Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

    it's damn difficult to work out kip's potential that day - the only way i can try, is to work on his "possible" PB's around then

    tily, gives the stats, but no insight:

    http://tilastopaja.com/db/atm.asp?ID=24912

    there are PB's there from '65, '67, '68, '72 !!

    the guy is simply impossible to quantify !

    i'll try 1 quick guess: at '68 peak he must have been capable of a 49 - 50s & for 3k, a 7'35 - 7'37, easily.

    these -> 3'32.5 - 3'34.4

    ( & best of 1'46.0)

    i may be mistaken, but unless had a faster 400 than 49, & a faster 3k than 7'35, then kip was likely in shape of :

    3'32.5

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

      RE: GH's comment above, I simply cannot believe that Mexico City's altitute had "zero effect" on Keino's ability to run 1500 meters. It HAD to have cost him something--perhaps only a couple seconds--but that means he was in something like 3:33 flat shape--which he never remotely approached EVER again in his life. When you count in his aborted 10,000 escapades earlier, the 5000, the gallstones, etc., etc., Keino was either the luckiest guy in the solar system that day or a magician.

      I also have to respectfully disagree that ALL Olympic races are "gems." They all HAPPEN and they all have a WINNER, but to say that they're all equally good strikes me as sheer fantasy.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

        >I asked him about this after watching Par Porter run a sub-4:00 mile
        >on a legit course in Alamosa right before the CC nationals.

        Everyone one the planet knows that Alamosa mile loop isn't legit!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

          "Keino had gallstone problems during the Olympics."

          That story has been called a ruse by several of Keino's teammates, including Ben Jipcho and Wilson Kiprigut. Keino was a great runner and great champ, but prone to some bizarre behavior and excuses. Keino couldn't hang in the 10k, so it was gallstones. He was outkicked in the 5k, gallstones. The pic of him on the medal stand is priceless. There has probably never been a more sour look on an Olympic medalist's face.

          That aside, whether he had gallstones or not, they are not as big problem when it comes to recovery as mono, if it all, depending on the severity of the condition.

          The altitude did not hamper Keino as much as sea level runners, obviously. He could probably have run two seconds, three seconds faster at sea level. But a fit Ryun was certainly capable of much faster than that. As to the 80% version that showed up in Mexico, it's all conjecture, but there are few who could see Keino outkicking Ryun in any race, fast or slow. Unless you're the kind of guy, say, who thinks the great Henry Rono was a better all around runner than Said Aouita, which he wasn't.

          Keino won the race, and that's the way it goes. At sea level he probably would have lost. Which even Jipcho freely admits in conversation (several times, including one of Bud Greenspan's docs). There is always going to be the "...what if?" argument in track, especially in the 1500.

          In '88: What if Cram and Elliot hadn't been hurt? What if Aouita hadn't been hurt, and had run? What if the idiot Brit selection committee had sent Coe - would he now have three golds in the 1500?

          In '00: What if El G hadn't been running races all over the place before the games? Or was Ngeny's pre-games program of running over and under distance events and working with Lagat the key to his victory? Fun to speculate, but Ngeny has the gold.

          In 72: What if Ryun hadn't have fallen? Could he have won the final? Good chance of it. Vasala had run 1:44+ going into the games, but Ryun had run 1:45 at the trials, and he wasn't sharp enough, hadn't run many 800's. And he had cruised a 3:52 mile before the games. In Munich, he was putting in some spectacular workouts. Ryun probably would have launched a kick from 250 - 300 meters out, and a drive that long at Ryun type speed would probably have been too long for Vasala to cover, never mind Keino, who was never known as a real kicker. But Ryun fell on his arse, so it's all conjecture. Vasala has the gold and that's that.

          In 92: Did Morceli choke? Or did the Kenyan's obvious team tactics in boxing Morceli KO his chances? Agreeing with Kenny Moore, it was grand to see the Kenyans get shut out of the medal dept. in that race after such brazen behavior. A European country pulling that crap, or Americans doing it, would have been roundly criticized or worse.

          In '76: If Bayi had been there, would Walker have won? This one I am confident about in my belief - Walker would have won anyway. It might have been a much faster race, but by '76, he was able to handle anyone, in fast or slow races. Good thing Steve Ovett hadn't been born a year earlier. If so, Walker would have silver.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

            >Everyone one the
            >planet knows that Alamosa mile loop isn't legit!

            But what everyone on the planet doesn't know is the REASON for the Mile repeats loop being short: Vigil purposely made it to be about 5-6 seconds short of a Mile in order to be able to gauge what the runner's effort would be worth at sea-level. Notice this 5-6 seconds fits perfectly with what he said about the effort fully acclimated altitude native (most of the Adams State team) not being worth a full ten second conversion.
            Vigil has never made any bones about the loop being short. Being a curious type, I wondered how far 5-6 seconds would be and later measured it with a wheel...I have forgotten just how far it was, but it was appropriately short of a Mile.
            At least the time I was there, the end of CC season/peaking Mile time-trial was run on a LONGER version of the repeats loop. Granted, it was not run on a track, so feel free to quibble about a second or so.

            Far from fudging, the loop being purposely short--and why--was one of the first things Vigil told me about the work-out. This is the same principle Vigil adheres to when he has Deena Kastor and Co. do a tempo run on a downhill grade to simulate sea-level speed. Obviously, I have a lot of respect for the man. With all his success, he does not need to lie about anything, as some insecure types do. Like everyone, Vigil might be mistaken or forgetful at times, but he doesn't play games with anyone, especially his athletes.

            Interestingly, through the years I have noticed many of the eighties jerks stretching to find fault with the program because they didn't like being pounded by Porter in CC races that were regularly covered by Sports Illustrated back then. [General comment, definitely not a dig at Malmo.] I had the "pleasure" of listening to a group of Greater Boston Track Club folks loudly trashing Porter and how hard he trained (the day's newspaper article) on a shuttle heading to Golden Gate Park in San Francisco to view the nationals course. Porter won that one by about ten seconds over Reebok's mercenary-for-the-race Steve Jones (IMHO, Jones is a great guy, BTW). The GBTC guys were nowhere in sight that day.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

              The discussion of Vigil, Porter, etc. reminds me of a serious question on tactics/physiology.
              Joe Vigil has a Ph.D in Physiology and I'm semi-literate where the subject is concerned. Nevertheless, I have never understood why Porter, apparently with Vigil's blessing, was such a foolish front-runner in the '84 (I think) World Cross at the Meadowlands. Porter was in incredible shape then, and I truly believe he should have been no worse than 2nd and probably should have won. But he went out very fast and then did all the leading until Lopes took over, after sitting in patiently.
              I am NOT, of course, saying he should have waited for a last 200 kick, but I'm convinced that if he'd run the sort of smart race that Ritz did at NCAA Cross - sitting in, conserving energy as much as possible - and then put the hammer down with a mile or two to go, he likely would have won.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                I recently saw the tape of the '84 race and can confidently say that
                a) Porter ran a courageous race, setting the pace all the way
                b) there was no way he could have beaten Lopes on that day

                By pushing the pace, Porter effectively reduced the race to the 4 toughest guys, eliminating a bunch of others who might have played a factor at the finish in a slower race. Porter got a close 4th as a result; if he hadn't pushed the pace, he might well have done worse.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                  I watched the '84 World Cross tape often since I showed it to the kids on the teams I coached (though I haven't watched it recently). In response to kuha:
                  (1) I think Steve Jones would have kept the pace fast if Porter hadn't led, (and surely someone would have if Jones didn't - World Cross is never slow), and
                  (2) even if it hadn't been as fast for the first few miles, if Porter had gone to the front with a mile or two to go - and hammered! - the "kickers" would not have survived. Yes, maybe Lopes would have won anyway, but I just think Porter's chances would have been much better if he hadn't led almost every step while the other contenders sat.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                    Interestingly, through the years I have noticed many of the
                    >eighties jerks stretching to find fault with the program because they didn't
                    >like being pounded by Porter in CC races that were regularly covered by Sports
                    >Illustrated back then. [General comment, definitely not a dig at Malmo.]

                    I think you are lugging around a lot of imaginary emotional baggage.

                    For the record, I have never said anything negative about Pat Porter or his program. Furthermore, I have never, even for a second, even thought of anything negative. Unless you consider my comments that the only thing to do in Alamosa is watch cowboys and indians fighting at the Purple Pig to be negative. Then I'll throw myself at the mercy of the judge.

                    My comment is on the accuracy of the loop, which is short.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                      And *I* backed up your comment about the loop being short and WHY. How does that threaten YOU, Malmo?

                      >[General comment, definitely not a dig at
                      >Malmo.]
                      What part of my above disclaimer--consciously added to spare your many-times-shown paranoic tendencies--don't you understand?

                      To the best of my knowledge, you were never a memeber of the GBTC--you certainly weren't one of the very well-known guys trashing Porter on the bus that day.
                      I'm not even sure if you've ever raced Porter, period.

                      So just WHO is carrying the emotional baggage, Mr. Counselor--?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                        >And *I* backed up your comment about the loop being short and WHY. How does
                        >that threaten YOU, Malmo?

                        >[General comment, definitely not a dig
                        >at
                        >Malmo.]
                        What part of my above disclaimer--consciously added to spare your
                        >many-times-shown paranoic tendencies--don't you understand?

                        To the best of
                        >my knowledge, you were never a memeber of the GBTC--you certainly weren't one
                        >of the very well-known guys trashing Porter on the bus that day.
                        I'm not even
                        >sure if you've ever raced Porter, period.

                        So just WHO is carrying the
                        >emotional baggage, Mr. Counselor--?

                        You.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                          >You.

                          Ah! The usual Malmo pissing contest. No facts, no arguement, just Malmo the former good runner saying so.

                          Grow up.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                            Brian you are a truly bizarre person.

                            First of all, it was you who spoke of imaginary demons, of those "many 80s jerks" who must have somehow slighted you in the past, and for some odd reason dragging my name into the midst of your "episode." For whatever reason who could only guess? To which I responded merely "I think you are lugging around a lot of imaginary emotional baggage."

                            Given your history of stalking me wherever I post on this forum, and always imagining conflict and ire where there is none, it seems to me that would be a logical conclusion.

                            Secondly, I added my personal take on Porter/Vigil/Alamosa explicitly for myopic types such as yourself, in a doomed attempt (what else?) at making my thoughts on this matter perfectly clear. I should have known better. You already knew what you wanted to hear.

                            Thirdly, you responded to my simple, straight-forward post with again another bizarre response somehow projecting feelings that I'm "threatened" by you, and then some foggy recollection of that terrible day when your hero was being slighted by unnamed GBTC athletes. Strange. I'm all for you working through your repressed childhood traumas, but could you please do me a favor -- next time leave me out of it?

                            And finally, what has amounted to your standard capitulation template, the gratuitous, "Ah! The usual Malmo(sic) pissing contest. No facts, no arguement(sic), just Malmo(sic) the former good runner saying so. Grow up."

                            That "former good runner" part is really eating at you inside, isn't it? You've said it so often you should imagine me mocking those words the next hundred times you type them. Live with it--I can -- it's not going to change.

                            All because the Alamosa one mile loop is short.

                            Another day, another bizarre internet stalker. Life is normal.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                              Uh . . . hope it's ok to get back to 1500 meters . . .

                              Disappointment . . . gem . . . what so many of them share is that they remain some of the most interesting, surprising, and talked-about races ever. Perhaps because of all the strange variables that played into them. Elliott's super move to distance himself (not a sit-and-kick race) and dominate the field -- probably the one race that made him a legend; Snell getting a double; Ryun and Keino and Ben the pacer -- all the drama of that; Walker getting his gold; Coe coming back from the depths with a an astounding sprint, then doubling in 84 (whether that was a perfect race, with Cram not in good form and Scott choosing the wrong tactic, and others missing, the fact Coe doubled makes it great). Sure, a few were clunkers.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Olympic 1,500m - disappointment!

                                Malmo, learn to read instead of "read into." Big difference. Helps mediate paranoia.

                                Again, typical Malmo: anyone who disagrees with you and says so is stalking--even if, as in this case, you were the one first responding to THEM and what they said actually COMPLIMENTS what you said (the loop being short). A shame the world just can't let you run wild with your opinions and assumptions (that I was even friendly with Porter). But I don't mind...you're the one makn a fool of yourself looking for trouble where it doesn't exist until you make it so.

                                Like you, I ran my best during the early to mid eighties. Does that make ME an eighties jerk? Only in your paranoic assumption-riddled mind would my comment be calling ALL runners from the eighties jerks.

                                BYTW, you seem to be jumping on my every comment, even when I go out of my way to issue a disclaimer for you.

                                Are you stalking me?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X