1.42.78 Negative Split 800m - 24.6 last 200m!!!

Rudisha is the greatest given his achievements, but line up the best of all time and Kipketer wins - regardless of how the race is run.

I fully agree.

It's the greatest vs best scenario. You can't go over Rudishas body of work and not give him the title of the greatest.

But best? Hmm, I would take Kipketer head to head in their primes. At his best, Kipketer was and still is the best 800m runner the world has ever seen. Races like the above I believe contribute to that point of view.

And then there was this. How do you run 1 42 indoors and look like you are jogging?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwgZMIMzP7s

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

I fully agree.

It's the greatest vs best scenario. You can't go over Rudishas body of work and not give him the title of the greatest.

But best? Hmm, I would take Kipketer head to head in their primes. At his best, Kipketer was and still is the best 800m runner the world has ever seen. Races like the above I believe contribute to that point of view.

Neither of you is making much sense. Kpketer is the best of all time? Rudisha is the greatest of all time? These are nonsensical and inconsistent assertions.

Troothsayer wrote:

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

I fully agree.

It's the greatest vs best scenario. You can't go over Rudishas body of work and not give him the title of the greatest.

But best? Hmm, I would take Kipketer head to head in their primes. At his best, Kipketer was and still is the best 800m runner the world has ever seen. Races like the above I believe contribute to that point of view.

Neither of you is making much sense. Kpketer is the best of all time? Rudisha is the greatest of all time? These are nonsensical and inconsistent assertions.

No, they are saying that in terms of accomplishments Rudisha is the GOAT. But that Kipketer ran races in such ways that suggest that he is the best 800m runner ever in terms of capacity (would win a H2H against Rudisha). That is of course speculation, but I agree that both Rudisha and Kipketer was stunning and both could have gone faster with perfect races.

cramberrys wrote:

Troothsayer wrote:

Neither of you is making much sense. Kpketer is the best of all time? Rudisha is the greatest of all time? These are nonsensical and inconsistent assertions.

No, they are saying that in terms of accomplishments Rudisha is the GOAT. But that Kipketer ran races in such ways that suggest that he is the best 800m runner ever in terms of capacity (would win a H2H against Rudisha). That is of course speculation, but I agree that both Rudisha and Kipketer was stunning and both could have gone faster with perfect races.

They are making no sense. Intelligence matters. If I told you that Jefferson was the greatest President of all time BUT Lincoln was the best President of all time, what the hell does that even mean?

This Kipketer race has been mentioned here before as the fastest negative split 800.

It also reinforces that a positive split is the best way to run a fast 800 since his PR is more than a second faster.

And no world class 800 runner gets a PR with an even or negative split.

I think the 1997 Kipketer was slightly better than Rudisha at his best. With perfect splits in Zuerich, Kipketer probably was capable of something like 1:40.5. I don't think Coe (81) or Cruz (84) could have beaten him in this kind of form.

Saying who is the best is always a debate but I don't think I have ever seen better form in an 800 runner than Kipketer. Effortless. I would put Coe and Rudisha next to him for elegance and class.

Kicked at 100m to go wrote:

Rudisha is the greatest given his achievements, but line up the best of all time and Kipketer wins - regardless of how the race is run.

I get the sentiment - but Rudisha ran 1:40 essentially solo so he'd probably win in a head to head matchup

Troothsayer wrote:

cramberrys wrote:

No, they are saying that in terms of accomplishments Rudisha is the GOAT. But that Kipketer ran races in such ways that suggest that he is the best 800m runner ever in terms of capacity (would win a H2H against Rudisha). That is of course speculation, but I agree that both Rudisha and Kipketer was stunning and both could have gone faster with perfect races.

They are making no sense. Intelligence matters. If I told you that Jefferson was the greatest President of all time BUT Lincoln was the best President of all time, what the hell does that even mean?

They are talking about athletes not presidents. It can make sense that one athlete is the greatest because of all of their accomplishments but another athlete could’ve beaten them in a 1v1 competition.

Kipketer could do awesome things like he did in this race, but I'd take Rudisha in any given race. A more assertive, versatile racer. Could win from the front in a fast race, slow race, and so on. Never beat himself with bad tactics unlike Kipketer or Coe for that matter.

Troothsayer wrote:

Neither of you is making much sense. Kpketer is the best of all time? Rudisha is the greatest of all time? These are nonsensical and inconsistent assertions.

Dependent on ones interpretation of "best" and "greatest" which it appears the majority here comprehend and you don't. But that's fine - I'll give you some examples and maybe you will take it on - it's a very helpful perspective to have especially in all the "greatest of all time" debates that happen across sports.

"Greatness" transcends era's and is a measure of all things to do with the athlete such as their career body of work, their reputation, their aura, their impact on the game at the time, and yes of course their pure ability at the sport/event (because without a really high level of ability none of the aforementioned probably amounts to anything).

"Best" is a measure of straight up ability at just the sport/event and is purely momentary. It doesn't cover an intangibles, titles/races won, duration of career or dominance - it's just how good the athlete was at their absolute best for the moment of the event.

This concept helps in these discussion across all sports. For example in the NBA there are some (not many but some) that argue in a team sport, there is a guy with 11 rings, who dominated an era and was as revered as any player in history. That player is Bill Russell and there are people that make a claim he is the greatest NBA player ever, which, all things considered is valid point of view. But it's hard to make the case that based on pure basketball ability he's even close to the best player ever - there are multiple centers that have played the game that were better at the sport than he was (Olajuwon, O'Neal, Chamberlain etc) - but as a total package, hard to say they were greater.

Since we are talking 800m running let's use a better example - Peter Snell. Peter Snell ran 1.44.3 on an oddly measured grass track back in 1962, but also ran 1.45.1 to win the second of his 2 Olympic titles (the first man to do it and still only the second man to do so along with Rudisha). But even if we transport Snell across era's (giving him the benefits of modern track and footwear etc) is he really beating Rudisha, Kipketer, Coe, Cruz and even guys like Borzakovskiy, Bungei etc etc? I'm not so sure. But if he isn't the greatest 800m runner ever (I think Rudisha is) he is most certainly #2 on that list because of his career body of work, dominance, aura etc.

Greatest and Best are connected but are slightly different things, I hope that explains the train of thought and glad you could enjoy the clip of the great Kipketer running a race that nobody on earth before or since could run.

Wilson number uno wrote:

I think the 1997 Kipketer was slightly better than Rudisha at his best. With perfect splits in Zuerich, Kipketer probably was capable of something like 1:40.5. I don't think Coe (81) or Cruz (84) could have beaten him in this kind of form.

After Rudisha's WR in London I was with James Templeton (Rudishas manager at the time) and we were talking about the race and he said to me "well we are just happy that Wilson messed it up in Zurich that night or else the record would have been much tougher" and he was specifically referring to Kipketer going out at near suicidal pace in the first 400 that night (48.10 for the pace and probably 48.3 for Wilson) and still somehow breaking the record.

There is zero doubt in my mind that if he had gone through in 49.0 that night he would have run 1.40.5-6. Of course 12 days later he set the WR in Cologne going through in 49.3 and this was after a further two 1.42.xx races (this one in Monaco and then in Brussels).

It's also been mentioned but Kipketer had and probably still has the best running form in the history of distance running (800m upwards). If you could teach economy and fluidity of movement across all levels of fatigue, it's him. It's the only way you can run a 400m in 48.3 and then back it up with a 52.8 (actually miraculous when you really think about it).

Every time I watch this I laugh at the bell when the split comes up and Alan Parry says "oh my word that's fast alright - forty-eight point one-o at 400m!". I also laugh (but also sympathetically and understandably) when Noberto Tellez just steps off the track with 100m to go because he just can't go anymore. Such legendary moments.

Thanks to folks for posts on this thread. I haven't really followed the 800 that closely over the years so I was not 100% familiar with Kipketer's remarkable races. Watching these videos reminds me of watching Komen in the 3000/5000. Both Kipketer and Komen are so smooth - seemingly human perfection for their respective distances.

Thanks!

THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:

Kipketer could do awesome things like he did in this race, but I'd take Rudisha in any given race. A more assertive, versatile racer. Could win from the front in a fast race, slow race, and so on. Never beat himself with bad tactics unlike Kipketer or Coe for that matter.

I'm interested in this comment, especially the assertive and versatile part.

I agree that Rudisha was career-wise the more assertive of the two. He had the moment in Berlin 09 where he missed the final messing round in the pack and then vowed to never leave it to chance again, always dominating from the front as he did. In Kipketers defense he was also very assertive prior to his issues with malaria but when he came back (understandably) was never quite the same and left too much to chance (hence why he lost races in Sydney and Athens that he could have won). So I'm fine with that.

But that is slightly contradictory to the versatility angle. Rudisha specifically adopted his front running tactics because he wasn't that versatile and couldn't handle running slower tactical races in the pack (a big loping stride that wasn't suited to changes of pace etc). Let me back that up with evidence. From 2011-2016 every single title Rudisha won was from the front, in fact I never saw him win a race that he wasn't leading after 200m. Only one of those races was "slow" (Beijing 2015) through 400, otherwise it was 49.X-51.X. So really we can accurately say that Rudisha could really only run at the front dictating the pace because that's all we ever saw.

In my opinion, Kipketer was far more versatile and the evidence are his 3 world titles starting in Gothenburg. He goes through the bell in 6th place in around 53 seconds running in lane 2 and then picks off guys down the back straight before destroying the field easily in the last 120m. 2 years later in Athens he similarly toys with the field front running these splits - 23.47, 26.21 (49.68), 27.31 (1.16.99) and 26.39 (1.43.38). In 99 he was famously attacked by Sepeng with 250 to go and had to run him down in the straight. I'm not diminishing Rudisha here but we simply never saw this from him.

So let's split the difference - assertive, I agree that over his career it's hard to go past Rudisha (even though we tend to remember the end of Wilsons career when he wasn't, rather than the start when he was) but with versatility I just don't see the evidence compared to Kipketer but happy if you have some moments to back up that POV.

1101 wrote:

Thanks to folks for posts on this thread. I haven't really followed the 800 that closely over the years so I was not 100% familiar with Kipketer's remarkable races. Watching these videos reminds me of watching Komen in the 3000/5000. Both Kipketer and Komen are so smooth - seemingly human perfection for their respective distances.

Thanks!

Hey isn't it great to have a thread about just running and runners that is honoring them and not ripping them? Imagine the possibilities.... :D

on the topic of negative split fast 800s, the former american record by johnny gray was a negative split, 51.6 + 51.0 (though i've heard him say it was closer to even splits too). no videos have surfaced of that 1985 koblenz race, so hard to verify accuracy.

for those who wonder if even/negative splits in the 800 would be wiser, it is worth considering that these athletes don't know when the records are going to come, as johnny recounts in his AR race, so the first guy who happens to run sub-140 will probably have to run multiple races coming through at 48, and may break it not doing negative splits before he has a magical (and largely unpredictable) even or negative split race. along those lines, it's worth considering (though impossible to confirm) is that if an athlete only tries even /negative split races, they may deny themselves opportunities to consistently run fast or break records. for my part, this is why i always admired johnny gray's oft-criticized racing strategy...

that's my story and i'm sticking to it,

cush