Peter Snell 800 WR on Grass

I'd say Snell was certainly on the same platform as Coe and Kipketer as the 3 greatest 2 lap runners of all time. After that it's pretty difficult to compare then as they took part in completely different eras from each other. Certainly if Snell and Coe had been around in Kipketer's era they would have run quite a bit faster than their pb's.

Snell made it known weeks before his WR that he was going to have a crack at it, so he would have been trying to "peak" in a non Olympic year.
As for it being a grass track, well it certainly wouldn't have been like the bumpy, sloping grass track many of us would have run on in junior school. Think Wimbledon level maintenance and care. It would have been just as fast as the best kept cinder tracks of the time; possibly with a bit more bounce. Of course it would have been faster on a synthetic track, but I'd say no more than 0.5 secs per lap.
It was a hand-times record, so could have been up to 0.2 slower with electronic timing, but I'd say it was probably as good if not better than Juantorena's 1:43.44, thus being a good 15 years ahead of his time. With company on the 2nd lap, probably nearer to 1:43.0

It was actually an 880yd race (1:45.1), and if you look at the breakdown of his 220 splits ~ 24.8, 26.2, 25.9 & 28.2 ~ his first lap was probably 0.5 too fast for optimum time. However, he really was suffering in the last 200m, and I'd say even if he were on synthetic, he wouldn't have saved much time over the last half lap.

---

grand slam wrote:

I'd say Snell was certainly on the same platform as Coe and Kipketer as the 3 greatest 2 lap runners of all time. After that it's pretty difficult to compare then as they took part in completely different eras from each other. Certainly if Snell and Coe had been around in Kipketer's era they would have run quite a bit faster than their pb's.

---

snell cursed the wabbit for going off too fast

the 1st lap was far quicker than he ever wanted & he said he had to hold on for dear life even then

i'd have to say, with ideal wabbiting, we are talking about mid 1'42 on '70s track

these lydiard guys with little speed work woud run best off virtually even splits - 2s differential wouda been abhorrent

also worth noting that Snell ran on a smaller track so had 5 bends to run as opposed to 4, which were sharper and less conducive to a big man like Snell..

A very very good run.

I ran on grass tracks in the West Indies in the late '70s after a typical HS and college US career for back then(mostly all-weather, some cinder tracks.) My times were comparable. It was really nice and very easy on the feet and legs racing on the firm, putting-green-type surfaces. I recall doing some 1500s and 3000s. There were many locals without shoes holding their own, too.

The grass track was stakes set out on a rugby pitch, 385 yards to the lap. Not quite a Wimbledon-type surface, but not a bad one either. He did have to negotiate 5 turns instead of 4, which does make a slight difference at those speeds.

kipkurgat

is up with anyone mentioned

1:13.2 John Kipkurgat KEN 16.03.44 1 Pointe-a-Pierre 23.03.1974

this is an absolutely insane split when you consider it was en-route in a 800, which of course he faded bad
ly to ~ 1'50

look at "proper" 600 list

1 1:12.81 Johnny Gray USA 19.06.60 1 Santa Monica 24.05.1986
2 1:13.49 Joseph Mutua Mwengi KEN 10.12.78 1 Naimette-Xhovémont 27.08.2002
3 1:13.72 Joseph Mutua Mwengi KEN 10.12.78 1 Naimette-Xhovémont 02.09.2003
4 1:13.80 Earl Jones USA 17.07.64 2 Santa Monica 24.05.1986
5 1:14.15 David Mack USA 30.05.61 3 Santa Monica 24.05.1986

what is important for medal distance is this number :

1:43.7 Marcello Fiasconaro ITA 19.07.49 1 Milano 27.06.1973

that was wr at the time ( ht )

1:43.91 John Kipkurgat KEN 16.03.44 1 Christchurch 29.01.1974

it was a solo run, crushing bayi & walker who both beat existing 1500wr a few days later

knock-off 0.5s for no wabbit between 200 - 400m

down to 1'43.41

it was a very windy day ( from coleman commenting on it during/after race & seeing the flags breezing in background )

knock-off at-least another 0.6s for this over 2 laps

down to 1'42.81

i don't have the splits for race ( vid removed & i didn't note them ), but they weren't great - his 400 was too quick ( as in his 600m above ), trying to run away from bayi, but it was worth at least another 0.5s

down to, at worst

~1'42.31

---

ventolin^2 wrote:

knock-off 0.5s for no wabbit between 200 - 400m

down to 1'43.41

it was a very windy day ( from coleman commenting on it during/after race & seeing the flags breezing in background )

knock-off at-least another 0.6s for this over 2 laps

down to 1'42.81

i don't have the splits for race ( vid removed & i didn't note them ), but they weren't great - his 400 was too quick ( as in his 600m above ), trying to run away from bayi, but it was worth at least another 0.5s

down to, at worst

~1'42.31

---

I believe that SebCoe ran 1:44.8 on cinders back in 1977 or 1978. I think that this is the fastest time ever on a cinder track.

Compared to Coe and Kipketer, his time is about 3s slower. Or not very competitive.˜

But I am sure a Snell on a synthetic track, getting paid millions to run, taking EPO, and so on would be running down around 1:42 or so

---

Old Runner wrote:

I was reading a recent RW article (flipping through it actually) and saw Peter Snell's 1:44.3 WR 800 was run on grass...I mean it was run on a grass surface.

Anyway, I'm sure this has been debated before, but how would that compare to Seb Coe's run or Wilson Kipketer's WR. Keep in mind that Snell did this while running high mileage under the Lydiard training method and he wasn't really trying to 'peak'.

So, had Snell run this with a better surface, better shoes, and training that would have been benefitted from a few more decades of knowledge, how fast could he have run the 800...and, was he better or just 'on par' with Coe and Kepketer?

---

---

hill runner 1984 wrote:so he gets a venty 1.6 second time bonus because...

---

---

he didn't have a wabbit for 200m of the race (gasp!)

---

---

supposedly went a bit too quick for the first 400 (most 800m races go out faster for the first 400 nitwit)

---

---

and, last of all, because the commentators were talking about the weather on that day? you need help man

---

---

hill runner 1984 wrote:so he gets a venty 1.6 second time bonus because...

---

---

he didn't have a wabbit for 200m of the race (gasp!)

---

---

supposedly went a bit too quick for the first 400 (most 800m races go out faster for the first 400 nitwit)

---

---

and, last of all, because the commentators were talking about the weather on that day? you need help man

---

the sotry i have from either runnersworld/runningtimes was an article on the greatest 800m runner of all time. it included everyone but kipketer....asked around 20 'experts' on the best ever.....every single response....Snell.....

"experts"

- err...

why not include kip ???

- who was their pick as greatest sprinter - before '08 & today ?

- who was their pick as greatest miler - if they included everyone but hicham - pray, why/why not ?

---

hill runner 1984 wrote:

---

ventolin^2 wrote:

knock-off 0.5s for no wabbit between 200 - 400m

down to 1'43.41

it was a very windy day ( from coleman commenting on it during/after race & seeing the flags breezing in background )

knock-off at-least another 0.6s for this over 2 laps

down to 1'42.81

i don't have the splits for race ( vid removed & i didn't note them ), but they weren't great - his 400 was too quick ( as in his 600m above ), trying to run away from bayi, but it was worth at least another 0.5s

down to, at worst

~1'42.31

---

so he gets a venty 1.6 second time bonus because...he didn't have a wabbit for 200m of the race (gasp!), supposedly went a bit too quick for the first 400 (most 800m races go out faster for the first 400 nitwit) and, last of all, because the commentators were talking about the weather on that day? you need help man

---

---

ventolin^2 wrote:

---

hill runner 1984 wrote:so he gets a venty 1.6 second time bonus because...

---

yes

---

he didn't have a wabbit for 200m of the race (gasp!)

---

yes

perfect drafting offers >> 1s/lap

---

supposedly went a bit too quick for the first 400 (most 800m races go out faster for the first 400 nitwit)

---

moron

1'13.2 was listed too demonstrate how absurdly fast he coud go

---

and, last of all, because the commentators were talking about the weather on that day? you need help man

---

idiot

that was a compus mentus coleman

the best athletics commentator on brit tv at the time

besides, didn't even need him - vid shows flags blowing strongly

---

looks reasonable surface to me

http://www.ina.fr/economie-et-societe/vie-sociale/video/CPF04006905/l-athlete-du-demi-fond.fr.html

ventolin, the point is that you are making arbitrary claims about unknowns when these guys had many chances to run faster and didn't.

i disagree with "many chances"

by logic, there will be only 1 day/few days in an athlete's career when they are at their absolute peak

if that short period of time corresponds to a race where they are determined to show it, they can get that peak performance

by definition, every athlete has a "pb" - which usually means that was the peak performance of their career ( unless you can claim a tactical, slower, medal race was intrinsically quicker )

kipkurgat had his peak one of 2 days in his career - either the 1'13 en-route day or the 1'43.9 day

that is not "many chances"