|
Run-Down Forums
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2002 9:18 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | Although have you ever done a best average for just finals ???? Would be interested to see how such a list would look !!! I imagine that Bailey, Boldon and Lewis would lose a few slots here ... |
Greene would obviously stand out even more with that criteria, but I would think Bailey would do pretty well (I assume you mean WC/OG finals?). When he was running well enough to make the finals, his record was pretty darn good... Must be a Canadian thing. 
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Justin
Varsity
Joined: 08 Oct 2001
Posts: 312
Location: London
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2002 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Grand Prix has, as you suggest, been the downfall of the 200m. The 100m and 200m alternate as GP events, but in years when the 200m is the GP event most meets still put on a 100m because it's such a marquee event, yet in 100m years there is no real call for a 200m as well. The effect is more and higher quality 100m than 200m races each year.
Depth of competition is important as well. Standards are now so high and so deep that it's hard to see how 100m/200m is a practical double nowadays. 8 races in a week at WC level is just no longer possible.
There is one truly outstanding specialist 200m runner in the world - Kenteris. 19.85 but no 100m form to speak of. I think it's sad he doesn't get the credit he deserves - 3 seasons, 3 golds, 3 personal bests. A champion, a racer. They are rare enough - we should celebrate them.
Justin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2002 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan wrote: | | Quote: | | Although have you ever done a best average for just finals ???? Would be interested to see how such a list would look !!! I imagine that Bailey, Boldon and Lewis would lose a few slots here ... |
Greene would obviously stand out even more with that criteria, but I would think Bailey would do pretty well (I assume you mean WC/OG finals?). When he was running well enough to make the finals, his record was pretty darn good... Must be a Canadian thing.
Dan |
By finals only I mean any final - just not including those times made during qualifying rounds ... So not just Worlds or Olympics, but also Euro circuit meets etc ...
Conway |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2002 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Justin wrote: | Depth of competition is important as well. Standards are now so high and so deep that it's hard to see how 100m/200m is a practical double nowadays. 8 races in a week at WC level is just no longer possible.
There is one truly outstanding specialist 200m runner in the world - Kenteris. 19.85 but no 100m form to speak of. I think it's sad he doesn't get the credit he deserves - 3 seasons, 3 golds, 3 personal bests. A champion, a racer. They are rare enough - we should celebrate them.
Justin |
I think Greene showed in 1999 that the double is indeed possible (as did Fredericks in 96) ... Just takes an extraordinary individual and as you say not everyone can do it ... As a matter of fact I consider Mo's performances in 99 hi best as he did do the double in 9.80/19.90 !! Fredericks 9.89/19.68 double being equally impressive to me ...
As for Kenteris, I am amazed at what he has done in the 200 given nothing in the 100 !!!! That is amazing ... I think he generally gets no respect becasue he doesn't compete against anyone outside of Greece a couple of times a year and then whatever big meet there is ... Not sure if that is fair or not ... No one complained when Moses or Lewis (in the long jump mostly) did similar - although I will say that I was NOT in favor of them doing it either ...
Non the less Kenteris has performed when it has mattered, he has the hardware, and no one has yet to beat him in a major since 2000 ... So until someone steps forward he IS the man ... So Fredericks, Crawford, Boldon, Johnson, Miller and others need ot step up to the plate ... Although I would love to see Greene get serious about 200 again ...
Conway |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathaniel
Water Boy
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 7:36 pm Post subject: Re: High Level Pr's |
|
|
| Conway wrote: |
400
43.18 - MJ - 43.68, 43.84, 43.92, No other sub 44's
... Even MJ dubbed "Superman" couldn't go back ...
Conway |
MJ averaged about 3 sub 44s a year during his career. He retired about a year after his 43.18. His WR record was only 1.1% faster than the 43.68 above. He didn't go back? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No he didn't go back ... Let's take your 1.1% ... Mo Greene's PR is 9.79 ... Add 1.1% and you get 9.897 or 9.90 ... Mo ran 9.89 last year yet was considered to be over the hill, past his prime, etc ... If 1.1% is the standard then look at MO's best times 9.80 (0.1%), 9.82 (0.3%), 9.85 (0.6%) ...
Or how about Kipketer and his 1:41.11 ... Based on your 1.1% then a 1:42.22 would qualify as "going back" ... I don't think so .. Now his 1:41.24 (0.01) now THAT's going back (although it came first)
I could go through different events, but I think you get my point ... Outstanding racing and consistency ... But nothing more than others have done and others have done better ...
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathaniel
Water Boy
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Conway wrote: | No he didn't go back ... Let's take your 1.1% ... Mo Greene's PR is 9.79 ... Add 1.1% and you get 9.897 or 9.90 ... Mo ran 9.89 last year yet was considered to be over the hill, past his prime, etc ... If 1.1% is the standard then look at MO's best times 9.80 (0.1%), 9.82 (0.3%), 9.85 (0.6%) ...
Or how about Kipketer and his 1:41.11 ... Based on your 1.1% then a 1:42.22 would qualify as "going back" ... I don't think so .. Now his 1:41.24 (0.01) now THAT's going back (although it came first)
I could go through different events, but I think you get my point ... Outstanding racing and consistency ... But nothing more than others have done and others have done better ... |
I think you missed my point. (I'll admit I didn't clearly make one). And, perhaps I've missed your original point as well... My point was that in 2000 after his 43.18, he ran just as well that year as any other. One might argue that he ran even better....
The fact that others have done better has no bearing on my arguement, still if you want to go there:
On Mo, holding 100m sprinters and 400m sprinters to the same standard is unreasonable there is typically less variation in individuals' 100m performances than the 400m. It might be argued than that Mo's results are no more amazing.
On Kipketer, if you're going to include his 1:41:24, than I want to include MJ's 43.39. Any knowlgeable witness to that performance will agree that his showboating cost a tenth of a second, probably more. If you think Kipketer went back, then I think you could say MJ did as well.
Regardless, you can't tell me a guy who has 22 times <2% off his best "didn't go back." Seriously, now. That's just ridiculus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 11:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not really clear on what's being debated here, so I'll stay out of that. But one thing that doesn't sit quite right with me:
| Quote: | | On Mo, holding 100m sprinters and 400m sprinters to the same standard is unreasonable there is typically less variation in individuals' 100m performances than the 400m. It might be argued than that Mo's results are no more amazing. |
Mo's accomplishments and consistency in the 100m are one of the most amazing feats ever witnessed in T&F!! I think you're confusing two different types of variance: absolute time on the clock and percent difference. Aside from Greene, most 100m runners vary quite a bit, and it only takes a couple hundreths of a second to be the difference between first place and no medal. To be that consistent at such a high level is phenomenal.
Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI]) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The issue that I was speaking of Dan and Nathanial was that of getting back to WR level once that level was reached ... The original discussion formulated around all of those sprinters that hit their peak time and then back way off from that ... A la Lewis after his 9.86, Bailey after his 9.84, MJ after his 19.32, Christie after his 9.87 etc ...
And while Nathanial is correct in that MJ in the 400 continued to compete at a very high level, he DID NOT go back to world record level ... Period ... Mo has run 9.80 and 9.82 in separate seasons since his 9.79 ... Kipketer actually ran his 1:41.24 FIRST and then came back and ran his 1:41.11 ... ElG has continued to drop his record and run less than a % close to it ...
MJ has NOT done that ... And his 43.3 was prior to his WR ... So he remained consistent ... But was no closer than half a second afer setting the record ... Still outstanding consitency ... Still a high level of competiton ... But NOT WR level or PR level ...
And as Dan stated what MO has done is unpresedented in the sport ... No one ... has done what he has done in terms of consistency at the HIGHEST level ... Period ...
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathaniel
Water Boy
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan wrote: |
Mo's accomplishments and consistency in the 100m are one of the most amazing feats ever witnessed in T&F!! I think you're confusing two different types of variance: absolute time on the clock and percent difference.
Dan |
On high level consistency, I am no less impressed by Frankie Fredericks, Ato Boldon, Michael Johnson, Alan Johnsion even El G. Mo's not alone.
Absolue vs. percentage, no confusion here.
...
Just a few examples, demonstrating that repeated high level performance is not uncommon for the shorter sprints:
60m
Maurice Greene has run 6.39-6.40 3 times
Ben Johnson ran 6.43-6.44 3 times
Tim Harden has run 6.43-6.44 3 times
Jon Drummond has run 6.46 4 times.
100m
Ato Boldon 9.86 4 times
Carl Lewis 9.93 4 times
110m HH
Allen Johnson 12.92-12.93 3 times |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Conway, that makes more sense (the thread is coming back to me now). Can't see anything I disagree with there.
Nathaniel, hitting a bunch of top marks isn't the same as consistency. Ato would come closest (amongst the short sprints and hurdles), having been pretty consistent at the top end of his performances, but he still fails miserably in terms of performing well when it counts. Aside from Mo, pretty much everyone has widely dispersed performances, either on the clock or by place. MJ is the only one I can see placing in that category, but even that is a stretch. He ran in a comfort zone for the most part, only pressing when he was chasing a record. As a result, most of his performances were much further off his top level than Mo's have been.
Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI]) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Conway wrote: |
MJ has NOT done that ... Still a high level of competiton ... But NOT WR level or PR level ...
|
I am not sure what the deal is with all the CAPITAL letters and "...Period."'s. I hope you're aren't taking offense to all this...
Define WR level. In 2000, MJ was in WR fitness. The reason that he didn't PR again was more a matter of luck than that "running at what I will call "near ceiling" levels drains the body in a totally different way." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That would just be Conway's style of writing; caps for emphasis (I usually use bold, but same thing).
| Quote: | | Define WR level. In 2000, MJ was in WR fitness. |
Seems to me a few different things are being talked about, namely MJ in the 200m vs. 400m. It was in the 200m that MJ never returned to record level. In the 400m, he didn't reach record level until the end of his career, so there really wasn't any chance to get back there or to fail trying...
Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI]) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathaniel
Water Boy
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan wrote: |
Aside from Mo, pretty much everyone has widely dispersed performances, either on the clock or by place. MJ is the only one I can see placing in that category, but even that is a stretch.
Dan |
(definitely going on a tangent...)
Dan, welcome to Earth. Visit here much.
In the 400m, MJ owns only 26 of the top 50 times. And, MJ was kickin' it in the 200m at the same time (he's got 13 there). Marion Jones has 20 of the top women's 100m performances... and for the non-sprinters, El G has merely 20 of the top 50 1500s outdoors.
In the 100m, Mo has run 17 of the top 50 times! Simply incredible!!! Indeed Mo is a recordless spectacle to whom there is no comparison... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Dan, welcome to Earth. Visit here much. |
I've no idea what that's supposed to mean...
No one is saying MJ hasn't run a lot of fast times. I'm not sure why your fixation on that. Conway's point that you objected to, which has been re-stated and not yet refuted, is that he didn't get back to that time level after getting to the top.
The fact that Greene does not dominate the all-time list to the same extent as MJ or ElG is indicative that he has much more top-tier competition than either of them has or had. And calling him a recordless spectacle is presumably sarcastic, but comes across as a very silly stance to take. He held the world record for several years and was only bettered by a hundredth of a second in a perfect-conditions race he didn't run in by a person who loses to him pretty much every time out. Something tells me losing a record in such fashion wasn't much of a blow to his confidence...
Also, let me repeat that if you're making an argument about consistency at the highest level, you have to look past just the times. ElG is another that falls well short of the target in that respect. Marion probably gets by (albeit with much more time variance), but I don't think we were discussing women...
Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI]) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
