Who's better, Coe or Lagat?

You can't be serious - no contest. Coe, Ovett and Cram all are a long way ahead of Lagat.

But Nurmi beats all those hacks.

While we're talking about Nurmi, why don't we just talk about Zatopek? Even though he was never timed in a competetive mile as to of my knowledge...

No way Lagat loses to a 48 year old man.

1:41

3:29

3:47

2:12

WR's 800,1000,1500,Mile, 4 x 8

2 Golds

2 Silvers

Case Closed

I'm not sure how anyone can be a long way ahead of the 2nd fastest 1500m runner ever...

English wrote:

You can't be serious - no contest. Coe, Ovett and Cram all are a long way ahead of Lagat.

Chances are that Coe wouldn't have an Olympic 1,500 gold if he had to race Guerrouj. My guess is that Lagat would beat Coe at 1,500 meters, but not at 800 meters.

Q: Who's better, Coe or Lagat?

A: Coe

next question?

Every time we have a debate about who's better (remember Scott vs Ryun or Snell vs Webb) and we have two guys from different eras, it never ceases to amaze me how many people pick the guy who has a faster pr as the better runner, even if they raced 20 years apart. There a quite a few division three track runners who have a faster 1500m pr than Paavo Nurmi. Does that make them better?? Coe's championship record speaks for itself-only man to win back-to-back 1500 titles. The olympics are the one constant of track and field over the past century, and they are an important gague of who's better than who. WRs are important too, since times inevitably get faster with subsequent generations. Coe set 3 wrs in the mile and 1 in the 1500. Lagat has never set a wr and only has one of the ten fastest 1500m times ever run. Coe is clearly the better of the two runners, even if his pr is 3 1/2 sec slower in the 1500m.

Richard Neer wrote:

No way Lagat loses to a 48 year old man.

haha

The answer is so short and soooooo correct: Coe.

Coe was 32 when he ran 3:29 - clearly past his best years. He didn't have EPO like Lagat either.

I agree that is very easy to pick Coe. (by the way this 1500m only, Coe’s range is a different subject)

But how about this angle:

El Guerrouj is easily the best ever. Lagat’s career unlucky coincided with El G. Otherwise Lagat would have an Oly gold and silver as well as a world record.

Doesn’t finishing right behind the best ever in almost every race give him the right to be considered the second best ever?

Now that I have said that I would still pick Coe over Lagat but Morceli over Coe.

Flashmile wrote:

1:41

3:29

3:47

2:12

WR's 800,1000,1500,Mile, 4 x 8

2 Golds

2 Silvers

Case Closed

Exactly

Who's to say that El G would have one if he had to race Steve Ovett and Steve Cram?

WangJFan wrote:

Coe is better than Lagat. However, I don't see how Ovett is "way better" than Lagat. Also, Coe choked twice in the 800m at the Olympics. That has to count for something.

Coe choked once in the 800, not twice. I'll grant you that in Moscow, 1980, his very first Olympic final, he definitely choked.

But in LA, 1984, he not only didn't choke, he ran superbly. 1:43.64. Don't forget, he was coming off a yearlong bout with toxoplasmosis that had everyone writing him off. He was barely even selected for the English team that year. Nobody, but nobody was gonna beat Cruz that day. Yet Coe still ran a fantastic final and beat Konchellah, Gray, Jones, etc. That was anything but a choke.

...a *very* minor point in an otherwise excellent rebuttal: Coe was preselected for the 800m in 1984 by the BOA. His selection for the 1500m was the controversial one: despite losing to Peter Elliot by a stride in the AAAs that year (3:39 and change) the committee chose Coe for the third spot along with Ovett and Cram.

But, honestly, how can we compare two Golds Silvers to a silver and a Bronze? You can only race those who line up on the day -- and Coe beat everyone, twice, on the two days that counted.

Martin

Actually, Coe only "choked" once in the olympic 800. In 1980, he was the overwhelming favorite, but in 1984, he head been sick for over a year and had only returned to training in January. Most people had written him off and Joaquim Cruz was considered the favorite heading into the race. Getting the silver medal was a tremendous accomplishment. And, while Coe choked in the 800 in 1980, he made up for it by handing the favorite Ovett his first loss in almost 4 years. Comming back to win a race that you're not favored to win after choking a few days earlier in a race you were supposed to have easily won is way up there among the toughest things to accomplish mentally as a (mid)distance runner.

That said, I would not consider Coe to be the best ever, I think El Gerroudj has now earned that mantle. And just because Lagat chased him to line and ran a near wr-race a few years ago and beat him twice doesn't leapfrog him ahead of all the greats who have won olympic golds and set world records. My top 7:

1)Hicham El Gerroudj (8 years #1, 2 wrs, olympic gold)

2)Nourredine Morceli (7 years #1, 3 wrs, olympic gold)

3)Sebastian Coe (2 years #1, 4 wrs, 2 olympic gold)

4)Herb Elliot (undefeated entire 4 year career, 3 wrs, olympic gold)

5)Peter Snell (3 #1s, 2 or 3 world records, olympic gold-after winning 800)

6) John Walker (3 #1s, 2 world records, olympic gold, world ranked over 12 years)

7) Kip Kenio (olympic gold, 2 or 3 #1s, world ranked over 8 year period)

I'm glad to see a couple of people correcting the notion that Coe "choked" in the 800 in 1984. Cruz has an awesome, dominant 800 runner at that time and actually one of the strongest favorites in the '84 Games. I remember being imprssed that Coe, given the fact that he'd drifted away from the spotlight in '83, was able to stay so close and get a silver.

And then, of course, he beat Cram, the undisputed #1 1500 runner at the time.

I don't actually see any point to comparing him to Lagat.