For me, I think it's Paul Kipsiele Koech (3000m Steeplechase). Though, because he's aging, I don't think he will be for long. I love watching him run.
edit:
gh wrote:do you really mean "non-dead" or "active"?
thanks gh, sorry for not clarifying. I mean active, if you lined them up and had them run today, January 15th, 2013, at atleast 55 degrees Fahrenheit. You can have them run any distance you would like, or have them run seperate heats where they only ran their best distance against their regular circuit competitors. I can definitely see the confusion in the original poor wording of the post. Thanks!
jazzcyclist wrote:I have to go with Rudisha who is closer to his prime that Bolt.
I had Rudisha at 3. I would put Asbel Kiprop at 2. I think he can be competitive internationally from the 1500 all the way into 8 km and beyond. His 800m wouldn't be bad either.
Marlow wrote:Bolt is, of course. Unless you mean distance, and then it's Paula Radcliffe. MEN DISTANCE RUNNERS? Alive: Bek or Geb, pick-em. Active: If Bek is 100% back, obviously him. If not, TBD. There is no single standout right now.
If Bolt were to break 9.5, I'd put him at 1, because I feel that would be superhuman, but I agree that he is not as close to his prime as Rudisha, and it would be hard for me to rank him, because he is a short distance sprinter. He would lose to most of the runners on my list in any race that lasted longer than one minute. For me, Gebresellasie and Bekele would not be in the top 10 in a race that would be held today. The best Ethiopians would be Merga and Gebremedhin. I really like Gebramedhin but would put Mo Farah above him, though I would consider races with pace makers more valuable than those without. Paula Radcliffe would not be in the top 100 for me. For British women, the number one I guess would be Ohuruogu. My number one woman runner would be Turinesh Dibaba, the Ethiopian, but at best, she would be near the bottom of my overall top ten list. Thanks for your opinions, sorry if mine are too longwinded!
Last edited by athleticshushmail on Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:03 am, edited 5 times in total.
If we talk about runners in the past who are alive, it is only right to talk about runners in the future who are alive but not active yet. I suspect somewhere in East Africa is the runner who will break the 2 hour marathon and thus become the greatest runner ever.
athleticshushmail wrote:If Bolt were to break 9.5, I'd put him at 1, because I feel that would be superhuman, but I agree that he is not as close to his prime as Rudisha, and it would be hard for me to rank him, because he is a short distance sprinter. He would lose to most of the runners on my list in any race that lasted longer than one minute. For me, Gebresellasie and Bekele would not be in the top 10 in a race that would be held today. The best Ethiopians would be Merga and Gebremedhin. I really like Gebramedhin but would put Mo Farah above him, though I would consider races with pace makers more valuable than those without. Paula Radcliffe would not be in the top 100 for me. For British women, the number one I guess would be Ohuruogu. My number one woman runner would be Turinesh Dibaba, the Ethiopian, but at best, she would be near the bottom of my overall top ten list. Thanks for your opinions, sorry if mine are too longwinded!
This is exactly why your thread title question is unanswerable. We are all defining "best runner alive" differently. There can't be debate,because we are all answering a different question from everyone else.
Conor Dary wrote:If we talk about runners in the past who are alive, it is only right to talk about runners in the future who are alive but not active yet. I suspect somewhere in East Africa is the runner who will break the 2 hour marathon and thus become the greatest runner ever.
The first sub-2 marathoner has not been born yet, I suspect.
Suppose someone runs 1:59:xx in 2050 at age 30, there are still seven years before he is born.
TN1965 wrote:The first sub-2 marathoner has not been born yet, I suspect.
As the official 'Pie-Eyed Optimist' here, I think there's a kid in the world today who will run sub-2 within 25 years (by 2037!). I will be 87 and shall will myself to stay alive and see it.
TN1965 wrote:The first sub-2 marathoner has not been born yet, I suspect.
As the official 'Pie-Eyed Optimist' here, I think there's a kid in the world today who will run sub-2 within 25 years (by 2037!). I will be 87 and shall will myself to stay alive and see it.
Nah. Realistically, I won't be around in 2037 but am not concerned about missing it cause it ain't gonna happen.
TN1965 wrote:The first sub-2 marathoner has not been born yet, I suspect.
As the official 'Pie-Eyed Optimist' here, I think there's a kid in the world today who will run sub-2 within 25 years (by 2037!). I will be 87 and shall will myself to stay alive and see it.
Nah. Realistically, I won't be around in 2037 but am not concerned about missing it cause it ain't gonna happen.
See if you can convince Marlow of this simple concept.
What I meant originally and didn't put correctly was "Who do you think is the greatest runner at this moment, today." Somebody who could run a sub 2 hour marathon 2 years ago, one year from now, or in 2055 wouldn't count for that criteria. If you had the runners compete head to head, however you deemed best, who would be most impressive or most dominant to you. In regards to the question of many runners not being at the peak of their training cycle, that's a good point. I should have asked this 6 months from now.
Pego wrote:See if you can convince Marlow of this simple concept.
Oh, ye of little faith. It's like in Mary Martin's Peter Pan, where Tinkerbell's light is fading, and Martin turns to the camera and tells all the boys and girls at home that have to BELIEVE IN FAIRIES or Tink will die. I do! I do believe in fairies!!
Best ALL TIME 800-10K runners in the USA are: Steve Prefontaine Mary Slaney. Reason being, they had GREAT times at ALL the distances between 800-10K. (Actually, Pre did NOT have a great 800 or 1K!! But from 1500 up, he did!!))
Best sprinters (USA): Tommie Smith Allyson Felix
Best A-T in the WORLD, 800-10K: Haile Gebrselassie Grete Waitz
lonewolf wrote:Nah. Realistically, I won't be around in 2037 but am not concerned about missing it cause it ain't gonna happen.
There's a greater chance of you being alive in 2037 than of anybody running a sub-2 marathon in or before 2037.
You may be right. I will only be 106. I had an uncle WWI veteran who lived to age 105. Outlived three wives. Retired from his small town taxi service at 100 because he got tired of little old blue haired ladies calling him at 9:30 PM for rides home from BINGO.
Two of his younger brothers, also WWI vets, lived to 100 and 101.. the one who died young at 100, a big rawboned fellow, claimed to have been the Army European boxing champion. He might have lived longer but never fully recovered from being "gassed" in France.
lonewolf wrote:You may be right. I will only be 106. I had an uncle WWI veteran who lived to age 105. Outlived three wives. Retired from his small town taxi service at 100 because he got tired of little old blue haired ladies calling him at 9:30 PM for rides home from BINGO.
Two of his younger brothers, also WWI vets, lived to 100 and 101.. the one who died young at 100, a big rawboned fellow, claimed to have been the Army European boxing champion. He might have lived longer but never fully recovered from being "gassed" in France.
Is the longevity on the European side or the American side of your family?
lonewolf wrote:You may be right. I will only be 106. I had an uncle WWI veteran who lived to age 105. Outlived three wives. Retired from his small town taxi service at 100 because he got tired of little old blue haired ladies calling him at 9:30 PM for rides home from BINGO.
Two of his younger brothers, also WWI vets, lived to 100 and 101.. the one who died young at 100, a big rawboned fellow, claimed to have been the Army European boxing champion. He might have lived longer but never fully recovered from being "gassed" in France.
Is the longevity on the European side or the American side of your family?
The Centenarians are all on the paternal European side. My Comanche/Choctaw mother made it to 94; an older sister to 99. The men on maternal side tend to wear out a little younger, mid 80s.
DSKlausler wrote:If there is no restriction to a single distance, I might go with Mr. Eaton.
The only distances in which Eaton would beat Rudisha are 100 and 200. 400 might be close, and Rudisha will win 800 and above.
And if we restrict the distance to standard Olympic distances (100, 200, 400, 800, 1500, 5000, 10000 and marathon), Rudisha could beat any sprinter in 800 and above, and any distance runner in 800 and below. Asbel Kiprop with 800 PB of 1:43:15 might be an interesting competition. Does Rudisha have a better chance of beating Kiprop in 1500 or Kiprop beating Rudisha in 800?
So if there is a race of unknown Olympic distance six months from now, and you are allowed one entry to maximize the chances of winning, I'd pick either Rudisha or Kiprop.
TN1965 wrote: So if there is a race of unknown Olympic distance six months from now, and you are allowed one entry to maximize the chances of winning, I'd pick either Rudisha or Kiprop.
Yes, an interesting bet. The race is chosen completely at random, from 100 to the marathon, but you have to choose a runner first. Whom would you pick?????
TN1965 wrote: So if there is a race of unknown Olympic distance six months from now, and you are allowed one entry to maximize the chances of winning, I'd pick either Rudisha or Kiprop.
Yes, an interesting bet. The race is chosen completely at random, from 100 to the marathon, but you have to choose a runner first. Whom would you pick?????
'at random' does that mean that every Olympic track event gets equal likelihood, or the each interval of 100 meters gets equal likelihood (much different optimal choice). Do hurdler (110h, 400h, 3000SC) count?
'at random' does that mean that every Olympic track event gets equal likelihood, or the each interval of 100 meters gets equal likelihood (much different optimal choice). Do hurdler (110h, 400h, 3000SC) count?
By the way, this is an interesting question.
What I mean is every flat, forget the hurdles(and especially the walks!), running event gets a ping pong ball,
100, 200, 400, 800, 1500, 5000, 10,000, and marathon.
You get to choose a runner, and then, the event is pulled out.
Since it is my game, I get to go first and I would go with Rudisha. ho,ho..
'at random' does that mean that every Olympic track event gets equal likelihood, or the each interval of 100 meters gets equal likelihood (much different optimal choice). Do hurdler (110h, 400h, 3000SC) count?
By the way, this is an interesting question.
What I mean is every flat, forget the hurdles(and especially the walks!), running event gets a ping pong ball,
100, 200, 400, 800, 1500, 5000, 10,000, and marathon.
You get to choose a runner, and then, the event is pulled out.
I would go with Rudisha.
Actually, it depends on how many people you are playing against. I would be inclined to take Bolt because (assuming I have unique rights) I win the 100 and 200 with almost certainty (doubt that Blake gets taken) and will likely get the 400 as well if others pick a 5000/10,000 type and someone else a 1500/5000 type.
