Ryun vs. Keino (was Track History)

[Guest]

Re: Track History

Lewis is the best. He didn't get the record, but he jumped his best in answer to Powell who had just broken the record. Great competitor, 4 golds, longevity ... Lewis is the best LJ man no matter how you look at it.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

>Lewis is the best. He didn't get the record, but
>he jumped his best in answer to Powell who had
>just broken the record. Great competitor, 4
>golds, longevity ... Lewis is the best LJ man no
>matter how you look at it.

I agree completely. Remember that Powell didn't celebrate his WR until AFTER Lewis was done jumping. To this day he'll tell you he was convinced Lewis was going to top him and he'd have to break the record again to win.

Lewis never set an official WR, but he held the low-altitude best for about ten years. At one of the Olympic Festivals ('82, I think), they called a foul on him and raked the pit even though there was no mark in the clay -- the IAAF rules say if there's no mark in the clay, there's no foul (and you're supposed to measure all of them just in case of an appeal). Several different observers, including Cordner Nelson, estimated it at over 30 feet (Lewis said 30'2"). Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

William DeHart Hubbard belongs in the list of all-time LJ greats.

[Bob H]

Re: Track History

>> At one of the Olympic Festivals ('82, I think), they called a foul on him and raked the pit even though there was no mark in the clay -- the IAAF rules say if there's no mark in the clay, there's no foul (and you're supposed to measure all of them just in case of an appeal).<<

The IAAF rules (like the USATF rules) say that it's a foul if you touch the ground after the foul line. The plasticine is there to help determine whether the athlete has touched the ground. But leaving a mark is not an element of the foul. If a jumper plants beyond the plasticine strip it will not leave a mark, but it will clearly be a foul.

Moreover, you're not supposed to measure all jumps just in case of an appeal. Normally, jumps that are called fouls should not be measured at all. But the rules say that if the athlete appeals immediately, then the officials should measure a jump that had been called a foul. The rule providing for a measurement of a foul jump after an immediate appeal was added to the rules after, and as a result of, the Carl Lewis incident. It applies to throws, too, by the way.

[Roy]

Re: Track History

One event we haven't talked about very much is one of my favorites: The Decathlon. How would you rank the all-time best decathletes? One I really like is Milt Campbell. He was such a great all-around athlete and a great competitor. Another would be Glenn Morris who had a one year career with two world records in that one year. What do you think?6

[parkerclay]

Re: Track History

Roy,

Sounds like a great topic. Let's start a new thread on that.

[billthedog]

Re: Track History

Is there much of a difference between decathlon and all-around ability? On the latter: Rafer Johnson while in college was the overall best three-thrower-- shot, discus, javelin -- one year; he made the Olympic team in the broad jump in 1960, and he was quite a hell of a high hurdler (13.7?; gh can say). Mathias was reasoanbly comparable, except in the broad jump, but at a level when performances were still suffering from the war.

[billthedog]

Re: Track History

At one of
>the Olympic Festivals ('82, I think), they called
>a foul on him and raked the pit even though there
>was no mark in the clay -- the IAAF rules say if
>there's no mark in the clay, there's no foul (and
>you're supposed to measure all of them just in
>case of an appeal). Several different observers,
>including Cordner Nelson, estimated it at over 30
>feet (Lewis said 30'2").

[billthedog]

Re: Track History

>At one of
>the Olympic Festivals ('82, I
>I think), they called
>a foul on him and raked
>the pit even though there
>was no mark in the
>clay -- the IAAF rules say if
>there's no mark
>in the clay, there's no foul (and
>you're
>supposed to measure all of them just in
>case of
>an appeal). Several different
>observers,
>including Cordner Nelson, estimated
>it at over 30
>feet (Lewis said 30'2").
(The answer to this didn't come out the first time I tried.) I remember a piece in T&FN some years ago, mocking the editors' occasional references to foul throw or jumps. This fellow stepped over the board in the shot put and carried the shot out to 65 or 66 feet (then an extraordinary put) and had it measured; a foul throw close to the world record!

[jsquire]

Re: Track History

The IAAF rules (like the USATF
>rules) say that it's a foul if you touch the
>ground after the foul line. The plasticine is
>there to help determine whether the athlete has
>touched the ground.

Then why did Nelson claim the opposite (and quote the pertinent IAAF rule) in "Track's Greatest Champions"? Can you clear this up for us?

[Guest]

Re: Track History

A huge amount of correspondence and a lot of it about Ryun-Keino. Without necessarily taking sides as to who was greater:
(1) In mexico City, Keino won the 1500 m after running in the 10 K (almost full distance) and heats and finals of the 5 K. Ryun was hampered by after effects of mono, lack of altitude training, but it seems Keino's will to win was only driven up by loss to Gammmoudi at the 5K.
(2) A cowardly suggestion by someone that Keino faked his gall bladder trouble after dropping out of the 10 K in Mexico City.

The Harbig-Woodruff mythical 800 m match up seems to be the best of all-time. John W was the supreme untapped talent and I for one think he could have run sub 1:45. Rudolf H was obviously closer to realizing his potential, and as the first to use interval training properly, stands out as a man way ahead of his time.

A closing thought. If Walter George with his "100 up" exercises could run 4:10-4:13 miles back in the 1880s, on terrible tracks, sometimes in "tactical' races (e.g. against Cummings), in a mythical 1500 m/mile race, I would bet on him against Ryun/Keino/Elliott/ Snell/Morceli and even El G.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

The claim that Keino faked his gall bladder ailment comes from other Kenyans, notably Ben Jipcho. Marty Liquori, in his bio, also has a few words on Keino and his ways of cheating his conquerors as he put it, and his lying about not training much. (Liquori watched Keino and Jipcho train - they didn't know he was observing - then Keino tried to play down the training session he had just put in). Keino has done a lot for running and orphans in his country, but that hardly means he isn't capable of chicanery. The gullibility of Westerners is one reason that runners like Chepchumba and Lagat could run doped, and have everyone nod their heads and swear a Kenyan would never lie, not even take an aspirin.

Keino ran a great race, and was helped by altitude and a Ryun who was hardly at his best. That's the story in a nutshell.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

>Keino ran a great race, and was
>helped by altitude and a Ryun who was hardly at
>his best. That's the story in a nutshell.

Ryun was near his best. Once again, I'll remind you that it was his fourth-fastest race ever; if the altitude was what lead to his defeat, then he probably was in WR shape at sea-level. He got beat by the largest margin of his life up to that point, as Keino ran his PR (and only a second off of Ryun's WR).

If it is true that Ryun's hamstring and mono problems were the cause for his post-68 dropoff, you'd think they'd be MORE of an issue in the year he suffered them (1968), not less. Ryun simply could never accept that he got whipped badly (it's obvious in interviews) and I think that's why he tanked.

Sure, Keino played mind games with his opponents. So did Ali and Lou Holtz along with a whole host of others. Part of his popularity may be connected to taking advantage of the white man -- turning the tables, so to speak.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

J. Squire, I enjoy your posts and respect if not agree with most of what you say--but I'll disagree completely with your saying that Ryun was near his best at the '68 OG. If he had been in his '67 shape (when he ran 3:33.1 and whipped Keino by a similar margin) I believe Ryun would have stayed closer i.e. in contact with Keino in Mexico City and out kicked him in the final 100 meters. No doubt though Keino ran an incredible race (3:34.9 at altitude!) But I believe Ryun AT HIS BEST still would have stayed close enough to catch him with his kick.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

>J. Squire, I enjoy your posts and respect if not
>agree with most of what you say--but I'll
>disagree completely with your saying that Ryun
>was near his best at the '68 OG. If he had been
>in his '67 shape (when he ran 3:33.1 and whipped
>Keino by a similar margin) I believe Ryun would
>have stayed closer i.e. in contact with Keino in
>Mexico City and out kicked him in the final 100
>meters. No doubt though Keino ran an incredible
>race (3:34.9 at altitude!) But I believe Ryun AT
>HIS BEST still would have stayed close enough to
>catch him with his kick.

Of course a top of his game Ryun would have run much better. And of course the altitude made a big difference. Keep in mind while most of Squire's post are good, he's very, very PC. To the point of saying things like race doesn't exist, etc.

[Guest]

Re: Track History

>>J. Squire, I enjoy your posts and respect if
>not
>agree with most of what you say--but
>I'll
>disagree completely with your saying that
>Ryun
>was near his best at the '68 OG. If he had
>been
>in his '67 shape (when he ran 3:33.1 and
>whipped
>Keino by a similar margin) I believe
>Ryun would
>have stayed closer i.e. in contact
>with Keino in
>Mexico City and out kicked him in
>the final 100
>meters. No doubt though Keino ran
>an incredible
>race (3:34.9 at altitude!) But I
>believe Ryun AT
>HIS BEST still would have
>stayed close enough to
>catch him with his
>kick.

Of course a top of his game Ryun would
>have run much better. And of course the altitude
>made a big difference. Keep in mind while most of
>Squire's post are good, he's very, very PC. To
>the point of saying things like race doesn't
>exist, etc.

What I try to say is that things like calling Morrocans "black" and Spaniards "white" because they're separated by a few miles of water is ridiculous. Our definitions of race are ever-changing; one hundred years ago Irish, Italians and Jews were not considered "white " in America. Jews dominated basketball early in the century; "experts" said that they had a natural racial advantage due to their inherently tricky ways. We're shocked by such statements now, but many still attribute racial superiority/inferiority in certain track events even though they only hold true for the men's side of the sport -- and I'm certain they reveal much about the person making the statement.

PC is for those who don't actually know any black people. I was the only white guy on my high school track team, and that's why I understand that the largest differences between the races in America are not biological but cultural.

And finally -- yeah, the altitude was a factor in Mexico City. Was it the only factor? You decide. How much did it affect Ryun? How much did it affect Keino? Certainly not the same for both. If you argue that the altitude had no effect on Keino at all (unlikely) and that Ryun would have beaten him a sea level (possible) then Ryun was in at least 3:34.8 shape. Not his best, but damn good -- hardly crippled by hamstring and mono problems. If you accept this point of view, then it's hard to believe that those same hamstring and mono problems ended his career. I'm not trying to be "PC", I'm just thinking a problem through to its logical conclusion, which is that if you give Ryun the greatest benefit of the doubt then his post-68 dropoff is totally inexplicable. If you accept the idea that physical problems ended his career, then the altitude wasn't crippling. You can't have it both ways!