Ovett vs Coe movie

[berkeley]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Did anyone see the recent BBC documentary about the 80 Olympics? It featured Coe and Ovett quite prominently. Nauseating stuff - very much seen from Coe's perspective, loses the 800 but shows divine strength of character to come back and win the 1500 (cue swelling music).

I'm old enough to remember the 80 Olympics. I can see through the hype. Neither Coe nor Ovett were among the stars of those games in terms of performance. We didn't see the best of either. No amount of droning from Brendan Foster or whoever is going to convince me otherwise.

Certainly the times were not stellar, but it's tough to claim that the rivalry and the way the 800&1500 played out did not make both of them among the stars of those Games - and I'm speaking as a non-Brit. Times are often slower in major championship middle and long distance races, but they are not that relevant. You wouldn't say that Mo was not among the stars in Moscow this year, because his times were slow. If anything,the sprints and hurdles winners in 1980 were forgettable, with the US absent.

[Rog]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Yes, the times were slow, but it's not like we saw two great races - in the 800, after a slow first half, Nikolai Kirov bolted for home, Steve Ovett followed and kicked past in the home straight. Coe ran badly and was beaten. In the 1500, after a slow first half, Jurgen Straub bolted for home, Seb Coe followed and kicked past in the home straight. Ovett ran badly and was beaten.

We didn't see someone putting themselves on the line and setting off at world record pace and daring the opposition to follow. We didn't see the likes of Bayi v Walker in 74, or Cram v Aouita in 85 - two athletes duelling down the straight with the world record in sight. We saw two athletes who, each given two opportunities to win gold, only seized one of them. The other they squandered. Their races were more about mental paralysis than athletic achievement.

It's not that I'm anti-Coe and Ovett, but surely it's better to give praise where it's due. Ovett in Moscow wasn't as impressive as he was in Dusseldorf 77 or Prague 78, where he totally dominated the opposition over 1500. Coe was more impressive in 84, coming back from losing to the unbeatable Cruz over 800 to win the 1500 with an even greater kick (although his behaviour when he crossed the line was at best unfortunate).

I have a feeling I know how this movie is going to pan out even before it's been made. It's going to be the cliché that runs and runs :wink:

[kuha]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

For what it's worth, I basically agree with the above. As we know, Coe and Ovett worked hard at NOT racing each other whenever they could avoid it. And, in the Olympic showdowns, no single race had both of them at their best. So from the standpoint of a "thrilling narrative," it all seems a bit anti-climactic...

[lonewolf]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

That is my recollection also... Ovett was always portrayed as the "blue collar" guy and, whether contrived or not, they kinda ducked each other.

[Daisy]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

How much of the ducking was actually due to the promoters? I could see someone like Andy Norman arranging for them to duck forever to keep their 'price' high.

[berkeley]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Yes, the times were slow, but it's not like we saw two great races - in the 800, after a slow first half, Nikolai Kirov bolted for home, Steve Ovett followed and kicked past in the home straight. Coe ran badly and was beaten. In the 1500, after a slow first half, Jurgen Straub bolted for home, Seb Coe followed and kicked past in the home straight. Ovett ran badly and was beaten.

We didn't see someone putting themselves on the line and setting off at world record pace and daring the opposition to follow. We didn't see the likes of Bayi v Walker in 74, or Cram v Aouita in 85 - two athletes duelling down the straight with the world record in sight. We saw two athletes who, each given two opportunities to win gold, only seized one of them. The other they squandered. Their races were more about mental paralysis than athletic achievement.

It's not that I'm anti-Coe and Ovett, but surely it's better to give praise where it's due. Ovett in Moscow wasn't as impressive as he was in Dusseldorf 77 or Prague 78, where he totally dominated the opposition over 1500. Coe was more impressive in 84, coming back from losing to the unbeatable Cruz over 800 to win the 1500 with an even greater kick (although his behaviour when he crossed the line was at best unfortunate).

I have a feeling I know how this movie is going to pan out even before it's been made. It's going to be the cliché that runs and runs :wink:

Frankly I thought the 1500 was a riveting race, though thanks to Straub and not the principals. Of course the quality of the performances were not up to, for example, Ovett in Dusseldorf '77 (when he "tore the field asunder"). Still, I was much more interested in the struggle (much of it psychological) than I was in, say, El Gerrouj's win in 1999, where there was never any doubt as to the result and the rest of the field simply tottered helplessly home in his wake.
My point is, even discounting British press hype, the 800/1500 in 1980 were fascinating and the protagonists were huge stars of those Games. Track movies often disappoint, but I'll definitely watch this one.

[deanouk]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Yes, the times were slow, but it's not like we saw two great races - in the 800, after a slow first half, Nikolai Kirov bolted for home, Steve Ovett followed and kicked past in the home straight. Coe ran badly and was beaten. In the 1500, after a slow first half, Jurgen Straub bolted for home, Seb Coe followed and kicked past in the home straight. Ovett ran badly and was beaten.

Have to say I disagree. The Moscow finals were probably the 2 most talked about races of the games, both before and after. They were pure sporting theatre.
Coe ran a tactically dreadful race in the 800, but he didn't "run" badly. He was the fastest finisher of everyone, closing the last 200 in 24.9 and running most of the last curve in lane 2. If he'd been on Ovett's shoulder at 600m then yes it would have been much more dramatic in the home straight, and to that extent it was a bit of an anti-climax.

As for the 1500m, I believe it was one of the best races in Olympic history. The idea that Ovett ran a bad race is nonsense. Unlike Coe in the 800, who ran badly tactically, Ovett was always in a good position throughout the final of the 1500 and ran exactly as he did in all his other races. The only difference is that whereas he normally exploded with 200 to go in races where the rest of the field just waited for him to go, in Moscow he had that kick blunted by Straub going with 700 to go. Ovett actually ran the last 100m in Moscow in 12.6, faster than his last 100m in the 800 final, faster than the final 100 in Prague 78 or Dusseldorf 77. His last lap in Moscow was 52.5, some 2 secs faster than in Dusselldorf and faster also than Prague. He was actually better in Moscow, but was made to look less dominant because he had Coe (and Straub) in the field ahead of him.
Coe's last 100m in Moscow was 12.1, the fastest last 100m in any major championship ever. So how that can not be seen as a great race or lacking in athletic achievement I don't know.

[deanouk]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

The reason why the recent BBC documentary about Moscow appears to praise Coe more than Ovett, is because Ovett steadfastly refuses to help, advise or answer any questions about the event. He refuses to get involved in the upcoming film as well. If someone is not prepared to give their account or point of view, then it gives the film maker a lot less to go on, and of course that will be reflected in the end result.

The whole thing about class is rubbish and was created by the press at the time to make it sound like some Vaudevillian play. They seem to think back then that if you went to University then you must be middle class! In actual fact it was Coe who went to a secondary modern comprehensive and Ovett who went to Grammar school.

Coe also supported grass root athletics by competing in his county championships and running for his club and university far more often than Ovett; who was able to pick and choose his races far more readily, having Andy Norman as his confidente & agent; ever did.

Ovett was a full time athlete from the mid 70's, while Coe was never a full-time athlete apart from 1980. At all other times he was either a full time student or working for the Sports Council and other bodies.

So this whole idea of Ovett having to work for everything and Coe having everything handed to him on a plate is utter rubbish.

[kuha]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

The reason why the recent BBC documentary about Moscow appears to praise Coe more than Ovett, is because Ovett steadfastly refuses to help, advise or answer any questions about the event.

And this goes way back. The only significant figure missing from the great 1994 "Bannister dinner" in London was Ovett. I admire him tremendously, but honestly don't understand this "screw you" attitude toward the larger sport.

[gh]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

I've talked to Ovett twice. Well, the first time wasn't much of a talk. He showed up at the '79 NCAA in Champaign (courtesy Nike, probably) and a mutual friend in England had said I should tell him hi. I introduced myself and said that so-and-so said I should say hi, and he in so many words told me to piss off.

But then we then ended up at the same dinner table at a World Cup function in Madrid in '01 and I've rarely enjoyed anybody's company so much. Much laughing and joking and telling of tales out of class.

I figured all those years in Oz had worked wonders in the geniality department.

[JumboElliott]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Has Coe always been affable?

[gh]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

My first meeting w/ Seb was a delight. Leaving the Rome airport after the '81 World Cup was one of the great zoos of all time. Finally got through the line for a flite to London with only minutes to spare, as did Seb from the kiosk next to me. We both broke into a run (because there was serious doubt if we'd get to the gate in time) and while huffing & puffing—me, not him—i introduced myself, and we had a delightful conversation all the way to the gate.

On the plane (it was a BA flite), he spent the entire 2 hours or so signing autographs for literally everybody on the plane and never lost his smile or cheery demeanor.

I've still never figured out why he didn't make it in politics. From that moment on I had him tagged as future PM.

(oh, I guess his POLITICS just might have had something to do with it :mrgreen: )

[Daisy]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Has Coe always been affable?

My sister sent him a letter addressed to Seb Coe, Sheffield. I guess the post office knew his address and about two weeks after that she got a signed picture in return.

[Rog]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Deano, I can see you're a huge Coe fan, and no-one is going to persuade you differently regarding anything to do with him, so if you don't agree with the following, just ignore it.

In the case of Moscow 80, there was a huge amount of hype about the clash between Coe and Ovett both beforehand, and after, but this was mainly from the British press about two British athletes. When Ovett won the 800 in 1:45 I don't think it compared too favourably against Oliszaryenko's bold front running to win the women's race in 1:53. Similarly, Coe won the 1500 with a fast last 700, but that was because he just stuck to Straub and kicked past in the home straight. In the women's equivalent, Kazankina ran a fast last 700 too (comparatively faster, at that - I think she ran 1:59 for her last 800) but in her case it was because she went to the front 600 out and made a bold move herself. Despite a slow first half, she finished in a time that was at that point the third fastest time ever.

My point is that unless one is an insulated, chauvinistic Brit, one has to conclude that the men's middle distance events in Moscow 80 were overshadowed by the women's. Then, when you consider the great performances in other events by the likes of Kozakiewicz, Wessig and Sedykh, and Yifter's double, not to mention the many great performances in the women's events, then it's hard to see how one can draw the conclusion that Coe and Ovett were stars of the games - unless one is an insular, chauvinistic Brit.

I still stick to my point about Coe and Ovett running badly in their main events. Coe's 800 tactics were just stupid. Personally my favourite performance of his in a championship was the 800 in Prague 78, as it was the only time when a title was at stake that he committed himself from the start. We know it failed, but it was a glorious failure. If it had worked, then he might have had more confidence to adopt this approach in the 800 in Moscow as he surely would have burned off the opposition - like Oliszaryenko did. Ovett should have been able to beat Coe in the 1500, but as Steve Cram has recounted, Ovett seemed beaten psychologically before the race. In his peak Ovett kicked with 200 to go, not 100, and at his best I think he would have done this in Moscow to take gold. In fact I think he ran the penultimate 100 in both Prague and Dusseldorf in under 12 seconds, the just strode through the line - if he had done this in Moscow he would surely have won.

[deanouk]

Re: Ovett vs Coe movie

Strange then that Coe appeared on the front of the following month's "Sports Illustrated" magazine, which I believe is an American publication and has nothing to do with insulated chauvinistic Brits!

Ovett's penultimate 100 in Dusseldorf was 12.0 (although his coach, Harry Wilson said he hand timed it at 11.9); and came off a previous 200m of only 29.2, and a last 800m in a pedestrian 1:54.3, so it's hardly surprising. In Moscow the last 800 was 1:48.5, some 6 secs faster, and the penultimate 200 was 2 secs faster than Dusseldorf at 27.2. Completely different races. He was unable to put in a 12.0 penultimate 100 round the bend because he had his kick run out of him.

Ovett's penultimate 100 in Prague was 12.2, not sub 12, and the 200 stretch before that was 27.6, again slower than the corresponding stretch in Moscow. His last 700m was 1:37.5, compared to 1:33.2 in Moscow.

Ovett was great when no one stretched the field and went for home more than 400 out, as he was able to kick at 200m off a reasonable pace and pull away from the rest of the field. Up to Moscow the opposition always played into his hands. And Cram showed again that you could run the sting out of his legs by going from the bell in 83, thus neutralising his acceleration with 200 to go.

And if the pace hadn't picked up 700 out in Moscow there is little evidence to show Ovett would have pulled away from Coe with 200 to go, unless Coe was boxed in or ran a tactically disatrous race again, and it was clear from the opening 100 of the 1500 that Coe wasn't going to do that; always staying on the leader's shoulder. Coe's acceleration with 200 to go was (at least) just as good as Ovett's; his penultimate 100 in the 800m final there was 12.3, and that was running in lane 2. That IS worth sub 12 with a clear run in lane 1.

As for Olizarenko and Kazankina, of course their overall times were vastly superior to what the men produced; indeed they were vastly superior to practically any women's middle distance race at any chamionship since; and we all know why that was! But that doesn't necessarily constitute making one the "star" of a Games. Both Farah's times in this year's Worlds were hardly earth shattering, and he employed the same (some would say boring or predictable) "sit and kick" tactics of Coe & Ovett. Yet he was certainly one of the stars of the Championship, as his short-listing for AOY highlights. Unless of course the panel that sit on that one are comprised mainly of insulated, chauvinistic Brits?