Who would win the various GST event groups if they were contested by the all-time greats and everyone was in their prime, in peak condition, and training/racing in the same quality of shoes? Imagine the prize money for the winner of each group is $1 million to ensure they all take it seriously and give it their best effort.
McRunnin wrote:
Who would win the various GST event groups if they were contested by the all-time greats and everyone was in their prime, in peak condition, and training/racing in the same quality of shoes? Imagine the prize money for the winner of each group is $1 million to ensure they all take it seriously and give it their best effort.
SD-Coe, LD-Jakob
SD-Kipyegon, LD-Kipyegon
McRunnin wrote:
Who would win the various GST event groups if they were contested by the all-time greats and everyone was in their prime, in peak condition, and training/racing in the same quality of shoes? Imagine the prize money for the winner of each group is $1 million to ensure they all take it seriously and give it their best effort.
If you're giving previous all-time greats the same shoes, they also gotta be subject to the same drug testing standards. In that case:
Bolt wins sprints and I think Jesse Owens comes top 3. Very vibes based though because idk much about sprints.
Hocker in his Olympic 2024 shape wins the 1500 no doubt. Rudisha wins the 800, although Snell, Kipketer, and Coe take up the top 4. Idk it also comes down to who gets into the fields, are we taking the 8 best 800/1500 runners, or the best 4 1500 and best 4 800 runners? Probably El G 2nd in the 1500, then Lagat, Coe, Jakob? If it's a 3:35+ race though, I could see Coe winning it. Idk I probably take Coe as the overall winner 1:41 can compete with the best athletes today, and even El G and Jakob aren't fast enough to solo the kick out of him. Would be super interesting to see strength guys like El G and Jakob try to team up and share pacing to take the kick out of the 800 guys, but not realistic. Not sure how the rest of the scoring works out.
Jakob wins the 3k/5k no doubt. What are the fields? Jakob, Bekele, Geb, Komen, Farah, El G, Cheptegei, and idk maybe Gebrhiwet? Kipchoge? The only people with the pure speed to beat Jakob in a kick are Farah and El G, and let's be honest, El G ain't running 3:26.00 with modern drug testing. Plus Jakob is like 6s faster at 3k already. Farah would be a super fun matchup, but Jakob has that 3:26/7:17 + 3 5k gold medals in a row. Plus I don't think the races would go nearly as slow as they did in Farah's era, mostly due to Cheptegei and Bekele. Jakob stomps Cheptegei no issue, which leaves Bekele, and there's really just no way Bekele could beat Jakob in a championship 3k/5k. In a slow race Jakob embarrasses him, and Jakob is too fit to get dropped even if Bekele tries to run fast from a few kilos out. Even 2008 Bekele can't drop a 3:26/7:17 shape Jakob. Not to mention Jakob closed his WR with 3:51.1/2:22.2/55 last 1600/1000/400. Bekele's 2008 5k closed in 4:57/2:25/53.8 2k/1k/400, which is absurd in a 12:57 race, but it's still not enough to take out Jakob imo.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. Your questions, "What are the fields?" and "are we taking the 8 best 800/1500 runners, or the best 4 1500 and best 4 800 runners?" drive home how difficult it is to pull off GST's current format. It's not a big issue for the long distance group where there is a lot of natural crossover because the 3k and 5k are so similar, but the other groups need athletes who are versatile to keep things intriguing.
GST will only produce great races in the sprints and middle distances if you have combo athletes or versatilists like Gabby Thomas and Emmanuel Wanyonyi who specialize in one event but can be competitive in their off events. If the fields are comprised of only specialists who can only excel in their one event, then it just yields races within races in which the specialists duke it out in their specialty event while the others in the field who are running their off-event see who's the least bad in that event, then the two mini groups switch places for the next race.
Knowing we need combo event and/or versatile athletes, the question is: What's the optimal ratio of specialists to versatlists within a group? Would 6:2 be a good ratio, with 3 specialists from the shorter distance, 3 specialists from the longer distance, and then 2 who are strong in both? Or would 4:4 be a better ratio, with only 2 specialists for each distance going up against 4 versatilists? A 4:4 would probably produce more competitive and unpredictable races, but it could result in some glaring omissions from the field.
I think it boils down to the bigger picture question: what's the purpose of the GST format? Is it to see specialists clash with each other just for that novelty, or is it to see who's the best overall athlete across a range of events? As a fan, I'm more interested in the latter. But I know lots of us are also curious about the unique clashes between specialists and answering the question, "What could (great runner) do in X event?" That's why I think GST needs to be restructured as a series of one-day meets where each event group races at a different distance each time, and the series includes a crossover event where the specialists meet in the middle (e.g., a 1200 for the middle distance group).
McRunnin wrote:
Who would win the various GST event groups if they were contested by the all-time greats and everyone was in their prime, in peak condition, and training/racing in the same quality of shoes? Imagine the prize money for the winner of each group is $1 million to ensure they all take it seriously and give it their best effort.
The most obvious one is MJ in long sprint. That's why he invented this format.
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
The most obvious one is MJ in long sprint. That's why he invented this format.
Agreed. Sydney in the long hurdles and Devers in the short hurdles would also be safe bets.