She was not the greatest tripler, that wold be Gwen Torrence or Marie Perec, and we can include Privalova.
Without invoking selective filters for who was clean and who was maybe not, Koch is by herself. Are you filtering on the men's side using personal bias? If not, then, unfortunately we cannot do so on the distaff side either. Personally, Privalova never impressed me over one lap - 49.7x is nothing to write home about in this kind of discussion. In some respects she belongs in the same breath as Koch, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong, has anyone ever compiled a list of the greatest women combo runners like we have here with the men, based on points?
Thank you very much! It's a bit of a weird read, seeing as how Irena Szewinska finishes behind Pam Marshall. Clearly just assigning points leaves out quite a bit of other criteria in this kind of thing. I know the IAAF knows what they're doing when constructing these tables, but it still feels strange seeing some great 100/200 doublers with horrible 400 times - around 51 seconds - outranking some of the most sizzling quartermilers ever. I know, it is just one third of the total. Interesting stuff, and thanks again.
skiboo wrote:Thank you very much! It's a bit of a weird read, seeing as how Irena Szewinska finishes behind Pam Marshall. Clearly just assigning points leaves out quite a bit of other criteria in this kind of thing. I know the IAAF knows what they're doing when constructing these tables, but it still feels strange seeing some great 100/200 doublers with horrible 400 times - around 51 seconds - outranking some of the most sizzling quartermilers ever. I know, it is just one third of the total. Interesting stuff, and thanks again.
The same is true on the men's side. It's easy to be a 100/200 doubler, the 400 is just very different. If we compiled a 200/300/400 list, I think we would see the 400 specialists show more strongly over the 200 specialists.
paulthefan wrote:List needs updating for Felix. Put in her pr at 200m and let her run a few more serious 400m races and she catapults herself to the top tier.
Gay needed to crack 46,00 (45,89) at Texas in order to break the 3.685 combo tie with Powell and pass Carter for third all-time (3.713-3.712); Gay equalled Powell with his 46,34 at Sun Devil last week. Spearmon entered yesterday's race six points behind Gay and Powell on the all-time combo list.
As you know, Gay excelled at the 400m distance yesterday, running 45,57 to tally 3.733 points combined. There are too many steps involved yet for Gay to reach Michael Johnson, but I believe Gay could squeeze out another 23 points this season (9,73/19,57).
Xavier Carter is now 21 points back of Gay. Carter can use the 400m to gobble up those points, needing to improve from his 44,53 to 44,20 to tie and 44,18 to re-take that spot if Gay doesn't make any more improvement over 100m and 200m this season.
Gay earned another six points yesterday, bringing his combo score to 3.739. He remains in third, 78 points behind Johnson. Carter doesn't yet appear capable of catching back up to Gay on short-sprint PB's, but he can still make up ground if he's able to unleash a 44,12 to tie, 44,10 to break. Each man's best running is likely still in front of him.
Last time Gay ran, I predicted he had a 19,57 in him this season. He ran 19,58 yesterday.
EPelle wrote:Last time Gay ran, I predicted he had a 19,57 in him this season. He ran 19,58 yesterday.
Geez, nice call!
That said, I'm guessing you were estimating that 19.57 would be his SB for this season, and would thus be coming in late summer, not late May. Hehehe. Looks like you might want to crank your prediction down a couple tenths now.
I really do actually stink with these predictions. I hit one square on the head (to the 1:100) last summer in the w-800m, but fail miserably in prediction contests
EPelle wrote:Powell has increased his total by 95 points -- 3590 to 3685 -- from the last list; Bolt has moved up 199 points -- from 3634 to 3833. If Powell can match 200m PB's with Mike Marsh, he'll stand at 3712, tied with Xavier Carter for third all-time. Carter can keep sole possession of third with a likely improvement over 400m; he'll be hard-pressed to be sub-10,00/sub-45,00 at the same time, but perhaps the first-ever.
I think Powell is a projected 19.5 guy but he is too scared of the curve.. sad really.
EPelle wrote:Here's a near-certainty (as equal to the certainty that death and taxes shall come upon you): Bolt should be the only man to ever reach 4.000 points. If he never improves in the 100m or 200m, he will have to run 400m in 42,74 to reach that level. If he runs 100m in a 9,55 and 200m in 18,99, he'll have to "only" cross the finish line at 400m in 44,30 to earn 4.000 points. If he ends up just under 44,00 (43,98), he'll need to stop the 100m clock somewhere at/below 9,50 and not have to worry about improving over 200m.
42.74! 9.55! 18.99! Those are video game numbers that you're just nonchalantly throwing around. Bolt may be the best candidate to break the 4000 barrier in the sprints, but I wouldn't call it as certain as death and taxes.
9.55 aint a video game time anymore. Bolt ran 9.58.
Gentlemen, where are you looking for Tyson Gay's times? Tyson's best 400 time is 44.89 100 time is 09.69 200 time is 19.58 I would think that would put him in third place or second behind Johnson. :http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/discussion/posting.php?mode=reply&f=1&sid=efb8f1ba8cc20626a321e04b4357fa12&t=26393#D
I understand that there's probably no way to compile this list that's not arbitrary. But if you just add up the each runner's times for the three distances, Michael Johnson beats Bolt by almost 1.5 seconds, at 72.59. Why isn't that just as good a system as these points?
because the longer the distance, the more the same % of improvement becomes larger, so that would unfairly favor those who are better at the longer/longest distance.
to use a reductio ad absurdum, let's say we wanted a list of the best combo throwers with the 125-pound shot and the 4-pound shot. The difference in distance with the heavier weight will be in inches, whereas with the lighter one it could be many feet. That make sense?
EPelle wrote:Here's a near-certainty (as equal to the certainty that death and taxes shall come upon you): Bolt should be the only man to ever reach 4.000 points. If he never improves in the 100m or 200m, he will have to run 400m in 42,74 to reach that level. If he runs 100m in a 9,55 and 200m in 18,99, he'll have to "only" cross the finish line at 400m in 44,30 to earn 4.000 points. If he ends up just under 44,00 (43,98), he'll need to stop the 100m clock somewhere at/below 9,50 and not have to worry about improving over 200m.
42.74! 9.55! 18.99! Those are video game numbers that you're just nonchalantly throwing around. Bolt may be the best candidate to break the 4000 barrier in the sprints, but I wouldn't call it as certain as death and taxes.
Bolt keeps his 'video game' dreams alive. He's run the 9,5 (ish).
Will there be any more of a focus on breaking World records?
"Definitely I think one season we’re going to try and see if we can go faster. Without a doubt. I definitely think so."
"I still want to run sub-19 (in the 200). That’s one of the things I always think about and talk about with my coach. That’s one thing I’d really like to try."
By virtue of his 9,69 PB, Yohan Blake has improved to 3764 points this season -- an increase of 50 points over last year's combo score which elevated him to his current fourth spot. He'd need to run 19,04 in tomorrow's 200m to be the fourth to break the 3800 points threshold; he'd still remain 13 points behind Gay.
Those are video game numbers that you're just nonchalantly throwing around. Bolt may be the best candidate to break the 4000 barrier in the sprints, but I wouldn't call it as certain as death and taxes.