Who WINS in their prime going toe to toe Jim Ryun versus Coe?

Les wrote:

idjdj wrote:

Technology and training/nutritional knowledge??? This isn't some electronics show. Running isn't that complicated and nothing has changed that much. We have only had 1 highschooler run faster than Ryun did. Our other pro times are not much better.

You are completely wrong on this. If you look at the kind of beastly training his coach inflicted on him (30x440) regularly it's a wonder he was able to survive to run the times he did. As it was he peaked at 20. If you put Coe on the same training Ryun did he would have broken down and never run close to times he ran. If Ryun were running today, his training would be much more sane and advanced than it was then. Training was really primitive back in the '60s.

No, you are wrong. There is nothing wrong with 30x440. Runners STILL do workouts like this today. I know several top teams that do such workouts.

Training was not primitive. People are largely training the same way now as they did back then. Top elite runners are still doing crazy insane workouts just like Ryun was. Rupp, Kiprop, Alan Webb, Makloufi?, Cam Levins, etc.

for Ryun's 800 ability remembering he tied WR at 19y when ill on soft asphalt track beating field by proverbial mile when ill after a prelim just coupla hours before ( no one ever has set a 800/880y WR with prelim earlier in day ), here is account of a meet earlier in year when he was still 18y :http://kuhistory.com/articles/ryuns-run/the key is state of trackit was so sodden that the LJ runway was unfit to sprint on & a conveyor belt runway was employed

they coudn't obviously coudn't do such for a 440y track so we can only conclude this was not a track fit to run on & the handicap musta been horrendous compared to a dry, pristine track which has been quoted by epstein as 1.5% or likely ~ 1s/lap for a dirt track which has had races run on it

a sodden track has been quoted at by elite runner at 2 - 3s/lap

if "Ryun's track" was not a 2 - 3s/lap, then nothing ever was

given conservative 2s/lap handicap, compared to synthetic & 1s/lap for dry, pristine dirt, it means his 3'55.8 shouda been 1s/lap on dry track, meaning 3'51.8, already superior to Jazy's 3'53.6wr, & 3'47.8 for synthetic

this is likely as coupla months later he ran 3'51.3WR on dry dirt

therefore, with huge WR level mile run in his legs, he then ran a 46.9R for 440y making up 20 yards on anchor leg, which is 46.6 for 400

add 0.7s for relay -> 47.3 open 400

then knock off 2s/lap for sodden track ->45.3 for synthetic track 400

remember, that is 45.3 speed with a 3'55.8 mile in his legs, worth probably 3'51.8 for a dry dirt run, worth ~ 3'47.8 on a synthetic

so, at 18y, Ryun was capable on a synthetic, of 45.3 open 400 with a 3'47.8 mile in his legs from earlier in day

that is simply the most stunning 400 speed i have heard of a miler in history & he was still 18y at the time, well over a year before his peak in mid-'67

And do elite runners nowadays peak at 20? You should really look at what Timmons did to his runners. The thing is, it wasn't just Ryun training like this. It was entire college distance of varying talent, not just elite world class runners. He ruined dozens of runners.

if he had 45.3 speed with 3'47.8 in his legs at 18y, that is at worst a 45-flat fully rested & probably more like 44-high

it is inconceivable that he had slower 400 speed at his 20y ole peak, call it 44.75 - 45.00

assume 1500 endurance anywhere of 3'24/3'25/3'26/3'27 with this

there are plenty of calculators out there to estimate his 800 :

try 44.75 - 45.00 with 3'24/3'25/3'26/3'27 here for an 800 :

http://timescalculator.appspot.com/

Peter Snell came before Ryun, and has said himself he thinks he would be about a second quicker over 800 with modern tracks compared to the grass track he ran on. Sorry, but all these people claiming Ryun lost 2 seconds a lap and could have run 3.24 are deluded.

calculo wrote:

http://kuhistory.com/articles/ryuns-run/

newspaper link from the time :

confirms details :

cool day at 60F, paced only to 1/2-way, poor splits at 57.6/61.1/62.0/55.1 winning by 75 yards

confirms 46.9 anchor in relay making up 20 yards

track unfit shape to run on with a steam-roller being used during some races itself with morning runs run elsewhere

interesting article next to it from santee the former 1500wr holder notable for commenting Ryun had "most powerful thighs i have seen on a distance runner", very relevant when those legs are on a 6'2 frame

Seriously??? wrote:

Peter Snell came before Ryun, and has said himself he thinks he would be about a second quicker over 800 with modern tracks compared to the grass track he ran on. Sorry, but all these people claiming Ryun lost 2 seconds a lap and could have run 3.24 are deluded.

No one is saying cinder tracks are 2 seconds per lap slower than synthetic.

Nice strawman though.

Seriously??? wrote:Peter Snell came before Ryun, and has said himself he thinks he would be about a second quicker over 800 with modern tracks compared to the grass track he ran on. Sorry, but all these people claiming Ryun lost 2 seconds a lap and could have run 3.24 are deluded.

that is the problem

we are not talking grass tracks but dirt ones & crappy ones because of weather in kansas that meet

snell ran his 1'44.3 on a grass track which couda been steam-rollered into hardness of a cricket pitch

his next quickest time ever was 1'45.1 on dirt & snell was primarily a 800 runner who ran mostly 800/880y & coud not get close to his grass-track time on dirt

he got barely within 1s off his grass-track time on dirt

calculo wrote:

Seriously??? wrote:Peter Snell came before Ryun, and has said himself he thinks he would be about a second quicker over 800 with modern tracks compared to the grass track he ran on. Sorry, but all these people claiming Ryun lost 2 seconds a lap and could have run 3.24 are deluded.

that is the problem

we are not talking grass tracks but dirt ones & crappy ones because of weather in kansas that meet

snell ran his 1'44.3 on a grass track which couda been steam-rollered into hardness of a cricket pitch

his next quickest time ever was 1'45.1 on dirt & snell was primarily a 800 runner who ran mostly 800/880y & coud not get close to his grass-track time on dirt

he got barely within 1s off his grass-track time on dirt

1. He wasn't in as good form when he ran the dirt time, so it is hard to compare

2. That is still only 1 second per lap lost, no where near the 2 seconds a lap that you are claiming

llort_vbo wrote:

I say Ryun edges out wrote:

Assume they both have access to a 2015 level of technology and training/nutritional knowledge. How would a 1v1 race (plus a rabbit) between these two pan out? Would 1981 Seb Coe or 1967 Jim Ryun take the cake?

800 - Coe easily

1500 - Coe less easily

No way. Ryun STILL has the NCAA 800m record. And, he did it all on a cinder track.

Ryun gets his ass kicked and calculo meets him in showers afterwards

This, yes Ryun could've ran faster, yet he's still not just on Coe's level

Les wrote:

And do elite runners nowadays peak at 20? You should really look at what Timmons did to his runners. The thing is, it wasn't just Ryun training like this. It was entire college distance of varying talent, not just elite world class runners. He ruined dozens of runners.

If there was drug testing, then Ryun.

8FE wrote:

If there was drug testing, then Ryun.

Yes there was testing for Coe in 1980's.

There was no testing for Ryun in 67. Steroids were legal.

They did not test the golden child of track. He was spoiled beyond his means by his father and the sport. It has all come to light, especially now with his behavior.

Ryun's fastest 800m was 1:44.3 on a synthetic track not dirt.

IIRC his next best was 1:45.1 also on synthetic. He never broke 1:46 ever in his career. He only broke 1:47 on 4 other occasions, 2 of those being relay legs with rolling starts.

So his best open 800 on dirt was 1:46.2

Coe ran 1:45.0 on dirt in a uni race winning by 5 + secs.

Coe was WR holder for 18 years and ran 1:41.7, and broke 1:45, 26 times.

Ryun broke 47 sec once in a relay, 46.9 for 440yds, worth 46.6 for 400m. There is no way of calculating the effects of the conditions on that run numerically.

He ran in lots of other 4 x 400 relays in good conditions and never managed to break 47.

Coe broke 47 secs in individuals and relay legs on 13 occasions, including 3 on dirt, and a fastest of 45.5 in a relay. He was significantly faster over 400 than Ryun.

Over 1500 Ryun had one 'great' miler of note to compete against in his best years. Keino.

Coe faced many great milers, Walker, Bayi, Scott, Cram, Ovett, Bile,..

So the competition Coe faced was more in depth than Ryun's.

Coe was 3 secs faster over 1500 and 4 secs faster over a mile.

Ryun vs. the PED Coe is a tough call.

Clean Ryun vs. clean Coe is a runaway for Ryun.

idjdj wrote:

Maybe Mouse wrote:

You should rethink the implications of what you wrote vis-a-vis Jim Ryun.

No, what you are saying makes no sense as a response to what I said. This second comment of yours just reinforces that and shows that not only did you not reread my post, you may have never completely read it in the first place.

Good job.

No. I did read your post the first time. I also read it the second time just to be sure. But that only makes you completely WRONG.

The fact that you do not even understand the implications of your own post is what identifies you as an IMBECILE.

Good job.

yoyo mamam wrote:

Ryun vs. the PED Coe is a tough call.

Clean Ryun vs. clean Coe is a runaway for Ryun.

There is absolutely no evidence that either doped, but looking at each athlete's career trajectory, Ryun looks more likely to have doped.

Great as a junior.

Never the same after mono, which just happened to be the same year as steroids were banned in sport.

Inconsistent form thereafter for no obvious reason. Great one week, also ran the next.

Competed in period with no out of competition or out of season testing.

Coe had a long career, lots of peaks, slow deterioration as he moved into 30's, outspoken about peds and initiated tougher laws to combat dopers.

I don't think either doped. Both were athletic freaks. But it certainly looks like bias when someone who competed in an era of testing is accused as a cheat, with no evidence, whereas another who competed in an era of free for all drugs is declared innocent.