El Guerrouj's 4:44.79 2000m WR is untouchable

rfmaioral wrote:

Of course that is blazing fast, but not as good as his Mile record, or Komen's 3000m / 2 miles.

The 2000m is barely run, otherwise the record would be lower by like 2 seconds.

Noah Ngeny, Komen and Lagat could have challenged the 4:44 mark.

Mo Farah we can never be sure, but at his prime w/ his 3:28 1500m shape he could have a shot as well.

agree doable in the future-I think Komen's 3K record will be a lot harder to top

trewtwe wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

One never ceases to marvel at the benefits of modern pharmaceuticals.

You are like a broken record.

And that's how records are broken.

marathoneeer wrote:

So that is 57.12 for each of the five 400s

No, it’s 56.96 for each of the 5 x 400m.

1955 wrote:

Last I looked, it was further away from 2nd and 10th fastest of all the men's records, even Komen's incredible 3k.

All of EL G’s records are the result of a sophisticated and long term drug regime, and as such have been untouchable since the ABP was introduced. The only athlete that has come close is Kiprop in the 1500, and we all know how that came about!

His 2000m WR is the strongest imo. It is basically running a mile in 3:49.2 (which in itself would have been a WR just 18 years earlier!! ) and then running another entire lap at the same pace! How anyone can think that is legitimate is beyond me.

How about Daniel Komen s 3K?

Deanouk wrote:

[quote]1955 wrote:

His 2000m WR is the strongest imo. It is basically running a mile in 3:49.2 (which in itself would have been a WR just 18 years earlier!! ) and then running another entire lap at the same pace! How anyone can think that is legitimate is beyond me.

In 1966 Michel Jazy ran 4 mins 56.2 for 2000m. This was basically like running Roger Bannister's mile WR of 3 mins 59.4 secs (which happened just 12 years earlier) and then throwing down another 400m in 56.8 seconds (!). Does this mean that Jazy was on the juice as well? I know that Bob Schul once suggested that Jazy and Clarke could have been taking steroids because of the heart troubles they had after retiring from running. There was no sort of drug testing back then either.

Another point is that if there is not any real drug testing going on East Africa (take Ethiopia for example) how on earth will the authorities be able to compile a ABP on these athletes? As long as this situation continues there will always be a possibility that some untested East African could come of of the woodwork and break El G's records.

If you're arguing that Jazy might have doped - and it's possible - then that would remove all conjecture about El G's far superior performance.

BTW, there are some here who have argued that doping for distance events wasn't possible in the '60's, because the methods weren't available. Yet athletes today, such as the Russian runners recently convicted of doping, used a combination of amphetamines, testosterone, and steroids. All of these were available in the '60's. There were performances in Mexico in '68 that were very interesting.

But El G - of course he was.

Deanouk wrote:

His 2000m WR is the strongest imo. It is basically running a mile in 3:49.2 (which in itself would have been a WR just 18 years earlier!! )

No, some guy called Sebastian has run faster than this 20 years earlier.

Deanouk wrote:

The only athlete that has come close is Kiprop in the 1500, and we all know how that came about!

And Ngeny and Lagat.

It currently looks like Kiprop took banned substances, but it's really not clear what on earth was really happening with him. Did he have a coach/agent supplied doping regime through his career? Did he start cheating midway through? Was he sporadically trying different supplements of his own accord, akin to his incomprehensible decision making in races? Was he an arrogant idiot that upset various people with his behaviour and got himself framed as punishment?

Pretty depressing that it's so utterly murky.

Well Coe was doped to the gills, so Dean wouldn't mention him.

Looking back, amphetamine and steroid doping were popular at least since the 50s, blood transfusion since the 60s. That is general knowledge.

Back then, we also had no problems with openly poisoning our enemies with chemical weapons, so why some here think we were so nice with high ethics in the past escapes me. As a matter of facts, testing started decades ago because of the overly abundant drug cheats of the past.

WR progression= drugs? wrote:

Another point is that if there is not any real drug testing going on East Africa (take Ethiopia for example) how on earth will the authorities be able to compile a ABP on these athletes? As long as this situation continues there will always be a possibility that some untested East African could come of of the woodwork and break El G's records.

Good question for Ethiopia. I don't know if there is any sufficient OOC blood tests being conducted for the ABP database. Certainly their OOC testing is weak - when was the last time an Ethiopian runner tested positive OOC? At least Kenya is starting to do some OOC testing as witnessed by several positives over the last couple of years. And Kenya's first ABP violation occured when Sarah Chepchirchir was provisionally suspended recently pending a hearing. And now Uganda is starting to make some noise - what's their testing status?

So, lack of OOC testing and knowing the glow times would the key to breaking any of El G's records, IMO. All of his WRs & most of his PBs were set prior to the introduction of the EPO test in 2000, though he ran that sizzling 12:50 in 03. Some of his fellow countrymen weren't so lucky after the test came out glowing right through some of their greatest & fastest performances, e.g. B. Boulami (SC WR in 02), Mourhit (World HM Championships in 02), Ramzi (Gold medal performance @ Beijing).

Armstronglivs wrote:

BTW, there are some here who have argued that doping for distance events wasn't possible in the '60's, because the methods weren't available. Yet athletes today, such as the Russian runners recently convicted of doping, used a combination of amphetamines, testosterone, and steroids. All of these were available in the '60's. There were performances in Mexico in '68 that were very interesting.

Do you think there was that much doping with distance runners in the 60s or even the 70s? The times back then were modest and reasonable compared to the later decades of the wild 80s and the rocket-fueled 90s & 00s.

If you look at the 80s the Soviets threw the first punch with their doctrine of injectable roid cocktails at any cost for the sole purpose to "win" and dominate the World. Then East Germany shortly followed and the arms race was on.

That same philosophy has carried over today with Russia and many other former Soviet block nations.

Doping was possible in the sixties but had yet to really catch on in middle and distance running; that changed with the adoption of blood doping by some countries through the seventies, and then by the eighties and nineties it was the Wild West. Today, doping is more sophisticated in order to beat improved testing and the bio passport, and even more widespread. It is in all sports. It is estimated that there are over a hundred undetectable substances that are currently being used, and the black market in doping is in the billions of Euros. Athletics is one of the biggest offenders (info courtesy of WADA, independent journalists and Aljazeera.)

WR progression= drugs? wrote:

Deanouk wrote:

[quote]1955 wrote:

His 2000m WR is the strongest imo. It is basically running a mile in 3:49.2 (which in itself would have been a WR just 18 years earlier!! ) and then running another entire lap at the same pace! How anyone can think that is legitimate is beyond me.

In 1966 Michel Jazy ran 4 mins 56.2 for 2000m. This was basically like running Roger Bannister's mile WR of 3 mins 59.4 secs (which happened just 12 years earlier) and then throwing down another 400m in 56.8 seconds (!). Does this mean that Jazy was on the juice as well? I know that Bob Schul once suggested that Jazy and Clarke could have been taking steroids because of the heart troubles they had after retiring from running. There was no sort of drug testing back then either.

There was no drug testing back then because steroids weren´t forbidden.

well,, wrote:

WR progression= drugs? wrote:

In 1966 Michel Jazy ran 4 mins 56.2 for 2000m. This was basically like running Roger Bannister's mile WR of 3 mins 59.4 secs (which happened just 12 years earlier) and then throwing down another 400m in 56.8 seconds (!). Does this mean that Jazy was on the juice as well? I know that Bob Schul once suggested that Jazy and Clarke could have been taking steroids because of the heart troubles they had after retiring from running. There was no sort of drug testing back then either.

There was no drug testing back then because steroids weren´t forbidden.

And now they are testing for undetectable substances.

ck3237 wrote:

How about Daniel Komen s 3K?

How about El Guerrouj's 800?

The first EPO test in 2000 was not deemed very effective. IIRC, a new, more reliable test came out in 2005, the year after ELG retired. I can’t recall when the ABP was introduced, but it was after 2004.

never heard of Coe? wrote:

Deanouk wrote:

His 2000m WR is the strongest imo. It is basically running a mile in 3:49.2 (which in itself would have been a WR just 18 years earlier!! )

No, some guy called Sebastian has run faster than this 20 years earlier.

Yes, I’m aware of that thank you.

I mistakenly thought EL G had set his 2k WR in 1997, hence using 18 years rather than 20, to refer to fact mile WR was 3:49.4 by Walker at start of July 1979.

Deanouk wrote:

1955 wrote:

Last I looked, it was further away from 2nd and 10th fastest of all the men's records, even Komen's incredible 3k.

All of EL G’s records are the result of a sophisticated and long term drug regime, and as such have been untouchable since the ABP was introduced. The only athlete that has come close is Kiprop in the 1500, and we all know how that came about!

His 2000m WR is the strongest imo. It is basically running a mile in 3:49.2 (which in itself would have been a WR just 18 years earlier!! ) and then running another entire lap at the same pace! How anyone can think that is legitimate is beyond me.

It's easy to not really understand the 2000m or how hard it is because it is rarely run and it's weirdly positioned between a mile and 3000m. He ran through 1600m in 3.49.60 that day (so he was probably at 1 mile in 3min50.7) and rips off 55.19 for the final lap which is actually way above his average pace for the previous 1600m. Its not inconceivable that he may have been able to run

flat with more even pace running and then I think you would correct in saying it's his best. The only argument against that could be that he may have had an extra second in him vs being close to max with 3.26 and 3.43. Either way I agree with you 100% on legitimacy - it's all folklore now but no chance at all this guy or his contemporaries were legitimate.

Overall though Komens record is still the most insane. 4.53.18 at 2000m followed up with a 2.27.49 final km is beyond belief. Fun days back in the mid 90's to early 2000's