31.76 (didn't run any other listed 1500 that year)
8. Willis ~ 3:31.79 (3:33.22) difference - 1.43
15. Cheboi ~ 3:32.45 (3:33.82) " - 1.37
That's an average of 0.73 secs faster at Monaco for the 4 with other listed times for 1500 that year. The fastest non Monaco performance in 2011 was Kiprop's 3:30.46 in Rieti.
2012 had 6 athletes in the top 10 coming from Monaco's race: -
1. Kiprop ~ 3:28.88 (3:29.78) difference - 0.90
3. Chepseba ~ 3:29.77 ( 3:29.90) " - 0.13
5. Willis ~ 3:30.35 (3:34.70) " - 4.35
6. Makhloufi ~ 3:30.80 (3:32.58) " - 1.78
7. Birgen ~ 3:31.00 (3:31.17) " - 0.17
9. Kiplagat Seuri! ~ 3:31.61 (3:33.27) " - 1.66.
That's an average of 1.50 secs faster at Monaco for the 6 with other listed times for 1500 that year. The fastest non Monaco performance in 2012 was Kiplagat's 3:29.63 in Doha.
1. Kiprop ~ 3:27.72 (3:31.13) difference - 3.41
2. Farah ~ 3:28.81 (no other listed 1500 for 2013)
3. Ndiku ~ 3:29.50 (3:33.41) difference - 3.91
5. Birgen ~ 3:30.77 (3:31.90) " - 1.13
6. Tanui-Ozbilen ~ 3:31.30 (3:35.09) " - 3.79
7. Cheboi ~ 3:31.53 (3:32.85) " - 1.32
That's an average of 2.71 secs faster at Monaco for the 5 with other listed times for 1500 that year. The fastest non Monaco performance in 2013 was Kiplagat's 3:30.13 in Rieti.
1. Kiplagat ~ 3:27.64 (3:29.70) difference - 2.06
2. Kiprop ~ 3:28.45 (3:29.18) " - 0.73
3. Kwemoi ~ 3:28.81 (3:31.48) " - 2.67
4. Souleiman ~ 3:29.58 (3:30.16) " - 0.58
5. Iguider ~ 3:29.83 (3:32.09) " - 2.26
=6. Wote ~ 3:29.91 (3:30.86) " - 0.95
=6. Willis ~ 3:29.91 (3:34.72) " - 4.81
10. Manzano ~ 3:30.98 (3:34.40) " - 3.42
11. Centrowitz ~ 3:31.09 (3:32.70) " - 1.61
That's an average of 2.12 secs faster at Monaco for the 9 with other listed times for 1500 that year. The fastest non Monaco performance in 2014 was Kiprop's 3:29.18 in Doha.
Monaco clearly has great credentials for fast time and was clearly the fastest/best track in the world for middle distances. This analysis doesn't prove it is in any way illegal, and is certainly not short, but it does raise the question as to why top athletes run on average of 2.03 secs faster (based on the data of the 29 athletes above over the past 5 seasons) on the Monaco track than on any other, over the course of the season?
I would suggest looking at the above data that the number of 'fast times' increased by 2012 and thereafter, as athletes realised that it was an incredibly fast track.
Roberto Quercetani was the founder of the AFTS in 1950, which was established as the statistical body to support the IAAF. He was a native of Firenze and I read an article from a magazine or an extract from a book some years ago, where he stated that he had been present that night when Coe ran his WR. I did read it, have total faith in its validity, but am unable to produce a link or exact reference at present. While he never had the title, 'Official statistician to the IAAF' he has produced numerous lists of statistics and data for them (initially for putting together heats at championships) and has written numerous publications in association with the IAAF.