|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 20, 2016 16:19:10 GMT -8
A gold medal is a gold medal but give me a break. 3:50.00 as a winning time? 24 seconds behind the world record? Slowest winning time in the Olympics since 1936 - that's 80 years!
The women's 1500 meter world record is 3:50.07.
I'll take Jim Ryun's 1968 silver in 3:37.9 at 7500 feet altitude as a superior performance in every way, even though he finished behind Kip Keino's incredible 3:34.9 (second fastest ever at the time) for the gold. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 20, 2016 19:54:11 GMT -8
First American gold medal in the event since 1908 > fast time. It's called a tactical race, with a 50.6 last lap. I wouldn't call this "tactical", I'd call it "trench warfare".
Maybe they should make it a coed race. Would make it much more exciting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 22, 2016 7:02:32 GMT -8
I'll say this much in Centrowitz' defense. He led wire to wire so to the extent anyone in the field pushed the pace, he did. The other runners played right into his strengths and he took advantage. What a strange race.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Aug 22, 2016 7:13:02 GMT -8
He won the race and got the gold. Your criticism rings very false to me. You'd prefer a silver medal to a gold. WTH?
It's like going 15-0 in college football and complaining about strength of schedule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 22, 2016 11:24:52 GMT -8
He won the race and got the gold. Your criticism rings very false to me. You'd prefer a silver medal to a gold. WTH? It's like going 15-0 in college football and complaining about strength of schedule. To restate from my original post which it appears you didn't bother to read:
Slowest winning since 1936! Less than a second faster than the women's WR!
If I have to rank US Olympic men's 1500 meter performances in the last century I'd rate:
1. Jim Ryun. Second place 3:37.9 1968 Mexico City (7500 ft altitude). 2. Centrowitz. First place 3:50.0 2016 Rio de Janeiro (sea level).
Yes, Ryun's 1968 silver performance is vastly superior to Centrowitz's gold. I don't think that's even arguable.
Centro is good but he's also one lucky, lucky man.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Aug 22, 2016 12:05:53 GMT -8
He won the race and got the gold. Your criticism rings very false to me. You'd prefer a silver medal to a gold. WTH? It's like going 15-0 in college football and complaining about strength of schedule. To restate from my original post which it appears you didn't bother to read:
Slowest winning since 1936! Less than a second faster than the women's WR!
If I have to rank US Olympic men's 1500 meter performances in the last century I'd rate:
1. Jim Ryun. Second place 3:37.9 1968 Mexico City (7500 ft altitude). 2. Centrowitz. First place 3:50.0 2016 Rio de Janeiro (sea level).
Yes, Ryun's 1968 silver performance is vastly superior to Centrowitz's gold. I don't think that's even arguable.
Centro is good but he's also one lucky, lucky man.
So why does Ryun rank above Manzano in 2012? FYI Centro's PRs are all better than Ryun's. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 22, 2016 12:44:40 GMT -8
To restate from my original post which it appears you didn't bother to read:
Slowest winning since 1936! Less than a second faster than the women's WR!
If I have to rank US Olympic men's 1500 meter performances in the last century I'd rate:
1. Jim Ryun. Second place 3:37.9 1968 Mexico City (7500 ft altitude). 2. Centrowitz. First place 3:50.0 2016 Rio de Janeiro (sea level).
Yes, Ryun's 1968 silver performance is vastly superior to Centrowitz's gold. I don't think that's even arguable.
Centro is good but he's also one lucky, lucky man.
So why does Ryun rank above Manzano in 2012? FYI Centro's PRs are all better than Ryun's. 1. You have to consider the time and place. 1968 was 48 years ago. Ryun's 3:37.9 was just 4.8 seconds behind his own world record of 3:33.1 and achieved at 7500 feet altitude. Manzano's 3:34.8 is 8.8 seconds slower than El Guerrouj's 3:26.0 world record and run at sea level. So I'd rate Manzano's silver well below Ryun's.
2. Centro's PR's aren't really relevant to evaluating his Olympic final race. But if you want to compare Ryun's PR's, they were run on cinder tracks including his 3:33.1 (1967) WR at the time. All of Centro's PR's were on synthetic surfaces. His 2015 3:30.40 is a mere 2.7 seconds faster - after 49 years. In that same time the 1500m WR has dropped 7.1 seconds.
|
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Aug 22, 2016 13:29:03 GMT -8
I'm 53 and have only seen Ryun on old video. He's obviously a tremendous talent and I'd guess running on cinder is about one second slower per lap than on synthetics. But I think you can consider him as mostly a time-trialer. During that silver medal run he let Kip Keino get 40 yards in front of him and could never close to less than 25 or so. On the other hand I think Centro is a racer. Half or more than half of the field in the race a few days ago have faster pr's than him. Yet he positioned himself perfectly and made the race fit his style exactly.
This is barely related to your post but at the 1500 distance I'm not sure elevation is a plus or a minus. Sprints are clearly faster at altitude and distance races are slower. The 1500 is anerobic for much of it. I'm not sure what the experts think. I've ran a little bit at 9200' (Quito, Ecuador) and it was stunning at how much slower you have to go.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Aug 22, 2016 15:11:38 GMT -8
So why does Ryun rank above Manzano in 2012? FYI Centro's PRs are all better than Ryun's. 1. You have to consider the time and place. 1968 was 48 years ago. Ryun's 3:37.9 was just 4.8 seconds behind his own world record of 3:33.1 and achieved at 7500 feet altitude. Manzano's 3:34.8 is 8.8 seconds slower than El Guerrouj's 3:26.0 world record and run at sea level. So I'd rate Manzano's silver well below Ryun's.
2. Centro's PR's aren't really relevant to evaluating his Olympic final race. But if you want to compare Ryun's PR's, they were run on cinder tracks including his 3:33.1 (1967) WR at the time. All of Centro's PR's were on synthetic surfaces. His 2015 3:30.40 is a mere 2.7 seconds faster - after 49 years. In that same time the 1500m WR has dropped 7.1 seconds.
So, in the end, you aren't impressed with winning a gold medal and would prefer the silver. In your words, "meh." "A superior performance in every way." Except the only way that matters, crossing the finish line first. I'd take gold over silver every day and twice on Sundays. Slow tactical race or not. 14-1 > 15-0 per Werebeaver |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 22, 2016 16:03:25 GMT -8
I'm impressed with Centrowitz's win. Like I said in the first sentence of my initial post - a gold medal is a gold medal. It means you lined up against the best in the world on that day and finished in first place. That is no small accomplishment.
But to quote the founder of the modern Olympics, Baron de Coubertin:
"The important thing in life is not victory but combat; it is not to have vanquished but to have fought well."
So in the spirit of the Olympics, I can value a superior competitive effort in 2nd place over first place finish in another race on another day. The men's 1500 meters has been contested at every Olympics since 1896. That's 27 races. In that context, I'm more impressed with the races run by both the gold and silver medalists in 1968 than by the gold medalist's run in 2016.
That's all. In the end, it's just my opinion, for the reasons I've stated. I don't think you're wrong if you disagree. You and I just appreciate the sport differently.
|
|
|
|
Post by zeroposter on Aug 22, 2016 16:32:31 GMT -8
Squonk presented some great data to back his opinion. Well done. We may disagree, but I sure as heck like the way he backed his original post.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 22, 2016 17:02:09 GMT -8
Squonk presented some great data to back his opinion. Well done. We may disagree, but I sure as heck like the way he backed his original post. I think I probably overstated my case with the "meh". That implies I wasn't impressed by a win against a field of the best 1500 meter runners in the world. Anytime you line up against the best and come out on top, that's damn impressive. So I'll cop to that - you win an Olympic Games final - you don't deserve a "meh". Edit function doesn't allow me to change the title or I would.
I stand by the rest of my analysis and conclusions.
|
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Aug 23, 2016 13:50:27 GMT -8
Ah, the old Baron de Coubertin quote. Oldest trick in the book...
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Aug 23, 2016 14:45:58 GMT -8
Ah, the old Baron de Coubertin quote. Oldest trick in the book... I'm pretty sure that the Ol' Baron was not in favor of medals for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, but for Participation Ribbons for all. I just can't dig up the quote.  |
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Aug 24, 2016 7:34:14 GMT -8
I like your points, squonk. I've noticed the same thing with the long jump, which seems to have peaked 20-25 years ago, when CArl Lewis and Mike Powell were always a threat to hit the 29' threshold. This year the medalists in the long jump didn't pass 27'6". That's still great, but nowhere near what it was in the late 80's and early 90s.
|
|
