Ryun vs. Keino (was Track History)

[Guest]

Re: Track History

Tommie Smith was great but I say MJ in the 200 and 400

[jsquire]

Re: Track History

>Liquori didn't refer to Biwott himself as a
>monkey. Roger Bannister commented on Biwott,
>stating that he was the winner because of
>accident of birth, meaning he was from altitude.

Bannister was an accident of birth, by having great talent and the financial means to compete in amateur sport. All champions are accidents, becuase they are tremendously rare. Saying that Biwott won ONLY because of the altitude ignores any other abilities he had and any training that he did. Previously it was said that no champion athlete attributes his/her success completely or even mostly to talent, and would probably be insulted by those who did. In this way many insult the African runners, by lumping them all into a group of "superathletes", and by not understanding that each of them individually busted their asses to win.

Clarke's problem at any
>elevation was getting into tactical races when
>he couldn't kick. He just wasn't a kicker.
>Years later,when he had valve surgery, it was
>s speculated that this may have contributed to
>his lack of a real finishing kick. I won't go
>into the details, but I doubt this is the reason.
>He was like Carlos Lopes in that regard. Strong,
>but not a fast finisher. Clarke probably should
>have bolted from the gun in championship races,
>but how often does anyone see that happen,
>ever?

Zatopek had no kick to speak of, as he himself often said. He had no problems winning important races. The same was true of Nurmi. Before you tell me that "things were different then", Clarke ran only ten years after Zatopek retired -- and most of us expect Radcliffe to win a WC gold this summer, even though she has no kick.

>The altitude did have a significant
>effect. The pre and post Mexico City records
>for most of the athletes cited above are not all
>that amazing.

You must not have read what I wrote. Temu, not Clarke, was the world's #1 10k runner for both 1966 and 1967. Keino lost only to Ryun prior to Mexico City, and won another Oly gold and silver in 1972. Kogo was the #2 steeple runner in 1967. Wolde put 600 yards on the field in Boston before falling apart in a sub-40-degree sea breeze. My point was that these athletes did not simply come from nowhere; they were already among the world's top runners, and their continued improvement would be surprising only to those who simply didn't pay attention in the first place.

>Citing the 800 as a distance
>event doesn't qualify, as physiologists agreed
>that the effect on that race was probably nil,
>the 20% less atmospheric resistance countering
>the lower level of oxygen available in such a
>short race. It was in races beyond two minutes
>that the physiologists stated problems for all
>runners, especially sea level athletes, would be
>noticable.

And if it was unimportant in the 800, could it have been less important than expected in the 1500? Ryun was "untouchable" in 1966 and 1967, but ran faster than his Mexico City time JUST TWICE! Bodo Tummler ran the third fastest time of his life.

>Ryun obviously did not spend
>enough time at altitude. Neither did most sea
>level runners. Gammoudi, as stated in a post
>way up the page, spent two years in the
>Pyrenees, and still won a very slow race. It's
>inconceivable that it was only mental factors
>that would lead to the times being so slow in
>the steeple, 5k, and 10k. The times for the sea
>level runners in the 1500 were OK. Keino had a
>great time, second fastest at the time, but he
>was still almost 2 seconds outside the WR of the
>day.

I never said that the times were not affected. I said that the order of finish was less affected than most realize without actually looking at the results of previous years.

As C. Nelson noted in his book on the
>mile, Keino did show physiologists that even
>runners in the 1500 gained some speed when it
>came to the finish because of the altitude. I
>suppose the trick would be forcing your body to
>utilize enough oxygen at that altitude to keep
>you near the front of the pack. It's doubtful
>that anything less than a year or so at altitude
>would allow you to do so. Ryun stated he had
>never been so exhausted, and was almost 5
>seconds off his best time.

But again, Ryun ran the third fastest time of his life. He never ran within 2.8 seconds of that time ever again.

I feel like I'm the only one actually looking at facts.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

Jsquire, I've read this thread from top to bottom. I can understand the reasoning on both sides of the debate involving the 1500. I don't think you can use or compare the amount of fast races any of the runners from pre 1980 or so had in their careers, no matter how long or short they were. Back in those days, you didn't have the rabbits that you do now. A guy setting a WR at a middle distance event was rare. He might pick out one race or two, over a period of several seasons to go for a record. The real object was to win races. Ryun, Keino, the rest of the stars of the past had their PR's, then rarely if ever came close to them again. Different circumstances for each runner, but it's a fact. I tend to agree with those that said mono ruined Ryun in some respects. Many athletes in endurance events who have had mono never seem to be able to fully regain their form. That's one for the doctors who might be reading to explain.

The arguing is never going to stop. I see you are using the rankings and honors etc. system to make up your top ten lists. That's one good way to do it. People argue because they know that that system doesn't tell the entire story. Take a look at Renaldo Nehemiah. Probably the best hurdler that ever lived. No Gold, his records are gone, he had a short career. (He wasn't the same after getting knocked around in the NFL) In terms of points, honors, etc., he doesn't match up with Foster, Kingdom ... but many, many people who saw him run, saw what he did, feel he was the best. I would agree with them. This is probably what people are doing when they think of Ryun. He was a bit before my time, but from what I've read, and what I've seen, he had a tremendous talent that was never fully developed. So I think people are thinking of that and what he did during his short reign at the top to place him as one of the greatest. The races he ran against Keino before Mexico are probably also the reason you have a hard time making people come around to your side in the Keino vs. Ryun debate. I've seen the 1500 WR (on tape) where Ryun ran away from Keino, and then watched this race on the web:
http://www.ryunrunning.com/video/Mile01.mov

It's interesting to see that Ryun doesn't really put the pedal to the floor until he comes out of the turn, yet he is easily pulling away from a madly sprinting Keino during the previous 100 meters. The easy wins in fast and slow races probably have most fans favoring Ryun.

Me? I just go by what athletes did during their peak, whether it was long or short. At his peak, Ryun was the best, a lot better than Keino ever was. But most WR holders have been several cuts above their contemporaries. If we want to use medals as the ultimate decision maker, I say give it to Sebastian Coe!

[jsquire]

Re: Track History

>I tend to agree with those that
>said mono ruined Ryun in some respects. Many
>athletes in endurance events who have had mono
>never seem to be able to fully regain their
>form. That's one for the doctors who might be
>reading to explain.

My point was that he ran very well even by his own standards in Mexico City; it was afterwards that he tanked. Even in 1969 his only defeats were to Liquori in the NCAA, then DNFing at the AAU. Mono cannot be the ONLY factor involved, since he really dropped off the table two seasons after his infection.

>The arguing is never
>going to stop. I see you are using the rankings
>and honors etc. system to make up your top ten
>n lists. That's one good way to do it. People
>argue because they know that that system doesn't
>tell the entire story. Take a look at Renaldo
>Nehemiah. Probably the best hurdler that ever
>lived.

Of course it won't. That's the fun part of it. If we stopped arguing, we'd actually have to do work on our computers, and what fun would that be?

>So I think
>people are thinking of that and what he [Ryun] did during his short reign at the top to place him as
>one of the greatest. Me?
>I just go by what athletes did during their
>peak, whether it was long or short. At his
>peak, Ryun was the best, a lot better than Keino
>ever was. But most WR holders have been several
>cuts above their contemporaries. If we want to
>use medals as the ultimate decision maker, I say
>give it to Sebastian Coe!

I don't use rankings only, nor Olympics only. I'm trying to look through an athlete's entire career to see who ranks ahead of who. There really isn't any miler who has dominated the race for a long time, set lots of WRs, and been flawless at big meets, which makes this a tough nut to crack. (The key phrase on Ryun is "short reign".) Morceli is probably the closest.

Of course Keino never dominated the mile, instead he held a pretty high level for a pretty long time. Only Morceli and El G have been more consistent. Is it enough to balance the fact that he wasn't dominant? That's where the arguing comes in. And no, I don't think Keino was the best ever; including pre-WWII athletes, there are nine milers who were #1 more times than him, eight of them set WRs, and four won Olympic gold.

I just like to back up my statements with facts, and World Rankings summarize a season very well. Of course, there are other items, such as times, win-loss record, and major championships. But isn't that what they are based on?

[Guest]

Re: Track History

You are so right about your remark regarding 'work'. This is definitely more fun. One of the few places I can get 'get together' with others that have fun with this stuff, outside of other fans I run into at track meets. Good luck with your project. I'll probably have a few differences of opinion with it. That means more fun!

[gh]

Re: Track History

jsquire wrote:

>>Ryun was
>"untouchable" in 1966 and 1967, but ran faster
>than his Mexico City time JUST TWICE! .>>

Talk about twisting reality! Of course Ryun only "ran faster" twice. In 1966 he ran ZERO 1500s and in 1967 he ran only two. That was still the mile era. Throw in accepted mile conversions and he had six races faster than Mexico City.

Need also to remember that Ryun was a collegian in both those years, with nobody to run against most of the time. Had only two races that weren't on U.S. soil.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

How many collegiate races did Ryun average before hitting the big invitationals back in those days? Had to be a lot of them.

Ryun was a supreme talent that seems to bring out more speculation among fans than any other runner, with the exception of Bullet Bob Hayes. He's another one lots of fans wonder about, in terms of today's training, equipment, total dedication, etc. They seem to come along every 30 years in different events, at least it seems that way to me.

I think Mr. Squires is being technically accurate, in terms of 1500's, he no doubt knows about the mile being the distance usually run back then. We could even get picky and say Ryun did run one 1500 in 66, his 3:36 en route to his first WR. More fun and games as the guys wrote above.

[jsquire]

Re: Track History

>How many collegiate races did Ryun average before
>hitting the big invitationals back in those days?
>Had to be a lot of them.

I have photocopies of the T&FN World Rankings issues from 1947 to present, and my assumption is that they presented complete seasonal records for the top-ranked athlete then as they do now -- except that they completely ignored indoor competition until sometime in the late 70s.

In 1967, Ryun's first year of collegiate eligibility, they listed him as unbeaten in 11 meets. In 1968, Ryun had multiple ailments, and was listed as competing in 7 meets (and winning 6). In 1969 he was ranked #7, and I'm sure the record they listed (5 meets, 3 wins) was incomplete.

I think Mr. Squires is being technically
>accurate, in terms of 1500's, he no doubt knows
>about the mile being the distance usually run
>back then. We could even get picky and say Ryun
>did run one 1500 in 66, his 3:36 en route to his
>first WR. More fun and games as the guys wrote
>above.

I said that Ryun's OG time of 3:37.8 was the third best of his life; I'll admit an error but not the one you pointed out. In 1966 he ran 3:36.1 en route to a 3:51.3y WR, which I did count. In 1967 he ran a 3:33.1 WR. The time I missed was apparently never officially recorded; when he ran a 3:51.1y WR in 1967, no 1500m time was listed, but he must have run better than 3:37.8. So his OG time was the best he ever ran that wasn't a WR.

[gh]

Re: Track History

>I have
>photocopies of the T&FN World Rankings issues
>from 1947 to present, and my assumption is that
>they presented complete seasonal records for the
>top-ranked athlete then as they do now -- except
>that they completely ignored indoor competition
>until sometime in the late 70s.>

I labored under that misconception for many years too. I can say that starting in the early '70s the No. 1 indeed got an entire (outdoor) season posted. But a few years back I printed some hurdle stats and said something about Colin Jackson having the most something or others and Dave Carey sent a note which revealed that somebody (I think Craig Dixon '49) had way more meets than were printed in T&FN.

So, caveat emptor on anything pre-'70s, but I can't imagine that the RYun records don't represent complete seasons. My GUESS would be that you can trust anything as far back as the first Annual Edition (January '64), but before that.....?

[jsquire]

Re: Track History

>>I have
>photocopies of the T&FN World Rankings
>issues
>from 1947 to present, and my assumption
>is that
>they presented complete seasonal
>records for the
>top-ranked athlete then as they
>do now -- except
>that they completely ignored
>indoor competition
>until sometime in the late
>70s.>

I labored under that misconception for
>many years too. I can say that starting in the
>early '70s the No. 1 indeed got an entire
>(outdoor) season posted. But a few years back I
>printed some hurdle stats and said something
>about Colin Jackson having the most something or
>others and Dave Carey sent a note which revealed
>that somebody (I think Craig Dixon '49) had way
>more meets than were printed in T&FN.

So,
>caveat emptor on anything pre-'70s, but I can't
>imagine that the RYun records don't represent
>complete seasons. My GUESS would be that you can
>trust anything as far back as the first Annual
>Edition (January '64), but before that.....?


The Jan '64 issue presented the 1963 rankings; for the '62 and '61 rankings, the full capsules were released only in Track Newsletter. If those weren't complete, they look darn close. (In '61, the capsule includes 5 college dual meets for Dyrol Burleson.)

For the years before that, the rankings were simply printed as ten athletes' seasonal records, without commentary. Again, they look fairly complete to me, but that doesn't neccisarily mean anything. In the earliest years of the World Rankings, it's quite possible that T&FN didn't know complete seasonal records.

[dj]

Re: Track History

When working on win streaks (Parry O'Brien as one example) I found that the season records often were incomplete during the '50s, particularly for collegians who might have a large number of insignificant (for rankings purposes) dual meets.

[Jefferson Buffalo]

Re: Track History

Yo, gh. Time to change the thread title back to Track History?

[Guest]

Re: Track History

If memory serves, a website had EVERY Ryun race - of his career. Compiled I think by the guy who photoed him or wrote about him a lot ???. Had time, place, and in some cases splits. I might have that somewhere - but can't remember now.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

The site you're thinking of only listed the splits, etc., not video of the races. It's no longer operating. You can look at the video of Ryun vs. Keino listed above, but that video isn't listed with the other videos on that site.

Do the listings for guy like Ryun etc. also count dual meets, etc.? I know these guys were running a lot of relays, etc. Of course, those aren't factored in, but they can wear a lot of runners out before the summer hits, even today.

[Roy]

Track History

OK, We've talked a lot about the mile. What about the long jump? Who was probably the greatest long jumper in track history? Carl Lewis has to rank in the top three. What about Bob Beamon? He held the world record for a long time, but never approached that mark at sea level. Jesse Owens also held the WR for several years. I always liked Ralph Boston, however my vote would go to Carl Lewis....the greatest long jumper in track history.