Should have Michel Jazy run in the 1500m instead of the 5000m at the 1964 Olympics?

There was a big gap between Snell and the other medalists - but did Jazy have a great kick at 1500? I have always though of him as a sustained pace kind of runner, rather than someone who has a short, sharp acceleration. He could outkick Clarke over 2 miles/5K but would he have won a medal in the 1964 1500?

Jazy was terrific. Arthur Lydiard thought Michel was crazy to duck Snell.

I'm pretty sure Jazy would have been a real handful for Snell.

Jazy thought he could win the 5000, although many did consider Schul the favorite. I dunno, Jazy already had a 1500 medal from 1960. Don't LetsRun people always think guys should move up in distance?

Thought He Could wrote:

Jazy thought he could win the 5000, although many did consider Schul the favorite. I dunno, Jazy already had a 1500 medal from 1960. Don't LetsRun people always think guys should move up in distance?

But Jazy could have won a 2nd Olympic medal if he competed in the 1500m.

Silver and bronze were way behind Snell.

Let's be clear: Jazy was not beating Snell in the 1500m. Nobody was. Snell was just so much better than everyone else. Jazy had been crushed by Elliott in 1960 and I'm sure he didn't want to have that happen again.

He might have had a good shot at the silver, but, then again, he should have had it in the 5k.

Jazy could have run well in either of them.

He was perfectly positioned in the 5000m but ran himself out with a bad tactic the last lap.

Considering he was the fastest 1500m runner in the field, he should have saved his best effort for the finish.

Even without that, a better distribution of energy would have gotten a better result from him.

He was faster than Snell at 1500, and I think would have beat him in that event.

In those days, we called it 5000 meters.

1955 wrote:

Let's be clear: Jazy was not beating Snell in the 1500m. Nobody was. Snell was just so much better than everyone else. Jazy had been crushed by Elliott in 1960 and I'm sure he didn't want to have that happen again.

He might have had a good shot at the silver, but, then again, he should have had it in the 5k.

1964 was a year too soon in Jazy's 5000m development to win the gold medal. Had there been a 1965 World Champs, he would have probably have won the 5000m.

As to 1964, by then Jazy was a far better 1500m runner than in 1960 when his second place in the Olympics shocked everybody.

I recall Lydiard watching a Jazy training session, prior to the 1964 games, and considered him to be in fantastic 1500m shape.

He couldnt out kick anyone in the 5000....he surely wanst medaling in the 1500.

I wish Bob would have doubled. In 1964 he held 3 world records and was undefeated all year.

1955 wrote:Let's be clear: Jazy was not beating Snell in the 1500m

utter nonsense

the next year probably to show what he couda done in the 1500 if he'd contested it, he broke snell's mile wr taking it down from '54.1 to '53.6

Nobody was

jazy certainly couda threatened him

Snell was just so much better than everyone else

losing his mile wr to a guy he didn't face says he wasn't

Jazy had been crushed by Elliott in 1960 and I'm sure he didn't want to have that happen again

i seriously doubt jazy thought snell was elliott calibre over 1500, so little chance of ducking

He might have had a good shot at the silver, but, then again, he should have had it in the 5k

he was not in top shape for that 5k perhaps inexplicably ran it because of illness/injury perhaps denting speed which is only reason he woudn't run 1500 & schedule didn't allow doubling

the hope likely being 5k wouda been a dawdle to bell & even with sub-par speed he wouda destroyed them on last lap like niyonbongo in '96 or hicham in '04

he was obviously in worse shape than imagined as he coudn't manage even that

the following year he ran 13'27 which smashed the WR entering '65 of kuts 13'35, but ron beat him to it & got it down to 13'25 before jazy's 13'27

jazy if 100% in '64, year of importance, couda won 5k off fast or slow pace to bell

his breaking of snell's mile wr shows he couda been huge threat over 1500 if in top shape

Reading the biography on Jazy, it appears Jazy's best distance was between 2000m and 3000m.

And finally in October, he successfully attacked Norpoth’s 2,000 WR of 4:57.8 with a 4:56.2. This was his seventh individual WR. All of them were between One Mile and Two Miles, including 2,000 and 3,000. Undoubtedly his best distance was between 2,000 and 3,000. Sadly, there was no Olympic race within this range. So Jazy had to be satisfied with an Olympic silver and two European golds and one silver. His immaculate running style and often unanswerable finishing kick were a sight to behold. Today, films of his races are still inspiring.

So Jazy was better than Snell over 1500m because he beat his record. But Snell was not as good as Elliott even though he beat his record at the mile and was way ahead at 800m!. Didn't you now New Zealand raced the mile more? Surely your would a couda stars show he could have easily beat his 1500m time.

He would have had zero chance of living with Snells kick. 1:47 Vs 1:44 over 800m.

1955 wrote:

Jazy had been crushed by Elliott in 1960 and I'm sure he didn't want to have that happen again.

Jazy was quoted as saying the 1960 race was absolutely hellish. Even Elliott was tying up in the homestraight; the runners behind him were in a death march.

I think that Jazy, given that he perhaps wasn't in his best shape, didn't want to go through that again--and accurately assessed that Snell was unbeatable. As the races played out, I think his best chance for a medal--certainly for a silver--was in the 1500, but he'd already been there and done that.

In the 5,000 it was going to be very difficult for anyone to beat Schul at that time. (Remember, Clarke finished something like ninth.) And Norpoth, with his lethal final straightaway, would have been very hard to keep from silver. Different tactics might have gotten Jazy in just ahead of Dellinger for the bronze, but I really think that was it.

It comes down, really, to Jazy's not being physically in shape to win either 1964 race. He was probably right in thinking that his better *chance* to win was in the 5,000--but his chance was very, very slim even there. For that meet, he just didn't have the wheels.

Ummm, you people do realize Tokyo was cross country, right? No one anticipated that.

People have to remember, Snell's PB for the 1500m is 3:37.6 which was en route to his mile WR. He didn't race the 1500m distance much.

How many times would have Snell raced the 1500m in his career?

Toru Taniguchi wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

So Jazy was better than Snell over 1500m because he beat his record. But Snell was not as good as Elliott even though he beat his record at the mile and was way ahead at 800m!. Didn't you now New Zealand raced the mile more? Surely your would a couda stars show he could have easily beat his 1500m time.

He would have had zero chance of living with Snells kick. 1:47 Vs 1:44 over 800m.

People have to remember, Snell's PB for the 1500m is 3:37.6 which was en route to his mile WR. He didn't race the 1500m distance much.

How many times would have Snell raced the 1500m in his career?

Not often.

The 1964 Olympics was the only time he was in good shape to race longer distances. At all other times he was only in good 800m shape yet he held the mile record.

Who is niyonbongo?

Niyongabo?

A lot of people don't know that Snell only just qualified for the semi finals by finishing 4th in his heat for the 1500m.

But he dominated from there though.

A fastest loser or did say the top 4 go through?