Harry Wilson believed that Steve Ovett could run 1:40 800m.

Pro News/Info/Results History

Reply New New Thread

Moderation Moderation Information Moderation Information & Rules

Page 1 of 15

1 2 15

Next Last

1 year ago 05/06/2025 6:12am EDT

In Montreal too.

Despite Ovett winning 800m gold in Moscow, we never really got to see his full potential at 800m.

He underperformed in the 800 at Montreal, and he and his coach Harry Wilson decided to focus on the 1500m after that (not sure if that was the plan before Montreal, or a response to Montreal).

For the next five or six years or so, Coe would realistically have been his only challenger at 800m had he focused on it (leaving aside Beyer's dodgy performance in Prague 78), with Ivo Van Damme dying, Juantoreno getting injured, and Rick Wolhuter getting old.

1:40 is obviously not realistic, but given the 50 second last lap in Moscow when he was blocked in at the start of it, you'd have to say he was in minimum 1:43 flat shape that day, and so perhaps he could have run a high 1:41 time like Coe had he focused on it, or even like Coe, kept it as his primary event. People forget he was still only 20 at the 76 Olympics. He was also younger than Ivo Van Damme and had always beaten him until Montreal.

I can't post the link, but it was posted recently in 'The Story of Steve Ovett' Facebook group.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 6:58am EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

100 seconds Steve Project wrote:
I
1:40 is obviously not realistic, but given the 50 second last lap in Moscow when he was blocked in at the start of it, you'd have to say he was in minimum 1:43 flat shape that day, and so perhaps he could have run a high 1:41 time like Coe had he focused on it,

No, you don't have to say that.

And, no, he could not have run a high 1:41 time. He is currently the 186th fastest ever. A 1:41 high is within the top 10. In 1978 or 1980 he maybe could have run slightly unter 1:44.00. With full concentration on the event, maybe a few tenths faster. He just was not close to Coe in the event.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 7:18am EDT

re: 8zihb

8zihb wrote:
I
And, no, he could not have run a high 1:41 time. He is currently the 186th fastest ever. A 1:41 high is within the top 10. In 1978 or 1980 he maybe could have run slightly unter 1:44.00. With full concentration on the event, maybe a few tenths faster. He just was not close to Coe in the event.

Nothing you wrote there makes much sense.

In prague he did run 1:44.09 despite having to check his momentum twice (his own fault), and in his 3rd race in 3 days, and being taken round in a suicidaly fast first lap by Coe. He could clearly have run at least 3/10ths faster in a perfectly paced race with some rest before.

He beat Coe every time he raced him over 800m, being the underdog each time.

The fact that his pb was only 1:44.09 is irrelevant, or that it is 'only' the 186th best time. The Prague European Championships was the only time after Montreal (other than LA when he was very ill) he was in a fast 800m race, and it was far from 'ideal'. If he tried to shadow Coe in Oslo 79 or Florence 81, there is no way he would finish with only 1:43.9.

Can you point to any other 1:44 runner doing anything like Steve's second lap in Moscow 1980?

1 year ago 05/06/2025 9:04am EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

100 seconds Steve Project wrote:
8zihb wrote:
I
And, no, he could not have run a high 1:41 time. He is currently the 186th fastest ever. A 1:41 high is within the top 10. In 1978 or 1980 he maybe could have run slightly unter 1:44.00. With full concentration on the event, maybe a few tenths faster. He just was not close to Coe in the event.
Nothing you wrote there makes much sense.
In prague he did run 1:44.09 despite having to check his momentum twice (his own fault), and in his 3rd race in 3 days, and being taken round in a suicidaly fast first lap by Coe. He could clearly have run at least 3/10ths faster in a perfectly paced race with some rest before.
He beat Coe every time he raced him over 800m, being the underdog each time.
The fact that his pb was only 1:44.09 is irrelevant, or that it is 'only' the 186th best time. The Prague European Championships was the only time after Montreal (other than LA when he was very ill) he was in a fast 800m race, and it was far from 'ideal'. If he tried to shadow Coe in Oslo 79 or Florence 81, there is no way he would finish with only 1:43.9.
Can you point to any other 1:44 runner doing anything like Steve's second lap in Moscow 1980?

50 seconds at the bell in Prague was close to perfect, maybe 3-5 tenths too fast. He was pace almost the ehole race. 1:44.09 was what he could do. Maybe 2 to 3 tenths faster in a "perfect" race, so we almost agree here.

'only' the 1986th best time? So you actually agree that's where he should be placed?

He never "was" in a fast race? So in the races he contested it was not allowed to run fast? When someone has run reasonable fast, he was beaten (exception Moscow 80).

Maybe no other runner of 1:44.0 calibre was capable of such a last lap, I don't know. To conclude so much faster times for Ovett like you do, is nonsense.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 10:02am EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

100 seconds Steve Project wrote:
I can't post the link, but it was posted recently in 'The Story of Steve Ovett' Facebook group.

Whatever, boomer.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 10:06am EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

I seriously doubt that Ovett could have ever run 1:40, but I have to remind people that early on he was pretty good in the 400m and even could run a pretty quick 200m. Had he focused on 800m, he might have given Coe's 1:41 a serious threat.

Still, though, given his XC and road abilities, I wish it would have been more lucrative for him to focus on the track 5k. We might have seen a sub 13:00 much sooner.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 10:59am EDT

re: 1955

1955 wrote:
I seriously doubt that Ovett could have ever run 1:40, but I have to remind people that early on he was pretty good in the 400m and even could run a pretty quick 200m. Had he focused on 800m, he might have given Coe's 1:41 a serious threat.
Still, though, given his XC and road abilities, I wish it would have been more lucrative for him to focus on the track 5k. We might have seen a sub 13:00 much sooner.

As great as his range was, and as great as he was at 1500, it likely has to be one or the other (either he could make a run at Coe’s 800 mark, or he could make a run at 13:00). We’ve seen guys with great range who could run 1:43 and elite 5k times, but never a 1:41/sub-13 guy, not even close.

At his best, he probably could have run 1:43.x and sub-13:10 in the same year. He may have had 1:42.9 and 12:59 potential, but (for his era, anyway) that’s becoming quite speculative and it would have had to have been one or the other—he couldn’t train for both.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 12:45pm EDT

re: John Wesley Harding

John Wesley Harding wrote:
1955 wrote:
I seriously doubt that Ovett could have ever run 1:40, but I have to remind people that early on he was pretty good in the 400m and even could run a pretty quick 200m. Had he focused on 800m, he might have given Coe's 1:41 a serious threat.
Still, though, given his XC and road abilities, I wish it would have been more lucrative for him to focus on the track 5k. We might have seen a sub 13:00 much sooner.
As great as his range was, and as great as he was at 1500, it likely has to be one or the other (either he could make a run at Coe’s 800 mark, or he could make a run at 13:00). We’ve seen guys with great range who could run 1:43 and elite 5k times, but never a 1:41/sub-13 guy, not even close.
At his best, he probably could have run 1:43.x and sub-13:10 in the same year. He may have had 1:42.9 and 12:59 potential, but (for his era, anyway) that’s becoming quite speculative and it would have had to have been one or the other—he couldn’t train for both.

This may not be popular but I feel Ovett's performance in Los Angeles was the finest of his career. Clearly sick as a dog and still makes two finals.

What you do when under the weather is far more telling of your running ability than when you are fit & feisty.

How say u?

1 year ago 05/06/2025 1:26pm EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

100 seconds Steve Project wrote:
8zihb wrote:
I
And, no, he could not have run a high 1:41 time. He is currently the 186th fastest ever. A 1:41 high is within the top 10. In 1978 or 1980 he maybe could have run slightly unter 1:44.00. With full concentration on the event, maybe a few tenths faster. He just was not close to Coe in the event.
Nothing you wrote there makes much sense.
In prague he did run 1:44.09 despite having to check his momentum twice (his own fault), and in his 3rd race in 3 days, and being taken round in a suicidaly fast first lap by Coe. He could clearly have run at least 3/10ths faster in a perfectly paced race with some rest before.
He beat Coe every time he raced him over 800m, being the underdog each time.
The fact that his pb was only 1:44.09 is irrelevant, or that it is 'only' the 186th best time. The Prague European Championships was the only time after Montreal (other than LA when he was very ill) he was in a fast 800m race, and it was far from 'ideal'. If he tried to shadow Coe in Oslo 79 or Florence 81, there is no way he would finish with only 1:43.9.
Can you point to any other 1:44 runner doing anything like Steve's second lap in Moscow 1980?

LA '84?

1 year ago 05/06/2025 1:46pm EDT

re: childinthe80s

childinthe80s wrote:
100 seconds Steve Project wrote:
Nothing you wrote there makes much sense.
In prague he did run 1:44.09 despite having to check his momentum twice (his own fault), and in his 3rd race in 3 days, and being taken round in a suicidaly fast first lap by Coe. He could clearly have run at least 3/10ths faster in a perfectly paced race with some rest before.
He beat Coe every time he raced him over 800m, being the underdog each time.
The fact that his pb was only 1:44.09 is irrelevant, or that it is 'only' the 186th best time. The Prague European Championships was the only time after Montreal (other than LA when he was very ill) he was in a fast 800m race, and it was far from 'ideal'. If he tried to shadow Coe in Oslo 79 or Florence 81, there is no way he would finish with only 1:43.9.
Can you point to any other 1:44 runner doing anything like Steve's second lap in Moscow 1980?
LA '84?

Exactly.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 1:53pm EDT

re: Whatever Boomer

Whatever Boomer wrote:
John Wesley Harding wrote:
As great as his range was, and as great as he was at 1500, it likely has to be one or the other (either he could make a run at Coe’s 800 mark, or he could make a run at 13:00). We’ve seen guys with great range who could run 1:43 and elite 5k times, but never a 1:41/sub-13 guy, not even close.
At his best, he probably could have run 1:43.x and sub-13:10 in the same year. He may have had 1:42.9 and 12:59 potential, but (for his era, anyway) that’s becoming quite speculative and it would have had to have been one or the other—he couldn’t train for both.
This may not be popular but I feel Ovett's performance in Los Angeles was the finest of his career. Clearly sick as a dog and still makes two finals.
What you do when under the weather is far more telling of your running ability than when you are fit & feisty.
How say u?

Absolutely. And he ran 1:44.81 in the semi-final, despite being ill and having to go straight to the hospital. He was nearly 30 at that point as well and had lost some of his raw speed. The idea that he could only have run 1:43.8 at his peak is absurd.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 2:09pm EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

1 year ago 05/06/2025 2:19pm EDT

re: 8zihb

8zihb wrote:
100 seconds Steve Project wrote:
Nothing you wrote there makes much sense.
In prague he did run 1:44.09 despite having to check his momentum twice (his own fault), and in his 3rd race in 3 days, and being taken round in a suicidaly fast first lap by Coe. He could clearly have run at least 3/10ths faster in a perfectly paced race with some rest before.
He beat Coe every time he raced him over 800m, being the underdog each time.
The fact that his pb was only 1:44.09 is irrelevant, or that it is 'only' the 186th best time. The Prague European Championships was the only time after Montreal (other than LA when he was very ill) he was in a fast 800m race, and it was far from 'ideal'. If he tried to shadow Coe in Oslo 79 or Florence 81, there is no way he would finish with only 1:43.9.
Can you point to any other 1:44 runner doing anything like Steve's second lap in Moscow 1980?
50 seconds at the bell in Prague was close to perfect, maybe 3-5 tenths too fast. He was pace almost the ehole race. 1:44.09 was what he could do. Maybe 2 to 3 tenths faster in a "perfect" race, so we almost agree here.
'only' the 1986th best time? So you actually agree that's where he should be placed?
He never "was" in a fast race? So in the races he contested it was not allowed to run fast? When someone has run reasonable fast, he was beaten (exception Moscow 80).
Maybe no other runner of 1:44.0 calibre was capable of such a last lap, I don't know. To conclude so much faster times for Ovett like you do, is nonsense.

Pretty sure Ovett went through in 49.7 or 49.8. Coe went through in 49.32.

Juantorena split time was 50.8 when he won gold in Montreal in a WR of 1:43.5

1986th best time? What are you talking about??

He was never in a fast race, yes, what is difficult to understand about that? He was primarily a 1500m/miler after 1976 and also ran lots of 1000m, 3000m, 5000m. Many of the 800m he did race in were GB vs Moldova and the like. How many guys were running faster than 1:44 between 1977-1981?

At the end of 1978, despite being the dominant 1500m runner for two seasons, his 1500m pb was still only 3:34.5. He just was not interested in fast times, only winning real races.

Ovett's 800m pb is still the 58th fastest by a European, nearly half-a-century later and into the era of supershoes and bicarb gel.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 2:28pm EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

A 1:40/1:41/1:42 was prbably not there, but 1:43 in the right race for sure. Where I think that he could have run 9a lot0 faster was at the 1500/mile. Impailing himself on the fence did him no favors...

1 year ago 05/06/2025 6:34pm EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

He pretty much stopped running 800s outside of championships. I figure he could have run as fast as Cram or Elliott if he competed in a few paced races. The fact that he ran 1:44.81 at the 1984 Olympics when he was past his peak and experiencing severe health problems shows that he had a lot more in him than he ever showed.

1 year ago 05/06/2025 7:32pm EDT

re: FangYouTang

Yeah, it's a bit weird that Ovett's fastest was 1:44-low. I think he had 1:42 in him.

I've read Wilson's book insideout and backwards. I'm sorry - I just don't believe he said this 1:40 thing. Link?

Regarding LA84, did Ovett ever look stronger? If you study the pics (not the stretcher / collapsing ones) he looks fitter than ever - which he and Wilson claimed.

1 year ago 05/13/2025 2:50am EDT

re: OXYRUNR

OXYRUNR wrote:
A 1:40/1:41/1:42 was prbably not there, but 1:43 in the right race for sure. Where I think that he could have run 9a lot0 faster was at the 1500/mile. Impailing himself on the fence did him no favors...

Another interesting question is what if he had focused on the 1500m before 1977? Given his improvement between 76 and 77 at 1500 when he did start focusing on it, it's surely possible that he would have won gold in Montreal, especially given how the final was run. He may even have had a shot at beating Walker as it was if he hadn't tripped in the semi.

1 year ago 05/13/2025 2:54am EDT

re: Skuj

Skuj wrote:
Yeah, it's a bit weird that Ovett's fastest was 1:44-low. I think he had 1:42 in him.
I've read Wilson's book insideout and backwards. I'm sorry - I just don't believe he said this 1:40 thing. Link?
Regarding LA84, did Ovett ever look stronger? If you study the pics (not the stretcher / collapsing ones) he looks fitter than ever - which he and Wilson claimed.

Ovett was stringing a few wins together in the leadup to LA, but he still looked a bit short of either confidence or fitness. He had started to develop some allergy type problems in the weeks before LA, so I don't know if he and Wilson meant he was at his fittest after his winter training in 83/84, or actually going in to LA. It's easy to believe he was at least back to his best after a winters training following his 83 WR.

1 year ago 05/13/2025 8:12am EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

100 seconds Steve Project wrote:
Whatever Boomer wrote:
This may not be popular but I feel Ovett's performance in Los Angeles was the finest of his career. Clearly sick as a dog and still makes two finals.
What you do when under the weather is far more telling of your running ability than when you are fit & feisty.
How say u?
Absolutely. And he ran 1:44.81 in the semi-final, despite being ill and having to go straight to the hospital. He was nearly 30 at that point as well and had lost some of his raw speed. The idea that he could only have run 1:43.8 at his peak is absurd.

Cram ran 1:42.8 but he was also considerably faster than Ovett over the 1500 and mile at his peak. Coe had more speed than Ovett, as his 800 records (and kick) showed. So maybe Ovett's best 800 could have been 1:43-1:43.5. Still very fast in that era.

1 year ago 05/13/2025 8:13am EDT

re: 100 seconds Steve Project

Nice. But I'm really tired of hearing about what 'so-and-so' believes Athlete X 'could of done.' He did what he could and he is one of the all time greats. Harry Wilson is telling fish stories, and belief does not equate reality. I genuinely believed in Santa when I was 5.

Peter/Seb Coe, Said Auoita and a lot of other people from that era told some tall training tales -- I think it was part of head games.

Page 1 of 15

1 2 15

Next Last

What People Are Talking About On LetsRun

No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.

Reply Replying to

Username

Password

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview

By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Remember me on this device.

Harry Wilson believed that Steve Ovett could run 1:40 800m.

This thread has already been deleted.

You have been subscribed.

Harry Wilson believed that Steve Ovett could run 1:40 800m.

Jump To A Page

Follow 1955

Block 1955

Follow John Wesley Harding

Block John Wesley Harding

Follow Sub-9:00 guy

Block Sub-9:00 guy

Follow FangYouTang

Block FangYouTang

Follow Skuj

Block Skuj

Follow Coevett

Block Coevett

Follow Coevett

Block Coevett

Follow Armstronglivs

Block Armstronglivs

Follow dmb

Block dmb

Jump To A Page

This thread has already been deleted.

Reply Replying to

You have been subscribed.