How do you rank Wilson Kipketer among the greatest men's 800m runners?

800m researcher wrote:

Great post but dude...paragraphs.

Also, which Olympics did Kipketer win a Gold?

I would probably put Snell over Coe and Cruz actually, after some thought. 2 Olympic golds, world record and complete dominance over quite a few years.

Coe was never dominant over 800m, his world record just lasted for a long time.

Cruz was somewhat dominant but never hit a world record.

I think if Cruz had ran .05 faster he would be a lock for 3rd but...that's how the cookie crumbles.

If Kipketer had been allowed to run in the 96 Olympics it would have been a one man show.

nonsense

you coud have as slow as 48s speed & still dip into the 1'42s

speed is only 1/2 the equation, the other being endurance

if it's good enough, it can drag you into 1'42s off 48 speed

as for starting at higher distances :

- cram started as a 1500 guy & ran 1'42.8

- yego started as a 1'47 / 3'37 guy & looked to be heading for 1500 as that 3'37 was in zurich, the premier circuit race - he ended up 1'42.6

- even coe started off as a 1500 guy before dropping down to 800 fully in '78 with no actual 1500 only races run in '78

not cracking 1'43 after '81 doesn't alter fact it was his primary event & he always ran back to it whenever in doubt as to what to run

even rumoured he was he going to move up to 5k for '86, but he ends up back at 800 !!!

ventolin^3 wrote:

you coud have as slow as 48s speed & still dip into the 1'42s

I said top elites meaning the 1:40-1:41 set, now the all-time top 5. Though most 1:42 guys are faster than that too. Borza ran 46.

Rudisha and Amos run 45, WK and Coe ran 46, and Cruz surely was faster than his junior 48. You don't see many runners that fast in the 1500. Kiprop, maybe Suleiman these days, I doubt anyone else.

RomanceNovelCoverModel wrote:

Perhaps I've introduced significant bias in singling out one runner, but, how do you rank Wilson Kipketer among the greatest men's 800m runners?

Kipketer is one of the greatest ever. Records but no OG gold, just like Coe. Very smooth runner. At their best, he and Jeremy Wariner were the two smoothest runners I'd seen over the past 25 years, no matter what distance we're talking about.

Hard to compare different eras. He was the best of his era. One has to wonder how a guy like Coe would have done running on a circuit that allowed you to chase records race after race, giving you more chances to have that "day" where things all fall together. Coe really didn't run many races in comparison to guys on the circuit from '90 onward.

Rudisha is the best ever. #2 one can argue between Coe and Kipketer, but then you have Cruz whom a lot of people forget about. And Cruz would put up a great series of times back in the day. Peter Snell clocking 1:44 on grass is unreal.

Bad Wigins wrote:Rudisha and Amos run 45, WK and Coe ran 46, and Cruz surely was faster than his junior 48. You don't see many runners that fast in the 1500. Kiprop, maybe Suleiman these days, I doubt anyone else.

you seem incapable of reading/comprehending my earlier post

1500 guys training exclusively for 1500 will have something like 47/48 speed

now learn :

i said they have immense talent at 3'29/3'30 to run that

if they decided to drop down full-time to 800, they woud reduce mileage & increase speed-work, meaning that they woud look to improve their 47/48 to 46/47

400 speed is NOT fixed

it is a function of talent & training

a 3'29/3'30 guy who runs 1'43/1'44 off pure 1500 training, if switched fully to 800, coud get that 800 down to 1'42/1'43 off improved 400 speed

soulemain is a case in point :

he still looks to be running 800 off 1500 training & even won a medal in moscow for 800 in a weak field

if he switched fully to 800, i have no doubt he woud go seriously deep into low-1'42s

his 1500 may drift out to 3'30/3'31 but that is the cost of moving to 800

eh ???

you really don't know much about that era

coe ran 8 more 800s in '81 after firenze & never broke 1'45 in a pure 800 !

he mixed up 1ks/1500/mile that year, but he had all the opportunities he wanted for 800 if he had taken them

every major euro meet back then was a wr/nr attempt at 800 or 1500/mile

ask don paige who beat coe in '80

ventolin^3 wrote:

for an analogy on rest requirements, here is opinion of one of the smartest men in all sport - the manager of manchester, who almost took holland to a world cup final :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30617670

"It is scientifically proven that the body cannot recover within 48 hours,"

LOL. What a load of BS!

Who has hailed him as 'one of the smartest men in all sport'? No one, apart from you. Please give a reliable corroborating source for this claim. Otherwise it is the opinion of one deluded person not qualified to know what he's talking about.

It is also ludicrous comparing the recovery of a football player playing at full effort for >90 mins twice within 48 hours to someone running for 1:42mins. But that is something you clearly cannot fathom.

And if one cannot recover within 48 hours, then why did Cruz get faster with each successive race? All were WR attempts, and on the first one, where he'd had 2 weeks to recover since the Olympics, he was 2 secs outside the WR.

He was 21, fit, healthy and had trained all winter to run 3 or 4 successive races in quick succession to reach a peak. It was a repeat of his LA series, just with longer recoveries between each. He was running twice round a track, not a marathon.

Some very pertinent points, but you shoot yourself in the foot in the first couple of sentences. Namely that World Championships are the equal of Olympics. This is a nonsense when comparing athletes from different eras. Kipketer & Rudisha will always dominate using this criteria, as the competed in an era where they are held every 2 years. They didn't have World Champs when Snell competed and were only introduced half way through Coe's career, and then only every 4 years!

You cannot include criteria that didn't exist in a particular period as that means there is not a level playing field. The indoor scene is a relatively recent one too, and certainly there were not bi-annual indoor world champs until the late 80's, and even then they were seen more as a rust buster or stepping stone to the summer season. They really should be discounted as a criteria for all time greatest. Otherwise you have to include other competitions that were considered of great importance in the athletic world at particular moments in time, like the European Champs, Commonwealth Games, European Cup & World Cup.

The importance of running multiple fast times in a season is also a fairly recent trend. It was of little significance to the likes of Snell, Juantorena and Coe to run 'many' fast times, outside of breaking the world record. The likes of Cruz & Kipketer ran a lot of fast times for the simple reason that they were trying to break the existing WR! Cruz didn't manage it, but tallied up a lot of near misses in his attempts over 2 seasons. Kipketer ran in an era when there was much greater depth in talent (many sub 1:43 guys) and every circuit race seemed to be set up at WR pace. This was the height of the EL G, Komen, Geb era, when times were 'silly' and seemingly of greater importance than championships.

There are only 4 criteria that one can apply equally and fairly to all the contenders. They are the things that all athletes had equal access to.

Namely, Olympic medals, World records, World Ranking points and longevity (number of years in World top 10).

Other Championship medals and indoor records, while important (especially now) are secondary and are unfair criteria for comparison between different eras.

800m researcher wrote:

Coe was never dominant over 800m, his world record just lasted for a long time.

Cruz was somewhat dominant but never hit a world record.

Those comments are both factually incorrect.

Coe was 1.11 faster than any human in history for 5 years and 1.71 sec faster than any human for over 3 years. Cruz was never the fastest man in history and was 0.51 faster than the 2nd fastest in 84 and only 0.11 faster than the next fastest guy in the 85 season.

Coe was world record holder for 18 years in total and when he broke his 2nd WR, no one had taken as much off the WR since Harbig in 1939.

Coe lost just 2 races between the 78 and 82 European Championships. That's 2 defeats in 4 seasons. In 2 of those seasons, 79 and 81, he was undefeated at 800 and any other distance.

Cruz lost 6 times over 800m in his best 3 seasons from beginning of 83 to end of 85. His only undefeated season was 84. In 85 he was beaten twice and in 88 (his other good season) he also lost twice.

So the idea that Cruz was more dominant than Coe is a fallacy.

ventolin^3 wrote:

i broke 150 wrote:One has to wonder how a guy like Coe would have done running on a circuit that allowed you to chase records race after race, giving you more chances to have that "day" where things all fall together. Coe really didn't run many races in comparison to guys on the circuit from '90 onward

eh ???

you really don't know much about that era

coe ran 8 more 800s in '81 after firenze & never broke 1'45 in a pure 800 !

he mixed up 1ks/1500/mile that year, but he had all the opportunities he wanted for 800 if he had taken them

every major euro meet back then was a wr/nr attempt at 800 or 1500/mile

LOL. Well he clearly has a better knowledge and understanding of the era than you did!

Coe ran 7 'finals' at 800 after his WR and 1 heat. 4 of those races were in international matches or competitions for his country, where there would never be any pacing.

Of the remaining 3 races, 2 were in the UK and only 1 other was on the European circuit.

Now listen and learn. I've told you before that during that era everyone in the British team had to run a certain number of races at home as determined by Andy Norman. And with Coe being the major draw for domestic fans, he was obliged to run a certain number of domestic features to get the okay to run in places like Zurich, Oslo, etc. You have no idea of how tightly Andy Norman controlled the appearances of UK athletes (and those from all over) in Europe. I've spoken to Brian Theriot, who was on the circuit at the time, and he has an inside knowledge of how things were run. Coe even got into trouble in 79 as he was not given permission to run in the Oslo 800 by the BAAB. The only person who was exempt and ran far more in Europe than the rest of the British team was Ovett. And that was because Norman was his friend and agent.

You may claim to have watched all middle distance races since 1945 on your satellite tv, but you clearly read very little in the British press and in specialised books and periodicals of the time or subsequently.

And your claim that "every major euro meet back then was a wr/nr attempt at 800 or 1500/mile", is also BS. Again, I've asked you before, and received no response, please list the number of 800 races that Coe was in in which the pace maker went through the bell inside 50.4? The only other ones were the Firenze WR and the Cologne race against Cruz in 85, where he ran his third fastest 800 ever (1:43.0) when in nowhere near the same shape he displayed in 80, 84 or 86.

I think Rudisha had something like 9 races in 2012 where the pace maker went through in 50 flat or faster. So your claim is nonsense.

eh ?

only drivel offered

your peabrain knows nothing about sport

only a fool coud ask this

fool

he has a $10 - 15m contract/y

your peabrain think a guy who took a holland side with only 2 world-clasS players to penalty-shoot-out of wc final isn't a genius ???

as for corrobaration you fool, at $ million +++ budget/y, he can get the best physiologists advice/research he wants

why ???

impress me fool

tell me physiologically what is minimum time to recover from a 1'42 ???

fool

the brit kicka-a-ball schedule looked suicidal

it took the most esteemed manager in their game to tell it

his 2'14 was not flat-out

he got rubbish pace to 800 & ran hard last 200

because he was an incredible talent

if he had not chased $ so desperately & just aimed for koln, what does your peabrain think he couda run ?

no

learn about era

they were pb attempts to improve upon 1'43.00

no

it was 11 days

a race with crap pace to 800

he did miraculously to run 2'14 off it

utter drivel

it wouda been expected better at 24 or 25y

utter drivel

that's for a major with some 1'47's/1'46's/1'45's

not 2'14 ( off crap 800 ) , 1'42+, 1'42+ !!!

utter total drivel

how on earth do

1'45.6

1'44,8

1'43.8

1'43.0

compare with

2'14.0

1'42.3

1'42.4

1'41.7

???!!!

utter drivel

he was running quantum leap better times after games & it's a given he was peaking for games

complete nonsense

impress me with your stated

junior-high-school teacher brain

how you have analysed physiology better than guy managing many $15,000,000/y paycheck athletes ???

i ask you 1 question :

WHAT COULD CRUZ HAVE RUN IN KOLN IF FULLY RESTED FOR 1/52 ???

ventolin^3 wrote:

his 2'14 was not flat-out

he got rubbish pace to 800 & ran hard last 200

ROFL. Old memory playing up is it?

Your good at spouting hypothetical times but p**s poor at quoting actual facts.

Cruz went through 800 in that 1000m in Nice in 1:46.58 (which is 2:13.2 pace for 1000m). You then say he "ran hard last 200". Well his last 200m was 27.5, which is actually slowing down massively, and only 0.1 faster than Coe's corresponding split in a race more than 2 secs faster up to 800m.

You have a strange definition for a "hard last 200"

There was 14 days between Cruz's 800 victory in LA and his 1000m in Nice. He only went through the motions in the 1500 heat a few days after the 800. He was very rested by the time of his European tour.

The reason he ran so fast in Koln is because he had Koskei only 3 -4m behind him over the last 200m. That company pushing from behind is always going to make someone run faster. Historically Cruz ran better after a few races in quick succession to bring him on. The same thing happened in 85. I doubt he'd have been any quicker in Koln had he not run in the week before.

AW used similar criteria a few years back in ranking athletes in all time lists.

Based on my previous post about there being only 4 criteria that can be used for comparison, It went something like this: -

Olympics: - 20 points for G, 10 for S, 5 for B.

Plus a bonus 5 points for breaking a WR in an Olympic final.

WR: - 20 points for breaking the WR, then 10 points for a 2 time & 5 for a 3rd.

Then a point is awarded for every completed year an athlete holds the WR for.

World Rankings : - based on the T&FN rankings, one gets 10 points for a No. 1, 9 for No.2, down to 1 point for a No 10 ranking.

Longevity : - 1point for every season ranked in the top 10.

I took the top 6 candidates since WW2 and applied the above points system.

Snell - 117

Juantorena - 89

Coe - 156

Cruz - 70

Kipketer - 157

Rudisha - 115 (N.B. not including the rankings for the 2014 season, as I don't think they've been revealed by T&FN yet. But I would think he'll probably be ranked 3rd and therefore get 8 points plus 1 for another season in the top 10. This will bring him to 124).

It's too late for me to break the points for each category now, but may find time tomorrow.

N.B. for WR's I gave Kipketer 20 points for his 1:41.24 and 10 for his 1:41.11. For his 1:41.73, which equalled Coe's existing mark, I gave another 5.

So based on this criteria which can be fairly and equally applied to athletes from any era ( except the 2 WWars) the list is as follows:

1. Kipketer - 157

2. Coe - 156

3. Rudisha - 124

4. Snell - 117

5. Juantorena - 89

6. Cruz - 70

Having said that, this wouldn't be the same as my own personal list.

never

drivel

where ?

he ran hard last 200 but knew no chance of wr

the 800 pace was 1'46+ you fool

he had no chance of dragging into 2'12s off 1'46+

only a fool woud thought wr was on without 1'45-split & he was 1'46+

no

it was a hard 200 for a 800 guy

utter drivel

he ran 1500 just 11/7 before

fool

it is

effort

fool

he'd had such a brutal year with ncaa, no adult observer expected him to run after games

utter total drivel

cruz didn't give a fuuck who was chasing him

utter drivel

like it did Rudy who constantly looked back in gold run '12 ???

utter drivel

he only won 1 gold

nonsense

he was peaked for zurich & got hammered by a cram who was in likely 1'41-low/mid shape

cruz hammered coe in same shape

this is most stoopid drivel posted here

he han 4 damn quick races within 6/7 you fool

i ask you again

WHAT COULD CRUZ HAVE RUN IN KOLN IF FULLY RESTED FOR 1/52 ???

most presumptious innane drivel posted

how dare you aggrandize above publications as a mere junior-high teacher

deanouk wrote:

WR: - 20 points for breaking the WR, then 10 points for a 2 time & 5 for a 3rd.

Why fewer points for breaking the world record a second time? It seems like breaking your own world record is even more impressive than breaking someone else's.

eh ?

guy is fool

fool

learn to read/think

1'40.9wr / 1'42.6iwr

no pacers

fool

above

from boy hardly outta diapers in '79 ?

yes

known for decades

yes

nothing precluded him from blasting a solo

he never broke 1'44 solo

fool

damn better idea than you

you were hardly out of diapers in late-'70s

this

"brian theriot"

had better be able to answer defamation to who ever he does

offer his contact details & letsrun already has yours as a co-defendant

drivel

he'd already run brussels in '78

i hope theriot offers you evidence in court

fool

he was greatest runner in the world in '77/'78

something kid hardly outta diapers woudn't have known back then

drivel

you better know ovett well enough to claim this

no

mid-'80s

plenty on general tv before

fool

most all was in broadsheets,

i don't go for scrubbing in books 20 or 30y later

utter total drivel

what part of your peabrain coudn't comprehend don paige ???

eh ???

most dumb question i have seen

how about your peabrain answer

Kip/Rudy didn't need pacers you fool

1'42.6iwr/ / 1'40.9wr

explain to us fool how coe never cracked 1'44 solo ???

pathetic

hammered by cruz in '85

never broke 1'44 solo

fool

he was miles behind pacer

find the races

find pacer's bell time

estimate Rudy's bell time

utter drivel

Rudy has never run a wr/~wr race with pacer anywhere helping

the pacer has been miles ahead by bell

only a complete fool coud be so dumb...

Critical Thinking wrote:Why fewer points for breaking the world record a second time?

why less or more ?

it depends on whether lotta guys got close to wr in interim

It seems like breaking your own world record is even more impressive than breaking someone else's

nonsense

caballo took his 1'43.50 down to 1'43.44

i can assure you 1st was more impressive...

Simple. Form an opinion on his rank among the greatest 800m runners. If he's the best, call him "1st" if one person is better than him, call him "2nd' and so on.

Strange question.