20.13..forever?

[eldrick]

now, for your list of 5 previous 200wr holders

here's a list of progression :

http://www.athletix.org/Statistics/wr200men.htm

do a full list going back to 1900 & tell us who were 200/100 guys & who were 200/400 guys

if they are same numbers, then you have a point

if they don't, then your point is nonsense - always go for the 100 guy & screw the 400

[Texas]

now, for your list of 5 previous 200wr holders

here's a list of progression :

http://www.athletix.org/Statistics/wr200men.htm

do a full list going back to 1900 & tell us who were 200/100 guys & who were 200/400 guys

if they are same numbers, then you have a point

if they don't, then your point is nonsense - always go for the 100 guy & screw the 400

I think we started seeing this with Henry Carr, he seemed to be the one who started it. Since then all the 200m WR holders were guys who ran the 400m to some degree as compared to a Donovan Bailey, Mo Greene, Tyson Gay type.

We see this at all levels of competition. Those sprinters who do/can run a solid 4x4 leg or run the 400 out performing 100m only guys in a 200m. Do you really think I haven't looked into this in depth? I noticed you ignored my examples...why?

How about...

19.30..Bolt..was running a 45.3 as a teenager
19.32...MJ...400M WR holder
19.62...Gay. 100m sprinter
19.63...Carter...a 44.5 guy
19.65...Spearmon...44.9r

[eldrick]

i didn't ignore your examples

( upto trials '96 - mj's 200pb in career from '88 hadn't even got him into top-3 of american 200 list despite his 400 background !!! )

if you'd had this discussion start of '96, all you wouda concluded is that low-43 endurance will get you high-19.7, but if you want to get into 19.6 territory ( King & marsh's easing down 19.7s ) you need 9.8/9.9 speed as the pre-requisite )

nor did "it" start with carr

if you are going to do a proper analysis - go back all the way to the beginning

[Texas]

i didn't ignore your examples

( upto trials '96 - mj's 200pb in career from '88 hadn't even got him into top-3 of american 200 list despite his 400 background !!! )

if you'd had this discussion start of '96, all you wouda concluded is that low-43 endurance will get you high-19.7, but if you want to get into 19.6 territory ( King & marsh's easing down 19.7s ) you need 9.8/9.9 speed as the pre-requisite )

nor did "it" start with carr

if you are going to do a proper analysis - go back all the way to the beginning

Totally missing the point. So let me try again...

SINCE...Henry Carr...all those who have held the 200m WR were guys who had the 400m in their arsenal. Four of the top five fastest times ever ran were ran by guys who had 400m ability. The High School record is held by a guy with 400m ability as is the European record.

Now how do you misunderstand that?

Ok..now..

Jimmy Hines was faster than Tommie Smith do you agree? So how come in the 200m Smith was the better sprinter? Wasn't Hines faster? So what did Smith have that Hines lacked...hmm...could it be......speed endurance!!!!!!

Frankie Fredericks was faster than MJ do you agree? So how come in the 200m MJ was the better sprinter? Wasn't Fredericks faster? So what did MJ have that Fredericks lacked...hmm?

[eldrick]

no

you are forgetting history - that means going all the way back to 1900 & doing a full analysis - there is absolutely no reason to start with carr in '64 - if you wanted a convenient start, it shouda been at least '45

once you've done a proper analysis going back to at least '45, then you have something of interest - otherwise, it isn't

as for hines, he was 100m king - it took enough of his energies to keep ahead of lennox, greene, etc than have the luxury of also putting in sufficient time/energy to waste on the 200 ( minor event as always )

however, looking at his height & stride, i'd not have been surprised that off his 9.95A, if he'd run in mexico 200 that he may have come close to the double-ratio that most equally strong 100/200 guys have ( he wasn't ) - not 19.90A, but no reason why not a 20.00A just off his 100m ability & silver

as for frankie, mj ran a 10.12 curve - what do you think that wouda been on a straight ?

[Texas]

no

you are forgetting history - that means going all the way back to 1900 & doing a full analysis - there is absolutely no reason to start with carr in '64 - if you wanted a convenient start, it shouda been at least '45

once you've done a proper analysis going back to at least '45, then you have something of interest - otherwise, it isn't

as for hines, he was 100m king - it took enough of his energies to keep ahead of lennox, greene, etc than have the luxury of also putting in sufficient time/energy to waste on the 200 ( minor event as always )

however, looking at his height & stride, i'd not have been surprised that off his 9.95A, if he'd run in mexico 200 that he may have come close to the double-ratio that most equally strong 100/200 guys have ( he wasn't ) - not 19.90A, but no reason why not a 20.00A just off his 100m ability & silver

as for frankie, mj ran a 10.12 curve - what do you think that wouda been on a straight ?

Facts are facts, and all that mumbo jumbo won't change a thing. Yes since the early 60's the 200m World record has been owned by multi faceted sprinters. No 100/200 meter man (only) has held the record. I don't care about the pre Henry Carr days...ok? I'm talking afterwards..ok? For the last 45 or so years, yes we've seen nothing but sprinters with that 400m ability holding the WR record. That is a fact and it cannot be denied...ok?

Now, there is a reason Roy Martin's 20.13 HS record is still standing. What is it? Have we not seen faster 100m sprinters? What we haven't seen is a guy with the speed..AND...endurance that.. The Robot.. possesed yet. He had speed and yep.......speed endurance!

Jimmy Hines wasn't beating Tommie Smith under any circumstances in a 200m....trust me!

Look at Allyson Felix for a good example. Can she beat the world's elite in the 100m? How does she do in the 200m however? What 100m sprinter can hang with her in a 400m?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We see all kinds of speed. There are guys like Mel Pender, Houston McTear, Ira Murchison, Andre Cason, Sam Perry, Herb Washington, who were more 60ish types with some 100m success. No 200m action in their plans. Then there are guys like Mo Greene who could run everything from the 60-200. Frankie Fredericks was a great 100/200 guy as was Ato Boldon. Then we come to guys like Henry Carr..9.3/200mWR/44.6r...MJ...10.09/WR200/WR400...Usain Bolt...100mWR/200mWR/45.2, then there was Herb McKenley the only sprinter in history to run the 100/200/400 Olympic finals. It's that last group that holds the advantage in the 200m. Guys who aren't limited.

[eldrick]

you have made up an arbitrary date to support your highly flawed proposition

'64 did not represent any great historical date - if you want a date with some meaning to base your arguments, go back to at least '45, which everyone acknowledges as a meaningful date - do anlysis with that

& as for hines & smith - hines withdrew after 1st round of trials feeling tired, but in their earlier season race :

june 20th

smith 20.2
hines 20.3
ronnie ray 20.4
carlos 20.6

smith beat hines by just 0.1s & hines beat carlos by 0.3s

hines had very good prospects at 200 if he'd followed up that path

as for "mumbo jumbo", if you haven't heard of simple doubling of 100m time to get you a 200 estimate for equally strong 100/200 guys, than what on earth have you learnt in all these years ?!

[Texas]

you have made up an arbitrary date to support your highly flawed proposition

'64 did not represent any great historical date - if you want a date with some meaning to base your arguments, go back to at least '45, which everyone acknowledges as a meaningful date - do anlysis with that

& as for hines & smith - hines withdrew after 1st round of trials feeling tired, but in their earlier season race :

june 20th

smith 20.2
hines 20.3
ronnie ray 20.4
carlos 20.6

smith beat hines by just 0.1s & hines beat carlos by 0.3s

hines had very good prospects at 200 if he'd followed up that path

as for "mumbo jumbo", if you haven't heard of simple doubling of 100m time to get you a 200 estimate for equally strong 100/200 guys, than what on earth have you learnt in all these years ?!

If you're not aware of the "fact" that anytime we find a100/ 200m man who has 400m ability he usually out performs a 100/200 meter sprinter without that 400m ability where have you been hiding? Why act like you don't see the names...

Carr, Mennea, Smith, MJ, Bolt?

Did they not run the 400meters? Yes they all did. Why are you struggling with that so? Where are names like Bob Hayes, Jimmy Hines, Valery Borzov, Donovan Bailey, Tyson Gay? Well? Didn't they all run the 200m? Yes they did so where are their WR's? How come all those super speedsters have...0? Why is it those sprinters who ran the 400 hold all the records since the early 60's....well?

Look man, I agree with you that prior to Henry Carr my theory sucked...ok? It's what came afterwards.......o-kay!

Tommie Smith and MJ are probably America's best all purpose sprinters. Smith being the only sprinter ever to be world ranked in all three sprints in the same year. Neither one of them were the stud 100m man in their time. They were however the best 200/400 man. Why is that? Smith was a 9.3/10.1 guy with a poor start. Yet he beat all the 100/200 guys in the 200m. MJ was only a 10.09 guy yet beat up on sub 9.90 guys in the 200m......how?

[eldrick]

we've been thru this a dozen times & the nonsense primarily stems from you defining NO 400m time-specific background

in your universe, if a 9.80- 9.90/19.70 - 19.80 guy ran 1 400m in his whole career & it was 47.00, that clocking alone elevates him to the nonsense category of

"200 guy with a 400 background !!!"

if you're talking 400 background worth mentioning - it shoud be at least <45 to even worth bothering with & probably <44.5

the derisory 46+ backgrounds that most of your list have is embarassing to even mention in polite company - most any <10 guy can run 46+s just off his 100m ability

[Texas]

we've been thru this a dozen times & the nonsense primarily stems from you defining NO 400m time-specific background

in your universe, if a 9.80- 9.90/19.70 - 19.80 guy ran 1 400m in his whole career & it was 47.00, that clocking alone elevates him to the nonsense category of

"200 guy with a 400 background !!!"

if you're talking 400 background worth mentioning - it shoud be at least <45 to even worth bothering with & probably <44.5

the derisory 46+ backgrounds that most of your list have is embarassing to even mention in polite company - most any <10 guy can run 46+s just off his 100m ability

Bro, you do understand that the 200m is not about blazin' speed...right? That distance is all about "sustained/maintained" speed. Come on man..sheesh! You don't see a speedy guy who runs the 400 having the advantage over a 100/200 type who doesn't in a race where "sustained" speed is the key? Come on man!

Mike Marsh could run a 45.08 400m. He was an Olympic Champion. Kenteris started out as a 400m man, he was an Olympic Champion. Then those I mentioned were all WR holders/Olympic Champions. You don't see a trend there?

[eldrick]

how many of the top 10 alltime 400 guys have broken 20 ?

how many of the top 10 alltime 100 guys have broken 20 ?

[Texas]

how many of the top 10 alltime 400 guys have broken 20 ?

That's not what I'm saying at all. I had a feeling you weren't getting it.

Ok here we go...

Henry Carr was a 9.3 guy which was good but he was no Bob Hayes who ran a 9.1 numerous times. In a 100 meters Carr stood no chance. Bob Hayes wasn't going to run a sub46.0 400 meters. Henry Carr could and did. Now here comes the 200m and Hayes vs Carr. Hayes gets out first and is leading coming off the turn, now what happens? Yes you guessed it. The Bullet starts to fade while the sub 46.0 400m guy starts to move. I've seen that race many many times, only the names have changed.

Carr beats Hayes
Plummer beats Hines
Mennea beats Wells
Smith beats Hines
Nellums beats Best
Kenteris beats the world
MJ beats Fredericks-Boldon-Greene

Ever heard of Derald Harris out of Los Medanos JC? Back around 75/76 or so? He wins the 200m at the Nationals? Who was Derald Harris? He was a Cal State 400m champion as a high schooler. Remember when Jordan Vaden ran his sub20.00 and it was...who? He was a star 400m man at tiny Livingstone. I really could go on and on.

I'm not talking about Lee Evans, Jeremy Wariner, Butch Reynolds, Quincy Watts as great 200m men...ok? I'm talking about guys with some sprint speed...AND....remember...AND....that 400m ability..ok? Guys like Xavier Carter, Wallace Spearmon, John Regis, Roy Martin, Bryshon Nellum, Usain Bolt, Pietro Mennea, MJ, Tommie Smith, Henry Carr,Kenteris. Those multi talented sprinters. Guys who can do it all........ok?

[Texas]

how many of the top 10 alltime 100 guys have broken 20 ?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

How many have held the 200m WR?Try....one!

The 200/400 guys have MJ and Tommie Smith holding both 200/400 WR's....right?

I've told this story before...oh well.

Ocie Early was the top 100 yard guy in our league he was out of Tulare "Bob Mathias" Union. The top 440 guy was Roy Allen also out of Tulare Union. Early was running in that 10.0-10.2 world while Allen was churning out 49 type stuff. At the league meet Early would win the 100 and Allen the 400. Because of points the two were put in the 220......guess who won? Yep..Allen ran Early down. Like I said, I've seen that race many times just different names.

[eldrick]

err...

hayes beat carr in trials

now use your brain

hayes already was a 200m wr holder prior to carr ( see list ), but didn't run it much

carr wins og in 20.36

hayes wins og in 10.06 on poor lane - most observers reckon ~ 9.95 in lane 4

he already shown 200 pedigree with 2 previous ties of wr in '63

now :

woud you or woud not a 9.95 guy, with previous 200m pedigree, run faster than 20.36 given the chance ?

[Texas]

err...

hayes beat carr in trials

now use your brain

hayes already was a 200m wr holder prior to carr ( see list ), but didn't run it much

carr wins og in 20.36

hayes wins og in 10.06 on poor lane - most observers reckon ~ 9.95 in lane 4

he already shown 200 pedigree with 2 previous ties of wr in '63

now :

woud you or woud not a 9.95 guy, with previous 200m pedigree, run faster than 20.36 given the chance ?

Dick Stebbins and Paul Drayton also beat Carr at the trials, doesn't that tell you something about the condition of Carr in those trials?


1. Paul Drayton USA 20.4 TR
2 Richard Stebbins USA 20.6
3 Robert Hayes USA 20.7
4 Henry Carr USA 20.8
5 John Moon USA 20.9
6 Larry Dunn USA 21.0
7 Donald Webster USA 21.1
8 Bernie Rivers USA 21.2


If you recall Hayes gave Carr his 200m spot because he knew Carr was the superior 200m sprinter due to getting beat by him so many times.

You do know that Homer Jones once beat Bob Hayes in a NAIA 200m right? So much for "one race".

Henry Carr was the superior 200m sprinter and even Bob Hayes accepted that fact.