m1500 Rank: this could be a first....


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Dutra5 » Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:54 am

Heats don't count IIRC.

He's got a couple of points for honors won, not much in the performance category and it's hard to imagine he has the head to head over too many who'd be ranked.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby gh » Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:39 pm

heats count (in the T&FN scheme of things) as part of win-loss if one of you advances and the other doesn't (in the same race), and as part of your seasonal-average.

But relative to Manzano/Centrowitz, Centro has a 3-2 advantage on the year. Centro's DL finishes are 3, 4, 8, 9. In terms of "honors won" the OT means almost nothing.

Centro blows Manzano away by our criteria.
gh
 
Posts: 46314
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Conor Dary » Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:02 pm

'Centro blows Manzano away by our criteria.'

I would agree with that.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby bushop » Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:30 pm

gh wrote:...In terms of "honors won" the OT means almost nothing...

All the US OT or specifically the US men's 1500m OT?
bushop
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: near the toys and tape measures

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:43 pm

bushop wrote:
gh wrote:...In terms of "honors won" the OT means almost nothing...

All the US OT or specifically the US men's 1500m OT?

Not all events are the same. Certainly the 110H and mSP count highly, which is why I have a problem with the insinuation that the OT 1500 counts so little. Have we not proven ourselves to a be a world power in the 1500 at this juncture? Centro last year and Manz this year are NOT an anomaly!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Conor Dary » Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:46 pm

I think the point is that getting 1st or 3rd in the Trials is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is to make the team.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:07 pm

Conor Dary wrote:I think the point is that getting 1st or 3rd in the Trials is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is to make the team.

I don't think that applies to our power events. Isn't an OT 1st in the 110H and mSP an important data-point in ranking the top ten WORLD athletes (even though most of the rankers can't even compete there)?
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby gh » Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:04 pm

Conor Dary wrote:I think the point is that getting 1st or 3rd in the Trials is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is to make the team.


No, it's the fact that the OT itself is basically irrelevant to having anything to do with the real international 1500 picture, while the--as others have suggested--the m110H and SP are crucial.
gh
 
Posts: 46314
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby gibson » Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:08 pm

interesting to know the selection criteria.
whatever the difference in method, i often agree with the tnf top lists.

in my book, a competitive trials race with a quality field is superior to an average diamond league result. this years 1500, while not over the top, featured centro, leo, wheating, andrews and a ton of 335 guys. that is a great win. 331 centro had to run hard to make the team.

head to head results early in the OG-season don't mean much to this cowboy.
i weight the OG result much more than a single diamond league outing.
the best man is definitely not the one who peaks early while others are training through.

all of which leads to the kenyans. what the hell are they doing to peak or rather not peak?
gibson
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 6:57 am

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Conor Dary » Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:33 am

gh wrote:
Conor Dary wrote:I think the point is that getting 1st or 3rd in the Trials is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is to make the team.


No, it's the fact that the OT itself is basically irrelevant to having anything to do with the real international 1500 picture, while the--as others have suggested--the m110H and SP are crucial.


Okay, I see the distinction. International is the key word here.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby deanouk » Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:40 am

The T&FN rankings are clearly based on overall performances during a season. I personally feel that they don't give enough weight to the most important races, i.e Olympic or World finals. I don't agree that winning an Olympic title is down to luck. Of course a bit of luck is involved on the way, but its far more related to the ability to peak for a specific race on a specific day which is known to all competitors years in advance.

Winning at Diamond league races is obviously important, but any individual athlete going to the line on that day will have little idea where his peers are in terms of their seasonal form. Some might be in the middle of a heavy training period, others testing the waters after injury, some in great early season form but wanting to hold back a bit. But everyone knows when the gun goes for the Olympic final that everyone is at or near to their best form. Of course some athletes may have some bad luck (e.g injury) which might prevent them from running their best and winning, but rarely does someone win an Olympic title due to good luck.

I remember in 84 when the No.1 ranking was awarded to Aouita, based on 8 wins on the circuit out of 8, including the fastest time of 3:31.54. Most of his victories were in relatively low key races in Italy. But he remained unbeaten.
Coe was ranked No. 2, which I always thought was a strange decision. He ran fewer races (6), yes, but won the 2 most important races of the year (Olympics & Zurich), which were also the best quality in terms of depth of talent. Both were emphatic wins in the 2nd and 3rd fastest times of the year, the former being an Olympic record. Moreover, Aouita chose not to run in either race.
What tipped the balance was that Coe suffered a narrow defeat early season when coming back from injury. He had stumbled in that race and was beaten by less than a metre by Peter Elliott, no mean 1500 runner himself. But the fact remained that the ranking panel chose quantity rather than quality, and seemingly did not weigh an Olympic victory as the most significant race of the year by far.
deanouk
 
Posts: 448
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 4:15 am
Location: London, UK

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby bushop » Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:12 pm

deanouk wrote:I remember in 1984 when the No.1 ranking was awarded to Aouita... Coe was ranked No. 2...

The ranking order does seem odd.
bushop
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: near the toys and tape measures

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby odelltrclan » Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:05 am

gh wrote:heats count (in the T&FN scheme of things) as part of win-loss if one of you advances and the other doesn't (in the same race), and as part of your seasonal-average.

But relative to Manzano/Centrowitz, Centro has a 3-2 advantage on the year. Centro's DL finishes are 3, 4, 8, 9. In terms of "honors won" the OT means almost nothing.

Centro blows Manzano away by our criteria.


If your picking who you would think would win on a regular basis, as if you were Vegas making odds, certainly Centro would be higher. But the T&FN criteria has always been honors 1 as number 1. An OT win [doesn't it count as national title as well?] and Olympic medal far exceeds Centro's accomplishments for the year. So how could you make a claim that Centro "blows" Manzano away? At the end of the day if you asked either what they would have rather have walked away with for their accomplishments this year and Manzano wins hands down.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby bushop » Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:39 pm

odelltrclan wrote:
gh wrote:Centro blows Manzano away by our criteria.
1. An OT win [doesn't it count as national title as well?]
The US 1500m field is too weak.

odelltrclan wrote:At the end of the day if you asked either what they would have rather have walked away with for their accomplishments this year and Manzano wins hands down.
Not a part of the criteria.
bushop
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: near the toys and tape measures

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:50 pm

odelltrclan wrote:
gh wrote:heats count (in the T&FN scheme of things) as part of win-loss if one of you advances and the other doesn't (in the same race), and as part of your seasonal-average.

But relative to Manzano/Centrowitz, Centro has a 3-2 advantage on the year. Centro's DL finishes are 3, 4, 8, 9. In terms of "honors won" the OT means almost nothing.

Centro blows Manzano away by our criteria.


If your picking who you would think would win on a regular basis, as if you were Vegas making odds, certainly Centro would be higher. But the T&FN criteria has always been honors 1 as number 1. An OT win [doesn't it count as national title as well?] and Olympic medal far exceeds Centro's accomplishments for the year. So how could you make a claim that Centro "blows" Manzano away? At the end of the day if you asked either what they would have rather have walked away with for their accomplishments this year and Manzano wins hands down.


By the criteria Manzano has the honors won but Centrowitz has the marks and head to head. Based on the fact that the rankings are more of a summary of the full season and not either a single race regardless of level of importance or speculation on who might have won a hypothetical, Centrowitz should be ranked higher.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby gh » Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:41 pm

odelltrclan wrote:..But the T&FN criteria has always been honors 1 as number 1. An OT win [doesn't it count as national title as well?] ....


A "national title" means little/nothing if it's not a significant competition. The U.S. 1500, based on an overall view of the 2012 season, is not a particularly significant competition.

The name of a meet doesn't necessarily confer "significance" to the competition, and that includes the Olympics. Particularly in an event where the 3-per-nation rule might lead to a weaker field than one gets in a DL meet. Hence our protocol (which goes back to almost the year I was born) that no one meet—not even the Olympics—is the be-all/end-all.

You don't have to like/understand where we're going with this, but we have a well-stated (I hope) set of criteria, and we try to hew to them, year in and year out.

This particular example, by the way, I hope helps to put paid to those who think that the T&FN Rankings (which are decided by a very international panel) are somehow U.S.-biased. If they were, then guess what, Manzano would get a very high ranking. I have no idea—at this point the year, where the deep post-season analysis is only just starting—where he will end up, but as I noted in starting this thread, it's my belief that he really could end up not ranked, despite the silver. If that's a pro-U.S. bias, then I give up.
gh
 
Posts: 46314
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby odelltrclan » Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:53 am

gh wrote:A "national title" means little/nothing if it's not a significant competition. The U.S. 1500, based on an overall view of the 2012 season, is not a particularly significant competition.


The discussion was between Manzano and Centrowitz and therefore, the U.S. 1500, for that discussion should mean plenty as the winner, U.S. Trials or not is national champion. It cannot be classified as anything but a significant competition when you are dealing with those two athletes alone.

When dealing with U.S. rankings, therefore, your system seems to have a flaw. Your international panel may put Centro ahead because they view the US 1500 as insignificant, but to the US rankings, it should be considered significant. Hence, a runner could conceivably rank lower for your world rankings and higher for US.

The name of a meet doesn't necessarily confer "significance" to the competition, and that includes the Olympics. Particularly in an event where the 3-per-nation rule might lead to a weaker field than one gets in a DL meet. Hence our protocol (which goes back to almost the year I was born) that no one meet—not even the Olympics—is the be-all/end-all.

You don't have to like/understand where we're going with this, but we have a well-stated (I hope) set of criteria, and we try to hew to them, year in and year out.


If you are saying the Olympics are just another meet in the context of this year's men's 1500 (and most events for that matter) then I think you have developed too much of a habit of rationalizing. The top 3 Kenyans were at the meet, the biggest meet in 4 years on the planet, and performed poorly. So to even hint this was not necessarily a big meet (and lower than a ho-hum rabbited DL meet to me would be ludicrous.

The fact is, those who perform well in rabbited races where meet promoters are setting them up for time, don't always perform well in REAL races where they only have to rely on themselves.

As per Manzano vs Centrowitz, Manzano is being judged poorly because of post Olympic letdown (and some inconsistency which is always a problem with him), something that affected a number of athletes. Centrowitz, on the other hand, had a shortened pre-Olympic season due to injury, ran well at the Olympics, but still was highly motivated and working towards a peak after the Olympics and thus, is being rewarded for performing well in far less meaningful races.
odelltrclan
 
Posts: 1554
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:30 pm

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby gibson » Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm

tfn criterion could use a little more sophistication?

at the crux.

current criterion uses quality of competition as a key indicator.
the probability is that:
big meets have better quality.
early season , late season, less quality.

sure it is a little foggy to determine which races guys are trying hard (not training thru, coming back, etc.) but this is a critical thing that one must do - if you want to successfully gamble professionally - see horse racing as a prime example.

elite horse racing gamblers are light years ahead of track in this area.

in fact guys like alberto salazar are just now starting to approximate the care taken with stakes race horses.
gibson
 
Posts: 327
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 6:57 am

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby IBswed » Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:46 am

It's interesting- last year I had a similar question about Jenny Simpson ranking in the woman's 15.
Considering her season, I thought she might be a world champion who didn't world rank. At best I thought she would sneak in at 9th or 10th- so I was very surprised to see her finish as 3rd ranked.
Looking at her season, it somewhat mirrors Manzano in 2012. A losing record to a top American rival (though Manzano did top Centrowitz at nationals, Simpson was well beaten by Uceny). A weak DL record (5th, 10th and 13th.) Only 26th on the yearly list with a very slow top 5 average of marks. In fact the only thing Simpson did of real distinction all year was win in Daegu (in a slow tactical race, not that that diminishes the title)
I realize that the mens 1500 this year is a much deeper event then the woman's in 2011- but doesn't this rather suggest that a great deal of weight is put on results of a global meet?
IBswed
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby gh » Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:39 am

bump

so as it ended up, Manzano and Iguider ended up ranked Nos. 9 and 10.

Fast forward to this year: will Cronje end up in the top 10 with his Moscow bronze? I'm guessing no, based on his other international exposure:

Doha DL 8th
Oslo DL 9th
Zürich DL 8th
gh
 
Posts: 46314
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Marlow » Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:55 am

gh wrote:will Cronje end up in the top 10 with his Moscow bronze?

Which is exactly what happens when it's not an 'honest pace' race. Any Tom, Dick or Johan can make it to the podium (no offense to Cronje, who did what he had to do on the day he had to do it!)
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby 26mi235 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:15 pm

It was 'dishonest pace'? Guys that can win and place high on the circuit (mainly in rabbited races) but cannot place particularly well are not necessarily better runners just because they have a faster PR. And with semi-time trial racing, there is not a lot of racing savvy that necessarily comes in to play on those DL rabbit runs. Give me a Centro that can race when he is called on to do so. Of course, Kiprop typically does both well, but does have some 'big' so-so circuit races.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16315
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Marlow » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:22 pm

26mi235 wrote:It was 'dishonest pace'?

If the leaders of a race CAN run a 57-sec per lap pace and the first two laps go out at 2:00 (or worse!) we have a tactical race in which the best 'finishers' have the advantage, not the best one-thousand-five hundred-meter runners. Some people prefer tactical races. I do not. I may have drunk too much of Pre's Kool-aid, but I want a death-march at the end, not a free-for-all.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Master Po » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:31 pm

Marlow wrote:
gh wrote:will Cronje end up in the top 10 with his Moscow bronze?

Which is exactly what happens when it's not an 'honest pace' race. Any Tom, Dick or Johan can make it to the podium (no offense to Cronje, who did what he had to do on the day he had to do it!)


^^Actually, no. Unless you mean "With hardly any exceptions over the last 16 championships, any Tom, Dick, or Johan who has run faster than 3:33 or 3:50." Since 1997 -- so, the last 16 global championships in this event, which means 48 medals -- only 3 medals have gone to guys who have (as of that championship final) not run faster than 3:33 or 3:50. Those are:

Reyes Estevez bronze Athens 1997
Matthew Centrowitz bronze Daegu 2011
Johan Cronje bronze Moscow 2013

And, if it matters, Estevez (3:30.87 in 1998) & Centrowitz (3:31.96 in 2012) became significantly faster the next year after their first championship medals. With that in mind, Cronje (3:33.46) is the one outlier, by this sub-3:33 or sub-3:50 criterion, in the last 16 championships. Given his age & especially years in the event, I doubt if he'll get under 3:33, even though he's only half a second off it.

I have no strong opinion about whether Cronje should be world ranked. I probably would rank him because I'm guessing that many of his peers in this event would gladly trade their superior finishes in DL races for bronze at the WC. I would guess that they value that race more than others.

However, I do have a considered perspective about the persistent idea -- which seems to based on the fact that sometimes championship winning times are "slow-ish" -- that "anyone in the field" can win the medals. With these exceptions above noted, the medals always go to the guys who have run sub-3:33 or sub-3:50. They don't always go to the fastest guys in the world, but that dividing line is a pretty good marker of quality, and it ain't just any Tom, Dick or Johan.

Prior to 1993, one could probably re-set the bar a little bit slower and still find a consistent pattern, though I haven't looked as of yet.
Master Po
 
Posts: 2630
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: north coast USA

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Marlow » Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:15 pm

Master Po wrote:^^Actually, no. Unless you mean "With hardly any exceptions over the last 16 championships, any Tom, Dick, or Johan who has run faster than 3:33 or 3:50." Since 1997 -- so, the last 16 global championships in this event, which means 48 medals -- only 3 medals have gone to guys who have (as of that championship final) not run faster than 3:33 or 3:50.

Actually I was using hyperbole for effect, but I love the stats you came up with!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby TN1965 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 1:56 pm

Marlow wrote:
gh wrote:will Cronje end up in the top 10 with his Moscow bronze?

Which is exactly what happens when it's not an 'honest pace' race. Any Tom, Dick or Johan can make it to the podium (no offense to Cronje, who did what he had to do on the day he had to do it!)


Kiplagat and Chepseba have only themselves to blame. Kenyans planned a team tactics to push the pace by each one taking turns at the top. But they failed to execute the plan. If you do not want to open up the race for every one, stick with your game plan. :lol:
TN1965
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby kevinsdad » Sat Aug 31, 2013 10:39 pm

Marlow wrote:
gh wrote:will Cronje end up in the top 10 with his Moscow bronze?

Which is exactly what happens when it's not an 'honest pace' race. Any Tom, Dick or Johan can make it to the podium (no offense to Cronje, who did what he had to do on the day he had to do it!)


Kiprop has finished 6th in his last two DL races. How about I say this is exactly what happens when there are rabbits rather than an "honest pace" by the real competitors? Any Tom, Dick or Caleb can beat the world champ. Makes about as much sense as what is quoted above. There are upsets and unexpected results sometimes and they don't necessarily have anything to do with pace.
kevinsdad
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby 26mi235 » Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:54 pm

Marlow wrote:
26mi235 wrote:It was 'dishonest pace'?

If the leaders of a race CAN run a 57-sec per lap pace and the first two laps go out at 2:00 (or worse!) we have a tactical race in which the best 'finishers' have the advantage, not the best one-thousand-five hundred-meter runners. Some people prefer tactical races. I do not. I may have drunk too much of Pre's Kool-aid, but I want a death-march at the end, not a free-for-all.


There are two things, the 1500 meter race and running 1500 meters. The best 1500 meter runners are the ones that, when the top runners get together, they finish at the top (e.g., on the podium). The rest is, to some extent, window dressing, not a sign of being the best 1500 meter runners.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16315
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby gh » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:24 am

so Cronje puts up an NR 3:31.93 for 2nd in Rieti today. But he didn't really claim any major scalps, might still be on the outside looking in.
gh
 
Posts: 46314
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Marlow » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:45 am

gh wrote:so Cronje puts up an NR 3:31.93 for 2nd in Rieti today. But he didn't really claim any major scalps, might still be on the outside looking in.

Aw, c'mon.
#9 on the year-list
AND
WC 3rd

means he's got
1. Honor won
2. Head-to-head at the most important meet
3. Good mark

Squeeze him in there!!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby bushop » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:54 am

gh wrote:heats count (in the T&FN scheme of things) as part of win-loss if one of you advances and the other doesn't (in the same race), and as part of your seasonal-average.

Interesting... details like this make the T&F News rankings the most important historically.
bushop
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: near the toys and tape measures

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby said88 » Mon Dec 02, 2013 5:05 am

deanouk wrote:
I remember in 84 when the No.1 ranking was awarded to Aouita, based on 8 wins on the circuit out of 8, including the fastest time of 3:31.54. Most of his victories were in relatively low key races in Italy. But he remained unbeaten.
Coe was ranked No. 2, which I always thought was a strange decision. He ran fewer races (6), yes, but won the 2 most important races of the year (Olympics & Zurich), which were also the best quality in terms of depth of talent. Both were emphatic wins in the 2nd and 3rd fastest times of the year, the former being an Olympic record. Moreover, Aouita chose not to run in either race.


So, Aouita has mostly run in "relatively low key races in Italy"? Whereas Coe has just competed in the BIG ones - that's what you want to tell us? Deano!

Aouita has had 9 runs at the distance. All wins. Including: Koblenz, Paris, Hengelo, London, Zürich, African Championships. In one of the "low key" races in Italy he has reportedly run the fastest sprint finish in the history of the event. Also we're both sceptical about this, after the Ryun case it seems to be clear that it at least was super fast. He has had big victories in June, July, August and September. Not to forget that he ended the year as the fastest over 1500m and the Mile.

On the other side, Coe has won the very prestigious Southern Counties Championships, the Beverley Baxter Trophy and in the British League. But unfortunately just came in 2nd at another of these 1st class meets, the AAA champs.

So, clearly Aouita has run mainly in low key races whereas Coe just just did the opposite.

I don't say Aouita must be the Nr. 1 in 84 over 1500m, but to put it in the way you did really is not very helpful at all.

Aouita choose not to run in LA and Zürich 1500m? You know very well that he couldn't compete in LA because he ran the 5000m (where he probably has seen a higher chance for winning, to run both was not possible). It's really a must to tell this. And in Zürich? Both have ran very similar times, and I very much doubt that Aouita was the one who choose that he isn't in the 1500m field. Exactly like me, you don't know what really has happened that there were two races. Coe has had much more to loose than Aouita, and I strongly believe Coe (best friend of Brügger) was the one who didn't wanted him in the 1500m field. But for sure I don't know that. Same for you.
It's really not very helpful to put it in the way you want it.

There is a very good reason to put Aouita on the Nr. 1 over 1500m in 1984, also for sure some can differ because of the very big importance of the Olympics. (it just tells us that in some cases it's just not very helpful to do such a ranking at all). But the way you want to put it is just totally misleading. And you know that, Deano.
said88
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:28 am

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby Marlow » Mon Dec 02, 2013 5:10 am

said88 wrote:(it just tells us that in some cases it's just not very helpful to do such a ranking at all). But the way you want to put it is just totally misleading.

A. How is it useful to have NO ranking?!
B. You have an opinion. Dean has an opinion. Neither is 'misleading'. They're just different.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: m1500 Rank: this could be a first....

Postby said88 » Mon Dec 02, 2013 5:33 am

Marlow wrote:
said88 wrote:(it just tells us that in some cases it's just not very helpful to do such a ranking at all). But the way you want to put it is just totally misleading.

A. How is it useful to have NO ranking?!
B. You have an opinion. Dean has an opinion. Neither is 'misleading'. They're just different.


Aouita has had no chance to compete in LA (or he would have had to skip the 5000m where he probably thought nobody could beat him). I think in such cases it's much more helpful to do a ranking for "distance running" at all.

And it's definitely not an opinion what I have written. I don't say Aouita is/was better, or Coe is/was better. But we just should stay with the facts.

Aouita has definitely not run "low key races" in Italy. Coe almost only has run low key races (for sure with two important exceptions). But why not just writing it like that?
And it's also definitely not a fact that Aouita choose not to compete in Zürich over 1500m. I very much doubt this. Has Res Brügger/Seb Coe said this? That's not very helpful at all. Aouita probably has said the opposite.
said88
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 7:28 am

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], bobguild76, Google [Bot] and 9 guests