wtfunny wrote:
ventolin^3 wrote:
mo is greatest distance runner of all time
.....
anyone with a clue woud realise mo is capable of 12'40/26'30 ....
anyone with a clue would realize that he'd have to be capable of significantly faster times than both these to be even the 2nd greatest distance runner of all time.
not when you throw in a 3'28 with 12'40/26'30...
Which 12:40 and 26:30 are you talking about? Last time I checked he didn't even make the top 25 in 5km. Great times but nowhere close to your fantasy times.
get a clue
geb interviewed within ~ coupla years ago prior to some road race in limey talked about mo :
his eyes opened up when he said :
"he has run
3'28 !!!"
geb was shocked at this speed !!!
if you missed the interview, your dismal observation / tools / neurone
geb was utterly awed by mo's 3'28 !!!
geb had no doubt about how good mo was...
Your efforts to justify windy conditions for Bayi are laughable.
There was no mention of windy conditions in any commentary of the race, there are no waving flags during the 1500 final, and you quote a historical trend using average wind speeds over 2 months to show it was windy on one specific 4 minutes on 1 day? Haha.
No wind readings in the sprints returned anything approaching 3-8m/sec.
You have no evidence at all that it was windy in the 1500.
So no mention of wind in Stockholm means the wind was zero, but no mention of wind in Christchurch means there were windy conditions? You're a joke.
Coe had less than 100m drafting on first lap. That's less than 0.2sec. His first lap would have felt like 52.4 and Bayi's would have felt 2.5 sec slower. There is a world of difference.
Farah's lap times varied by less than 1.5 sec. That is incredibly even paced running. Try living in the real world. You're never going to have someone run 3.75 laps at 55.4 pace. There will be fluctuations. You're method for evening out is not proven and is very ungenerous to those where the first lap is way too fast or way too slow. Had Mo ran each lap the same pace his final time would have been a couple of tenths faster.
And Ryun ran 1:44.3 on synthetic and 3:33.1. Neither time put him all time top 50. To credit his capable of 1:39 and 3:24 is wrong and the funniest thing I've read anyone post on here.
He also won a single silver medal in 3 Olympics. You can make all the excuses in the world, as you could for any other athlete, including those who've already won golds, but everyone knows years in advance when to peak and those that are able to do so are generally the better athletes. That is the whole point of the sport, otherwise everyone would just run solo time trials to work out whose the best. Gold medals, specifically in the Olympics, is the pinnicle for every athlete in every event. Times are secondary.
Pacifico wrote:Your efforts to justify windy conditions for Bayi are laughable
i see you are inept at reading historical wind data
There was no mention of windy conditions in any commentary of the race
clueless
the commentator doesn't mention everything in space of 3.5 minutes
the athletics session was something like 3 hours that day
go fetch vid of whole session & listen out for the mention of the conditions
anyone who watched whole session on tv wouda remembered it
oh i forgot, you coudn't have watched it, you weren't even born when this race was run !!
there are no waving flags during the 1500 final
nonsense
you are incapable of watching a vid
the flags can be seen fluttering 1'55+ mark of the race
can't you watch a vid ??
and you quote a historical trend using average wind speeds over 2 months to show it was windy on one specific 4 minutes on 1 day? Haha
utterly clueless
the historical wind readings were high for every day of late-january/early-feb, no respite
it is beyond belief you can't comprehend this
we don't even need the wind readings :
the flags can be seen fluttering as was mention of conditions earlier in session by commentator, which you obviously never saw
it is beyond belief you can't comprehend this
No wind readings in the sprints returned anything approaching 3-8m/sec
utterly clueless
the wind readings were range 5 - 8m/s in those few days not 3 - 8m/s
you seem to have no clue that these are unblocked wind at a weather station or an airport
the same winds blocked off partly by stands in a stadium woud be reduced down from 5 - 8, but still significant
the christchurch stadium was wide open stadium offering little wind blockage, as stated by commentator & observation of flags
commentator gave additional info that wind was worst on back-stretch where stadium was most exposed
You have no evidence at all that it was windy in the 1500
utter nonsense
the vid showing flags fluttering at 1'55+ in, the commentator mentioned earlier in session the conditions & historical wind readings
So no mention of wind in Stockholm means the wind was zero
utterly clueless
i saw the whole stockholm meet on tv at the time, not just the 1500
there was no mention of any wind anytime in meet nor in media after
go fetch any mention of any significant wind from any reputable source
but no mention of wind in Christchurch means there were windy conditions?
clueless
windy meet, windy weather reports, wide-open stadium, commentator mentioned wind thruout meet, vid evidence of flags fluttering in breeze
only a fool coud dispute the wind for christchurch 1500
You're a joke
you are inept with no idea of that '74 1500
you weren't even born when the race was run & never saw it live
Coe had less than 100m drafting on first lap
nonsense
it was ~ 175m
That's less than 0.2sec
no
it was ~ 0.3+s
His first lap would have felt like 52.4
what does this nonsense mean ???
it is claimed he went thru in 52.4, but familiar story with coe, no running clock
and Bayi's would have felt 2.5 sec slower
clueless
Bayi's race had no drafting & much more windy day with huge fatigue in his legs including a suicidal effort in 800 where he tried to outduel the great Kipkurgat
the true difference on 1st lap wouda been no more than 1.5s & Bayi's accumulated fatigue from rounds & battling the wind wouda made his last 1100 helluva lot harder than coe
There is a world of difference
no
there isn't if you learn to analyse properly
Farah's lap times varied by less than 1.5 sec
yes
a significant gap in a 3'28 essentially solo clocking
That is incredibly even paced running
no
it isn't for a 3'28+ clocking
that is approaching near-limit for lotta current guys & at those speeds, your speed can't vary by more than few tenths/lap
Try living in the real world
i always do
try stop posting nonsense
You're never going to have someone run 3.75 laps at 55.4 pace. There will be fluctuations
clueless
you can aim for 55.1 - 55.6s/lap for 3.75 laps for someone near mo's calibre
You're method for evening out is not proven
nonsense
it is method shown by oxford uni physicists
you think those guys are wrong ???
offer your physics
and is very ungenerous to those where the first lap is way too fast or way too slow
nonsense
it is perfectly accurate for fast 1st laps & subsequent enforced slow laps, laps where guy has to slow or die
it is not generous for unenforced 1st or subsequent laps but corrections can be made for this to get reasonable estimate
Had Mo ran each lap the same pace his final time would have been a couple of tenths faster
no
try nearer 0.5s
And Ryun ran 1:44.3 on synthetic
nonsense
how many times do you have to be told
he ran it on a semi-synthetic with a prelim just 3 hours before & so ill he shoudn't have even been running, forcing him to go out in jog of 53+
and 3:33.1
on dirt, off a jog to 300, some wide running on bend, in 95F !!! & only hard effort in last 300 !!!
how many times do you have to be told this ???
do you have some sort of memory problems ???
Neither time put him all time top 50
uttely clueless
how many times do you have to be told above until your neurone retains it ???
To credit his capable of 1:39 and 3:24 is wrong and the funniest thing I've read anyone post on here
utterly clueless
you clearly have idea about the sport & some sort of mental deficiency where you can't retain info told to you numerous times
he was capable of 1'39.9 / 3'24.2 on a '70's synthetic in ideal circumstances
He also won a single silver medal in 3 Olympics
bare facts
You can make all the excuses in the world, as you could for any other athlete, including those who've already won golds, but everyone knows years in advance when to peak and those that are able to do so are generally the better athletes
how clueless are you ???
at his 1st games he was 17 !!!
how inept are you as to not think that this wouda been nothing more than a learning experience where the greatest achievement possible wouda been to make the final ???
his '68 games were wrecked by mono
he was never in same shape ever again as '67 but in shadow of his '67 shape in '72 but still probably favourite but got tripped in prelim by a novice who shoudn't have even been in his prelim but IOC got Ryun's entry time wrong & put him in slow heat with guys who coud barely run a 1500 worth bothering with
how on earth does getting tripped show a deficiency ???
if he'd made final, he wouda had a something like 45/55 chance of beating that "reeindeer-milk" loaded fin guy
Ryun wouda definitely got silver in his shadow-of-'67 shape in '72 final but i'm not sure of gold
the fin was probably in wr 800 shape with 1'44.5 just prior to games & it is difficult to gauge Ryun's 800 shape as he ran wild race in trials where he forced wottle to run 1'44.3wr & Ryun missed 3rd by few hundredths
still, if Ryun had sat on the fin nearly whole race, & waited for kick in last 100, i definitely see Ryun winning but he mighta started kick bit too far out & fin mighta grabbed him back as Ryun didn't have the long kick of ole - 11.6 / 36.5 kick in a 3'38.2 on dirt !!!
That is the whole point of the sport, otherwise everyone would just run solo time trials to work out whose the best
no one is asking for this as general public don't have patience for it & weather woud vary too much over the ~ 1 hour required for such over 1500
Gold medals, specifically in the Olympics, is the pinnicle for every athlete in every event
clueless
the circumstances of every run in games has to be analysed
Times are secondary
eh ??
who has said otherwise for medal meets ??
Pacifico wrote:
Your efforts to justify windy conditions for Bayi are laughable.
There was no mention of windy conditions in any commentary of the race, there are no waving flags during the 1500 final, and you quote a historical trend using average wind speeds over 2 months to show it was windy on one specific 4 minutes on 1 day? Haha.
No wind readings in the sprints returned anything approaching 3-8m/sec.
You have no evidence at all that it was windy in the 1500.
You are correct. There was no notable wind in those Christchurch Games. In fact they were well remembered as having great weather.
Ventolin's efforts to argue otherwise is just hot air, pardon the pun.
He will argue day is night, so best just ignore.
This isn't an argument. You offer a distorted point of view and fail to provide a single shred of evidence to support your wild claims or counter the poster's points.
Where are these flags 'fluttering' in a video?
You provide the commentary earlier that day stating the wind was strong! If you make an outlandish claim that the wind slowed him by 1.0 sec then you'd better be prepared to provide evidence that you claim stated strong winds. An historical trend of wind readings over a 2 month period is irrelevant. What were the wind readings from inside the stadium for the sprints? You can't provide this commentary for that day because it was never said.
The wind readings during those Games were all within the legal limit for record purposes. Go look at the Track Stats Commonwealth Athletics Statistics Handbook from 1994.
Wind reading for Men's 100m final -0.5
200m -0.6
110H -0.1
Women's 100m +0.5
200m +0.6
100mH +1.0
So you are totally wrong on the wind readings. The wind for those championships were within legal limits and relatively non existent.
"Superb summer weather after an inclement Christmas-New Year. Precision planning. Typical Kiwi hospitality. Unstinting service by a legion of volunteers. It was, Tayler agrees, an event worthy of its sobriquet - the friendly games."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/sport/9623238/Dick-Tayler-from-dark-horse-to-a-Kiwi-legend
Bayi's splits were not in the same league in terms of unevenness as Coe's were in Stockholm.
Bayi's were 54.9, 1:52.2, 2:36.7, 2:50.8 (54.9, 57.3, 58.6, 41.4)
Coe's were 52.4, 1:49.1, 2:48.3 (52.4, 56.7, 59.2, 43.6) And his splits were officially taken at the meet.
In that race Robinson doesn't even get level with Coe until 100m into the race. He then proceeds to run wide of Coe for most of the bend, is directly in front of Coe for about 30m at the end of the bend going into the straight, and then runs the rest of the straight on the line with lane 2, offering Coe, who is on the inside of the lane, little if any drafting. By 275m Robinson is more than 4m ahead. Coe doesn't even get the equivalent of 100m of full drafting in that race. What he gets is worth 0.1sec.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp-W7B483K8
If you can't see that Robinson is running wide then I suggest a visit to the opticians.
Oh, and the wind reading for the men's 100m in Stockholm 81, was 1.0m/sec, stronger than any of the flat sprint finals for men or women in Christchurch and the same as the women's 100mH. Perhaps we should knock a second off Coe's time for running in equally 'windy' conditions!?
To state that Farah's 1500m in Monaco would be 0.5 sec faster with even splits is also totally wrong.
Pacifico is correct in saying that Farah's splits were pretty even.
If you use his splits of 54.9, 56.2, 56.5 and 41.3 and plug into the model that you use, then an evened out time of 3:28.83 is the result. This is a mere 0.1 sec faster than what he actually run. That is proof enough that he was running very even splits. 0.5 is utter nonsense.
Ryun only ran 1:44.3 and 3:33.1. The first was on synthetic and the latter was not run in temperatures of 95F, as you have been told on numerous occasions.
Deanouk wrote:You are correct
utter drivel
not only have you seen vid of flags fluttering at 1'55+ into race but wind records for meet & my recall of commentator in whole session not just 3'32+ of it
sadly for you, you weren't even born when this race was run
go fetch whole session of vid & listen to commentary
There was no notable wind in those Christchurch Games
utter nonsense
you can see vid of flags fluttering at 1'55+ into race, wind records for meet & my recall of commentator in whole session not just 3'32+ of it
In fact they were well remembered as having great weather
utter complete total drivel
what part of Kipkurgat's race can't you comprehend the commentator's :
"& probably the wind in the back stretch cost him the WR"
???
Ventolin's efforts to argue otherwise is just hot air, pardon the pun
utter nonsense
sadly for you, you weren't even born when this race was run, whereas I watched the meet live on tv
this gave me huge historical perspective for latter 800 & 1500 races which you sadly, as kid not even born at time of '74 games can ever hope to achieve
He will argue day is night, so best just ignore.
laughable
i suggest you stick to posting to yourself in that neurone without having to embarrass yourself by doing so out loud here
The flag is about 30m above the track and is hardly moving. A flag that far up above the track surface does not tell you much about the wind at track level.
I never said anything about the wind in the 800m final, which was on a different day and therefore totally irrelevant to your claims that the wind readings were between 5 and 8m'sec for whole of Jan & Feb. They certainly weren't at track level on the days of the sprint and jump finals. So you are wrong.
Re the 800m, the commentator said the wind 'PROBABLY' cost him the WR. Being as the WR was only 0.1 sec faster, that is a genuine claim. To knock 1 sec off Bayi's time for windy conditions that didn't exist is a ludicrous claim.
There are lots of examples of 'fast' performances in less than perfect conditions. In the 81 Mile in Brussels, Boit said, "I felt the wind in the backstretch," said Boit, who was
third. "I thought, `Oh, the time isn't going to be good.'"
The reading in the men's 100m that night was + 1.9m/sec.
The wind reading in the women's 200m that same night was -1.1m/sec.
Stronger readings than any of the sprint finals in Christchurch. Where are the quotes from the competitors of that 1500 Commonwealth final claiming the wind was strong?
Are you going to knock 1 sec off Coe's mile time due to stronger winds?
You knock random chunks of time off performances based on little information, and yet you are very selective with who you apply this to.
Just because it was a bit windy for the men's 800m final, it does not mean that the wind was the same strength for the duration of the Games. This is your only piece of evidence you use to take 1 sec off Bayi's run. Utter nonsense.
Deanouk wrote:This isn't an argument
no
you offer nonsense
You offer a distorted point of view and fail to provide a single shred of evidence to support your wild claims or counter the poster's points
utter drivel
i state observations of a meet i watched on tv when you weren't even born
i have stated wind fluttering in vid, wind records, commentator's comments for that session & for other day of 800
if you weren't born to watch full session of 1500 & hear commentary, that is your problem
Where are these flags 'fluttering' in a video?
get some glasses
it is 1'55+ into race & on next lap at same point
You provide the commentary earlier that day stating the wind was strong!
it was damn strong
If you make an outlandish claim that the wind slowed him by 1.0 sec then you'd better be prepared to provide evidence that you claim stated strong winds
clueless
how inept are you ???
i not only showed wind reports for that meet but vid evidence of flags
you weren't even born that time to have seen full session & earlier talk about wind
An historical trend of wind readings over a 2 month period is irrelevant
utter drivel
i am not talking about 2 months
what part of "late-jan/early-frb" does your neurone construe as 2 months ???
What were the wind readings from inside the stadium for the sprints?
little help as all the wrecking wind was on backstretch
learn something :
they don't put a wind-guage on back-stretch for sprints
You can't provide this commentary for that day because it was never said
utter nonsense
i watched whole session & wind talked about earlier
if you weren't born at the time, your lack
The wind readings during those Games were all within the legal limit for record purposes. Go look at the Track Stats Commonwealth Athletics Statistics Handbook from 1994.
Wind reading for Men's 100m final -0.5
200m -0.6
110H -0.1
Women's 100m +0.5
200m +0.6
100mH +1.0
So you are totally wrong on the wind readings. The wind for those championships were within legal limits and relatively non existent
utterly clueless
you can't seem to comprehend all the big wind was in back-stretch
quarrie won 200 in pathetic 20.73 !!!
how clueless are you not to know that in zurich later, he ran 2nd fastest ever low-altitude 200 of 20,06 with 0.4 !!!
only a complete fool who wasn't born at the time coud equate his 20.73 games win to epic 20.06 win later in zurich !!!
how much did the wind cost him between 20.73 & 20.06 ???
impress me !
"Superb summer weather after an inclement Christmas-New Year. Precision planning. Typical Kiwi hospitality. Unstinting service by a legion of volunteers. It was, Tayler agrees, an event worthy of its sobriquet - the friendly games."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/sport/9623238/Dick-Tayler-from-dark-horse-to-a-Kiwi-legend
clueless
how inept are you ???
did you not read :
"30-degrees plus, that day and quite blustery"
totally inept
Bayi's splits were not in the same league in terms of unevenness as Coe's were in Stockholm
how clueless are you ???
Bayi ran his with serious wind thruout, coe little
Bayi was wrecked by that suicidal 800 effort when tring to match a guy who was probably in 1'41-high shape in a 1-off, fully rested 800 in 0 wind day in zurich
Bayi's were 54.9, 1:52.2, 2:36.7, 2:50.8 (54.9, 57.3, 58.6, 41.4)
from clock & iaaf book
Coe's were 52.4, 1:49.1, 2:48.3 (52.4, 56.7, 59.2, 43.6) And his splits were officially taken at the meet
laughable !
another "busted clock" effort, just like oslo-800wr & mickey-mouse-firenze
it's not coe's fault, but somehow, the clock was always busted for anglo-saxon tv coverage for his best runs
In that race Robinson doesn't even get level with Coe until 100m
into the race
nonsense
it was more like 75m
He then proceeds to run wide of Coe for most of the bend
nonsense
he looks directly ahead of coe
is directly in front of Coe for about 30m at the end of the bend going into the straight
no
more like 50m of bend
and then runs the rest of the straight on the line with lane 2
utter nonsense
he never touches lane 2 in stretch
he drifts wide but always well in lane 1
coe gets part-drafting in last 50m
offering Coe, who is on the inside of the lane, little if any drafting
nonsense
he offers him part drafting for last 50m
By 275m Robinson is more than 4m ahead
& that distance still offers drafting
i'm sure you think Rudy's berlin/rieti wrs were "drafted" from long way behind ???
Coe doesn't even get the equivalent of 100m of full drafting in that race
nonsense
more like 175m
What he gets is worth 0.1sec
no
he gets 0.3s+
If you can't see that Robinson is running wide then I suggest a visit to the opticians
clueless
robinson offers him part drafting from 75m in then full drafting until none at 250m
learn to watch
Oh, and the wind reading for the men's 100m in Stockholm 81, was 1.0m/sec, stronger than any of the flat sprint finals for men or women in Christchurch and the same as the women's 100mH
clueless
quarrie ran 20.73 there & 20.06 in zurich
get a dam clue
Perhaps we should knock a second off Coe's time for running in equally 'windy' conditions!?
utter nonsense
enclosed stockholm, no wind wrecking on back-stretch
go fetch quarrie 20.73 in christchurch & 20.06 in zurich !!!
go read tayler's "blustery" for 10k in christchurch !
To state that Farah's 1500m in Monaco would be 0.5 sec faster with even splits is also totally wrong
nonsense
that is likely
Pacifico is correct in saying that Farah's splits were pretty even
i don't care about your drivel under other handle
If you use his splits of 54.9, 56.2, 56.5 and 41.3 and plug into the
model that you use, then an evened out time of 3:28.83 is the result
some clue
you don't seem to understand that 54.9 was too quick & 56.2 was not enough slowing to make recovery for his speed/endurance profile
he is not a 45-high guy, so 54.9 is too destructive
he shoud have never been faster than 55.8 paced to 400
mo got
NOTHING
he got wrecked by 54.9 undrafted as that is too far from his 400 ability
the next 2 laps, still virtually unpaced were too fast as you woud still expect mo to kick in a 53/54 on last lap
your neurone can't seem to comprehend that mo was at "only" 2'33.4 at bell, which is 3'29.2+ pace
mo was not tired enough in slowing past 700m to bell, meaning he slowed too much in it & had plenty of saved energy left
therefore mo was worth helluva lot better than 0.1s in "evened-out splits"
in comparison, coe in '81 was 2'33.4 at bell :
he ran last 400 in 58.5 !!
there was nothing to shave off his time from uneven splits
This is a mere 0.1 sec faster than what he actually run
clueless
you have to look at all the significant splits & think
That is proof enough that he was running very even splits
nonsense
see above
0.5 is utter nonsense
total drivel
learn to think :
54.9 for last 400 in a solo-3'28.9 means there was lot more in the tank to come if at even-pace
Ryun only ran 1:44.3 and 3:33.1
fact
The first was on synthetic
nonsense
it was on slow semi- with prelim 3 hours before & so ill he shoudn't even have run prelim let alone final !!!
the 800 times behind him were pathetic for slow 1st lap : he jogged aroud in 53+ & crushed field with 51+ with likely wide running !!!
this was '66 when just 19y & not even close to utterly incredible '67-late shape !!!
and the latter was not run in temperatures of 95F, as you have been told on numerous occasions
utter total drivel
see his recall on looking at stadium screen :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt8HIRvZNaMCan you summarize the disagreement?
Personally, I think Wanjiru had the most talent at the marathon than all those listed. For the mile, I don't know.
there has not been a serious 5k tt since paris-'12 & that was only because isiah suicidally sacrificied himself in 4th km, something no elite has been willing to do since & not even before for few years
Very interesting and maybe discussion for another thread.
Is this what happened to Webb after his record run? If you go too hard for time, you risk ending your career? Didn't Webb say himself that the record run took too much out of him?
Deanouk wrote:The flag is about 30m above the track and is hardly moving
no
it is moving
A flag that far up above the track surface does not tell you much about the wind at track level
no
it gives indication
wind wrecks runs
get a clue
- commentator for 800 says too windy
- 10k winner says "blustery"
i saw whole interesting sessions on tv
your neurone needs to get damn clue :
it was damn windy
I never said anything about the wind in the 800m final, which was on a different day and therefore totally irrelevant to your claims that the wind readings were between 5 and 8m'sec for whole of Jan & Feb
utter total drivel
i quoted wind readings from graph in few days relevant : end-jan/early-feb
how inept are you to not comprehend this for umpteenth time winds similar for those few days ???
They certainly weren't at track level on the days of the sprint and jump finals
completely clueless
don won it in 20,73 in assumed peak shape
he won zurich later in 20.06 !!!
how inept are are you to consider 20.73 & 20.06 similar calibre ???
So you are wrong
utter drivel
see don above
how big do you think wind was to wreck him to 20.73 compared to zurich 20.06 ???
Re the 800m, the commentator said the wind 'PROBABLY' cost him the WR
huge understatement
learn to think
don's 200 was 20.73
he ran 20.06 in zurich
get a damn clue about how fast Kip couda run in '74 if his form was anywhere close
Being as the WR was only 0.1 sec faster, that is a genuine claim
clueless
you weren't even born at time
i watched it on tv & thought more like 1s off to quantify it just for wind
that was more like a 1'42-high effort not considering solo, nor after rounds, brutal rounds with auto-time wr just coupla days before
To knock 1 sec off Bayi's time for windy conditions that didn't exist is a ludicrous claim
complete drivel
apart from not even being born at meet :
you can't comprehend for umpteenth time :
- wind on flags
- big historical wind for the meet
- 10k winner saying "blustery"
- 800 commentary about "wind on back-stretch"
- don winning in 20.73 & zurich later in 20.06 !!!
There are lots of examples of 'fast' performances in less than perfect conditions. In the 81 Mile in Brussels, Boit said, "I felt the wind in the backstretch," said Boit, who was
third. "I thought, `Oh, the time isn't going to be good.'"
boit was crap miler
he only moved up because he was ole man by '79 & had no idea of 1500/mile
he was worth 1'42-high in '77 v caballo off epic race if run off 2s +ve splits, so crap 4y later over 1 mile means nothing
The reading in the men's 100m that night was + 1.9m/sec.
The wind reading in the women's 200m that same night was -1.1m/sec
i don't recall either King Carl or calvin or great ashford running those sprints
no wind mentioned for coe's race
where is comment ?
your neurone doesn't seem to realise, big contra winds can help all the way around
Stronger readings than any of the sprint finals in Christchurch
nonsense
learn to think
brussels is relatively enclosed
don ran 20.73 in games & 20.06 in zurich !!!
explain the damn wind ???
Where are the quotes from the competitors of that 1500 Commonwealth final claiming the wind was strong?
utterly clueless
see enough already of :
- fluttering flags
- 800 commentary
- historical wind for those few days
read 10k winner :
blustery
Are you going to knock 1 sec off Coe's mile time due to stronger winds?
not on basis that no one claimed he had adverse wind for race
you never saw meet live
You knock random chunks of time off performances based on little information
nonsense
see numerous above & previous
and yet you are very selective with who you apply this to
nonsense
i saw '81 mile live on tv
no mention of wind for it
it was last individual race & no wind as coe states :
"Today everything was perfect", declared Coe at the finish, "The evening was mild, the weather excellent and the crowd great. I could never stress the importance of this enough, it is that which carried me to the record. Also, for the first time, I was pushed by a rival. Mike Boit stayed in touch for a long time and this made me work right until the end."
no drivel about bad wind for race
Just because it was a bit windy for the men's 800m final, it does not mean that the wind was the same strength for the duration of the Games
utterly clueless
the wind never letted up from historical reports nor likes of 10k winner staating "blustery"
This is your only piece of evidence you use to take 1 sec off Bayi's run
clueless
see numerous :
- wind reports
- flags fluttering
- commentary of 800
- whole meet viewing
- 10k winner - "blustery"
Utter nonsense
drivel
not even born when Bayi ran epic WR & not even in junior-high in '81
nothing 1st hand account
worthless postings
confused late reader wrote:
Personally, I think Wanjiru had the most talent at the marathon than all those listed
i never used to think so
i always reckoned geoffrey's '11 new york was
26-flat / 2"02-low/mid
the winning of this years' WC offers huge evidence to challenge
they coudn't even break 2"12 ?!
& sammy hammered ~ ? 2"06+
yeah
the race has to offer sammy right up with geoffrey-'11, who was quantum leap over any
10k / M
i believed i had seen, but times of this major gets sammy right-back there
however, i doubt any any bipedal ever wouda wanted to face the geoffrey of '11 new york...
For the mile, I don't know.
let me "educate you" :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBXu_K6bp8Ehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUsEuv3Debshe was in likely
~ 1'39.9 / 3'24.2
shape on '70s synthetic-track in those efforts
it wouda been interesting to speculate his potential if he actually trained for 800 !!!
ventolin^3 wrote:
the winning of this years' WC offers huge evidence to challenge
they coudn't even break 2"12 ?!
& sammy hammered ~ ? 2"06+
yeah
the race has to offer sammy right up with geoffrey-'11, who was quantum leap over any
yes, yes. in the heat too and under conditioned.
In some of his other marathons you can tell from the replays that he was sitting in the pack too.As fast as he was, I don't think he ever really REALLY REALLY pushed his absolute fastest time. He was saving his true effort. Shame we never saw it.
Ventolin, is Kiprop too tall for the marathon? He is so smooth. I watched that race with Mo F and couldn't believe it. He is on another planet in terms of running form.
I agree with you about Mo. Very underrated on that survey. Greatest distance runner right now.
is this possible? wrote:Is this what happened to Webb after his
record run?
possibly
Asbel looked in 3'27 shape in '11 but bombed in '12 due to coach foisted on camp
he coudn't be ~ dead-fuuckin last in final when on circuit before/after, 1st or close
If you go too hard for time, you risk ending your career?
definitely
ovett ran wild race off coe's suicidal opener in '78 euros, when at worst likely 1'42-high - 1'43-flat shape in 1-off
he ran wide on last bend of his pb on tactical race
( soulemain ran an ~ 1'41.5 !!! route-1 in monaco 800 in his 1'42.9+
he is very much in ovett mould )
ovett never wanted this crap again despite a 800 gold in '80
coe never capable of 49-low solo & hanging on for 2s +ve split
that is only for legends of 800
Didn't Webb say himself that the record run took too much out of him?
i think more to do with injuries
he was in great shape in '07
Paaavo wrote:
I've just read Paavo's Wikipedia.
Why the hell he got only 5.5%?
Aren't we too too inclined to pick athletes from recent times in detriment to athletes from the past (that we barely heard of, let alone watched and followed their careers)?
I'm sure we are a little biased towards the recent past, as these are likely the performances we grew up with and have witnessed ourselves, or at least heard about frequently.
The other issue that I'm sure plays in is that times are faster today. Sure, huge parts of this are related to better running surfaces, shoes, training, and nutrition; but for those that like certainty Kenenisa Bekele has run 12:37. Nurmi might have been able to run that time if he were born in 1990...but he may also have only been capable of 13:15.
You really are ignoring facts and clutching at straws here.
There are wind readings for the sprints and jumps INSIDE the stadium, which were all inside the allowable 2.0m/sec. This is specific information relevant to the issue. Wind reports for a general period of weeks over 2 months is a trend and is not specific.
Flags fluttering 30m+ above the stadium tells us little of the conditions on the track. The stats on the track show wind was minimal.
The commentary of the 800 is irrelevant, as it was on a different day to the 1500m, as was the 10k.
Are you really offering 2 runs by Quarrie 7 months apart as supporting the idea he was effected by the wind?
This would only be relevant if Quarrie was in exactly the same form in Jan as August. Neither you nor anyone else would have any way of proving this to be the case.
When he ran in Christchurch, he'd already run the 100m and his competition in the 200m was not as tough as who he met in Zurich on 16.8.74 at the peak of the European season. He had a head wind of -0.6m/sec in Christchurch, which is negligible.
In Zurich he had a tail wind of 0.4m/sec.
The difference in his times 7 months apart has nothing to do with the wind.
The performance of Raelene Boyle in the women's 200m in Christchurch supports this. She ran her 2nd fastest ever time of 22.50 on the 29.1.74 with a +0.6m/sec wind. Again, hardly any wind and well within the legal limits. And this was on the same afternoon as Kipkurgat's 800m win and Quarrie's 200m, so the wind was not strong at all.
Boit wasn't "a crap miler" as you so eloquently put. When he came second to Coe in Brussels it put him in the all time top 5 at the time.
And you seem completely lost on the point I was making, which has no bearing at all on Boit's ability anyway.
When I said that Coe's mile would have been effected by the wind, you said, "not on basis that no one claimed he had adverse wind for race". Well Boit DID CLAIM that. He said, "I felt the wind in the backstretch," said Boit, who was
third. "I thought, `Oh, the time isn't going to be good.'"
Can you not understand that someone in the race, who was immediately behind Coe, actually stated in a post race interview to Sports Illustrated, not years later, that he could feel the wind and he believed it would effect the time?
The point is that someone in the race, the 81 Golden Mile, actually stated that the wind was strong and that he felt it would effect the time. Coe clearly wasn't too bothered by it and would look back on the race with fond memories due to breaking the WR. But the point is that in this race an athlete commented on the wind, whereas no one did so in the Christchurch 1500m.
Moreover, the wind readings for the sprints in that Brussels meet, were much higher than those recorded in the sprint races at Christchurch.
Wells ran the 3rd fastest time of the year, 20.26 to narrowly beat Lattany, 20.27. The wind was +1.9m/sec
Ashford won the women's 200m in 21.84, the fastest in the world, with a -1.1m/sec.
You said you don't recall, "great ashford running those sprints".
Well, that would imply that either you didn't really watch all the meet live, or else you have poor recollection of events from 34 years ago! Strange then that you can 'recall' so vividly a commentator saying it was windy during the afternoon of Feb 2nd 1974!? That was 7 years earlier than not recalling who won the women's 200m. I conclude that your memory is not reliable.
Do I think the wind cost Coe a second in the mile? No. But the evidence is there that the wind was stronger at this meet than in Christchurch. In other words, the wind was calm in New Zealand and in no way slowed Bayi down by 1 sec. There are no reports from anyone in the race (unlike Brussels) that there was wind, there are no commentator accounts that you have provided for that day (Feb 2nd) that there was a strong wind, and all the readings from inside the stadium during those Games offer nothing above 2.0m/sec.
If you are going to allow Bayi a second off his time for strong winds that you cannot provide any evidence for, apart from a few fluttering flags way above the stadium, and which fly in the statistical wind readings taken on the track, then you need to apply the same benefit to other runs where competitor accounts and statistical wind readings inside the stadium are stronger.
And for your information I did watch the Brussels meet live, so don't presume to know what I was doing.
what about current 1500m champ wrote:
Ventolin, is Kiprop too tall for the marathon? He is so smooth. I watched that race with Mo F and couldn't believe it. He is on another planet in terms of running form.
I agree with you about Mo. Very underrated on that survey. Greatest distance runner right now.
There no such thing as being too tall or short for an event.
Farah is certainly the greatest distance runner right now, but that isn't very significant. He has no competition. Most of his competition struggles to stay in sub 13:15 shape. All of the GOATS had GOATs (or close to it) as competition. Mo just sits and kick on weaklings. This is one reason why he will never be a GOAT. Weak mentality and easy medals.