By '65 Snell would have been well aware that Ryun was becoming a real beast.
Could that have been a part of his decision to move on in life?
By '65 Snell would have been well aware that Ryun was becoming a real beast.
Could that have been a part of his decision to move on in life?
americans need to get over their self-centred world view of track. pre never medalled at a major championship. webb never came close. ryun got one silver. snell got three golds. nice try
yanks... wrote:
americans need to get over their self-centred world view of track. pre never medalled at a major championship. webb never came close. ryun got one silver. snell got three golds. nice try
So in '65 Snell knew that Ryun would only wind up with a silver medal, would fall down, have mono, etc , etc. Is that your "theory", lol.
I think Snell knew that Ryun was a real comer with extraordinary talent and yes, that probably had something to do with his early retirement.
btw, my thoughts have not one fricking thing to do with nationalities. I really don't know why you dreary, resentful little sorts are always dragging America vs the world into everything.
sky wrote:
By '65 Snell would have been well aware that Ryun was becoming a real beast.
Could that have been a part of his decision to move on in life?
Unlikely. By his own admission, Snell was just going through the motions in 1965.
the point is that, given snell's accomplishments, the idea that he would be afraid of ryun is ridiculous. only somebody completely biased towards american athletes would think that was the reason behind his retirement, and not mental fatigue
tbh tho wrote:
if we're being honest, nobody has ever reasonably suspected snell of doping. there is lots to suggest the coe doped.
If we're being honest, the best runner in an era with no testing should logically be a doper, along with the next 10 best too. Doping works.
would be interesting to see the brojos make a piece addressing the topic. never had really considered snell for the MD GOAT but i can see it being a fair point
Bad Wigins wrote:
tbh tho wrote:
if we're being honest, nobody has ever reasonably suspected snell of doping. there is lots to suggest the coe doped.
If we're being honest, the best runner in an era with no testing should logically be a doper, along with the next 10 best too. Doping works.
Good for your health too, as every 800m finalist from Rome in 1960 except the West Indian is still alive (Snell being the youngest at 79).
said88 wrote:
It seems that Coedeppe has found a new enemy with Kenya and East Africa in general. But we should not forget that the TWO FAMELYS of Elliott and Snell have "produced" runners who have set several World Records and won many medals. Just two familys! Compare this with around 200 Million people of East Africa (Kenya has not 70 Million people, but numbers and Coedeppe is something special). Coedeppe is close to complete his proof that in fact East Africans are just very bad in distance running.
So if a white supremacist (a real one, not a person like me who denies Africans are genetically superior) were to claim that white women are inherently better at tennis, because they dominate the rankings and produce the most champions, and were presented with the obvious counterexample of the Williams sisters, Saidipede would mock that argument as beyond ridiculous.
[quote]But we should not forget that One Family - The Williams - have "produced" tennis players who have won over 30 grand slam events. Just one family! Compare this with around half a billion white people in the world. Coedeppe is close to complete his proof that in fact white people are just very bad at tennis./quote]
Not to mention the fact that I was including multiple runners along with Peter Snell and Herb Elliott, such as Quax, Dixon, Walker, Lovelock Clarke etc.
Black supremacists here often point to two or three Kenyan runners (Kip Keinio and Henry Rono, for example) who achieved success before the total domination that began overnight in 87, and it's a valid argument as to not only why Kenyans weren't inferior runners (clean) but why were they were obviously always superior, only held back from total domination since the 19th century by war, faminie, evil British colonialists, planetry alignment etc until August18th 1987.
I read that the average Turkish IQ in germany is 85. I don't believe in important genetic differences between races, so I doubt it, but maybe after months of reading Saidipede trying to construct logical arguments in defence of dopers, it's not so difficult to imagine as true.
tbh tho wrote:
if we're being honest, nobody has ever reasonably suspected snell of doping. there is lots to suggest the coe doped.
I don't think there is lots to suggest Coe doped. There is only Coe's blood disorder, and the fact that he was blisteringly fast, as was Snell (for his time and surface).
We have to assume Coe was clean. If British guys from that era were failing tests, like El G's training partners, rivals, and successors like Ramzi were failing tests, then it would be reasonable to suspect him and remove him from GOAT discussion, but I think we need more to 'suggest' he was dirty than what we have.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Deanouk wrote:
not only was there amphetamines and steroids being used in 1960 - 64, they weren't banned and there was no test for them!
There was no test, but they weren't legal, as PED's had been banned in 1928. Though speed didn't exist yet, cocaine and opioids did, and it would be naive to think they weren't being used.
Another thing you didn't mention is that speed is a far more effective PED than anything else, including steroids. It is the equivalent of an enduring adrenaline rush, enabling you to perform well beyond your ordinary physical limits. But that effect diminishes over a few years of cumulative use.
I thought I read that steroids were only added to the list of banned substances by the IOC in 1975!?
Coevett wrote:
tbh tho wrote:
if we're being honest, nobody has ever reasonably suspected snell of doping. there is lots to suggest the coe doped.
I don't think there is lots to suggest Coe doped. There is only Coe's blood disorder, and the fact that he was blisteringly fast, as was Snell (for his time and surface).
We have to assume Coe was clean. If British guys from that era were failing tests, like El G's training partners, rivals, and successors like Ramzi were failing tests, then it would be reasonable to suspect him and remove him from GOAT discussion, but I think we need more to 'suggest' he was dirty than what we have.
It's irrelevant since not a lot of athletes "in this era" (1970-1980), were failing tests.
Technology and testing methods improve with time, hence if we are following your rhetoric, the fact that Aouita never failed a test but many of his countrymen did one decade later should be telling.
There was also a lack of will to catvh people back in the early 1980s
The Moscow Olympics of 1980, were the cleanest Olympics ever where not a single athlete was caught since the inception of anti-doping testing.
However, when you scratch a little bit :
Though no athletes were caught doping at the 1980 Summer Olympics, it has been claimed that athletes had begun using testosterone and other drugs for which tests had not been yet developed.
A 1989 report by a committee of the Australian Senate claimed that "there is hardly a medal winner at the Moscow Games, certainly not a gold medal winner...who is not on one sort of drug or another: usually several kinds. The Moscow Games might well have been called the Chemists' Games"
A member of the IOC Medical Commission, Manfred Donike, privately ran additional tests with a new technique for identifying abnormal levels of testosterone by measuring its ratio to epitestosterone in urine. Twenty percent of the specimens he tested, including those from sixteen gold medalists would have resulted in disciplinary proceedings had the tests been official.
Just a few more logic conclusions, and our proof, that East Africans in fact are very bad distance runners, and Oceanians are genetically much better fitted for distance running, is complete.
http://thegreatdistancerunners.de/Oceania.html
Addition: The Oceanian Marathon record is 2:07:51 from Robert de Castella, set 1986 in Boston.
There have been many, many big international distance races, where some Kenyans have finished with a better time than the Oceanian record. How many Kenyans have a better 800m PB than 1:44.40? 100? And how many Kenyans have a better Marathon PB than 2:07:51? 150? I really don't want to look for this exactly, since we already clearly got what we wanted: Oceanians are much better suited for distance running.
Just for clarification for the few normal and rational posters and readers in letsrun: I have never "tried to construct logical arguments in defence of dopers", which the old liar Coedeppe claims.
Motivated by what? wrote:
Coevett wrote:
I don't think there is lots to suggest Coe doped. There is only Coe's blood disorder, and the fact that he was blisteringly fast, as was Snell (for his time and surface).
We have to assume Coe was clean. If British guys from that era were failing tests, like El G's training partners, rivals, and successors like Ramzi were failing tests, then it would be reasonable to suspect him and remove him from GOAT discussion, but I think we need more to 'suggest' he was dirty than what we have.
It's irrelevant since not a lot of athletes "in this era" (1970-1980), were failing tests.
Technology and testing methods improve with time, hence if we are following your rhetoric, the fact that Aouita never failed a test but many of his countrymen did one decade later should be telling.
There was also a lack of will to catvh people back in the early 1980s
The Moscow Olympics of 1980, were the cleanest Olympics ever where not a single athlete was caught since the inception of anti-doping testing.
However, when you scratch a little bit :
Though no athletes were caught doping at the 1980 Summer Olympics, it has been claimed that athletes had begun using testosterone and other drugs for which tests had not been yet developed.
A 1989 report by a committee of the Australian Senate claimed that "there is hardly a medal winner at the Moscow Games, certainly not a gold medal winner...who is not on one sort of drug or another: usually several kinds. The Moscow Games might well have been called the Chemists' Games"
A member of the IOC Medical Commission, Manfred Donike, privately ran additional tests with a new technique for identifying abnormal levels of testosterone by measuring its ratio to epitestosterone in urine. Twenty percent of the specimens he tested, including those from sixteen gold medalists would have resulted in disciplinary proceedings had the tests been official.
It's not irrelevant because you still don't have any circumstantial proof that Coe doped. The fact that Aouita' scountrymen were caught 10 years later is slight circumstantial proof that he doped (but important taken with all the other evidence, such as his telling Australian athletes to dope, or his dodgy progression).
The fact that Coe's countrymen did not fail any tests is reason not to suspect Coe on the basis of no evidence at all.
Moroccans were getting caught, and they were setting ridiculous times in the 90's and 00s. That is circumstantial evidence that El G's remarkable achievements were the result of doping, and to a lesser extent (in itself) of the same for Aouita.
No Brits failed tests in the 90's and 00s. So we're lacking that type of circumstantial evidence against Coe and the early 90s guys like Curtis Robb and David Sharpe.
You're a complete imbecile Saidipede.
I'm not trying to prove that Austrolasians are superior runners. I'm saying that the remarkable success of a number of Australasian runners is evidence that they are not genetically inferior runners to Africans.
You and the rest of the doping apologists here are arguing that one ethnic group are genetically superior to another and then slandering me as a racist for providing evidence which disproves it.
Coevett wrote:
I'm not trying to prove that Austrolasians are superior runners. I'm saying that the remarkable success of a number of Australasian runners is evidence that they are not genetically inferior runners to Africans.
You and the rest of the doping apologists here are arguing that one ethnic group are genetically superior to another and then slandering me as a racist for providing evidence which disproves it.
It's absolutely evident that the "East Africans" have some genetical advantage (alongside with many other factors), which "helped" them to achieve the results which they did (nothing bad in this; anyone (OK: most) who is the best in something obviously must have some advantage against most of the rest). The fact that some 55 years ago Oceania has had some world beaters in distance running for sure doesn't disproof this at all.
To another point which was discussed here: Kenyans are definitely more interested in football than in distance running. I often meet Kenyans here in my country (Germany). Since it's my hobby, I often bring the subject to "the Kenyan runners". For sure some show some interest, others not. But it's obvious that they are much more interested in the German Bundesliga (national football league) or in the Champions league.
I'm not a "doping apologists" what the old liar Coedeppe claims.
Deanouk wrote:
Coevett wrote:
Agreed.
I did find an interesting interview with Snell, where he talks about facing Ryun (Snell did actually beat both Ryun and Keino in Tokyo!), why he quit athletics at age 25, and whether he might have won in Mexico if he had carried on.
http://www.garycohenrunning.com/interviews/snell.aspxWow!
Great find and interview. Thanks.
I knew Ryun was in Tokyo as a youngster, but the penny didn't drop that Snell would have faced Ryun and Keino in 64, although clearly they were on the up at the time and not the threats they would later become.
I think peak Snell would always beat a peak Ryun over 800m, but I think it would be the opposite over 1500m. Snell was muscular and not best suited physiologically for the mile, IMO, whereas Ryun was probably the ideal body type for 1500m running.
Snell's "body type" took him to 1962 NZ cross country title when x-c was REAL = hill & dale & barbed wire fences. Also, NZ had real depth in harriers back then; not just the Lydiard crew. Snell has stated this win was his greatest running accomplishment, as it took him out of his comfort zone and into a different running realm.
Coevett wrote:
Motivated by what? wrote:
It's irrelevant since not a lot of athletes "in this era" (1970-1980), were failing tests.
Technology and testing methods improve with time, hence if we are following your rhetoric, the fact that Aouita never failed a test but many of his countrymen did one decade later should be telling.
There was also a lack of will to catvh people back in the early 1980s
The Moscow Olympics of 1980, were the cleanest Olympics ever where not a single athlete was caught since the inception of anti-doping testing.
However, when you scratch a little bit :
It's not irrelevant because you still don't have any circumstantial proof that Coe doped. The fact that Aouita' scountrymen were caught 10 years later is slight circumstantial proof that he doped (but important taken with all the other evidence, such as his telling Australian athletes to dope, or his dodgy progression).
The fact that Coe's countrymen did not fail any tests is reason not to suspect Coe on the basis of no evidence at all.
Moroccans were getting caught, and they were setting ridiculous times in the 90's and 00s. That is circumstantial evidence that El G's remarkable achievements were the result of doping, and to a lesser extent (in itself) of the same for Aouita.
No Brits failed tests in the 90's and 00s. So we're lacking that type of circumstantial evidence against Coe and the early 90s guys like Curtis Robb and David Sharpe.
If memory serves me correct, I don't think that Lance Armstrong ever failed a drug test.
Tracks were short. Change my mind.
WSU PhD wrote:
On an odd side note, Peter Snell moved to the USA to attend UC Davis where he obtained a BS degree. Later he went to Washington State University where he earned a PhD in Exercise Physiology. He was awarded that degree in 1981 after starting his studies in 1976. This is during the time that many Kenyans including Henry Rono were attending WSU on T&F scholarships. I wonder if ol' Pete was involved in any of Rono's World Records that he set during 1978??
No he wasn't.
But its where I was fortunate enough to meet Snell. I was awestruck. I babbled. I partied with Rono, I wasn't awestruck, but he was awesome.
I also lived around the corner from Elliot. I lived in a fortunate era.
For me, my head says Snell, my heart says Elliot. Elliot retired at 22 to get on with his life. Who knows what he left on the table.