All-Time Greats Rankings

Here's what I have right now. Bear in mind the following:
No pre-1947 results are considered
Athletes with a * could earn more points as I work on pre-1962 AOY rankings
I'm still totalling numbers and I'm almost certainly missing some athletes
Women are in the works, but will require quite a bit of research

1 Haile Gebrselassie 309.16
2 Carl Lewis 297
3 Segey Bubka 283
4 Emil Zatopek * 265.5
5 Edwin Moses 253.5
6 Hicham El Guerrouj 247.5
7 Michael Johnson 242
8 Jan Zelezny 214.5
9 Yuriy Syedikh 208
10 Noureddine Morceli 203.5
11 Said Aouita 203
12 Kenenisa Bekele 202
13 Randy Matson 200
14 Janis Lusis * 193.5
15 Seb Coe 191
16 Virgilijus Alekna 187.5
17 Daley Thompson 185
18 Kip Keino 184
19 Ralph Boston * 182
20 Viktor Sanayev 180.5
21 Parry O'Brien * 178
22 Maurice Greene 177.66
23 Dan O'Brien 177.5
24 Jonathan Edwards 177
25 Udo Beyer 176.5
26 Wilson Kipketer 175
27 Ron Clarke 174
28 Colin Jackson 172
29 Javier Sotomayor 169.5
30 Moses Kiptanui 168.5
31 Frank Shorter 160
31 Bill Toomey 160
33 Steve Backley 156.5
34 Valeriy Brumel * 151
35 Alberto Juantorena 150.5
36 Renaldo Nehemiah 149.5
37 Allen Johnson 149
38 Khalid Khannouchi 148.5
39 Igor Astapkovich 148
39 Peter Snell * 148
41 Larry Myricks 147.5
42 Bruce Jenner 147
43 Mike Conley 145.5
44 Janusz Sidlo * 145
44 Jim Ryun 145
46 Dwight Stones 143.5
47 Mike Powell 142.5
48 Greg Foster 142
48 Wolfgang Schmidt 142
50 Tomas Dvorak 141.5

All-Time Greats Scoring Sample

Nourredine Morceli is my example. His career rankings...

Year	1500	3k	5k	AOY	POY	Total Pts
1990	1					10
1991	1	1		6		15 (10 for 1500m, 5 for AOY)
1992	1					10
1993	1	1		1	2	24 (10 for 1500m, 10 for AOY, 4 for POY)
1994	1	1	1	1	1	25 (10 for 1500m, 10 for AOY, 5 for POY)
1995	1	2		4	5	18 (10 for 1500m, 7 for AOY, 1 for POY)
1996	1			10		11 (10 for 1500m, 1 for AOY)
1997	5					6
1998	4					7
1999	5					6

Even in a year where he ranked in multiple events, Morceli can't score more than 10 points from them. If this practice were not in force, athletes who specialized in one event couldn't possibly compare.

The only way Morceli gets more than 10 in a year is if he made the top ten in the Athlete of the Year rankings (scored 10 for #1 on down to 1 for #10) or the top five in the Performance of the Year rankings (5 points for #1 on down to 1 for #5).

For his career totals, we take his best 4-year span, total it, and double. That's '93 to '96.
(24+25+18+11)*2 = 156
We take the rest of his best eight-year span ('90 to '97) and add that in.
156 + (10+15+10+6) = 197
And then the rest of his career is taken at half value.
197 + (7+6)/2 = 203.5

Why do I do it this way? There's a wide variance in career length between athletes, especially when comparing those from different generations. The Olympic cycle meant that most athletes would stick it out for a quadrennium. So that's considered the most important.

Being able to keep up greatness for a longer period of time does help, though, so I took a longer view at a lower level. Beyond eight years is pure longevity, which should just pad an athlete's numbers.

Next up: my current top 50...

Who Are The All-Time Greats?

This is something I've pondered on for many years. My long-time goal was to come up with track's version of Bill James' Historical Baseball Abstract. But there are multiple problems with this, not the least of which is my having a full-time job and being fairly lazy. But also, track simply does not lend itself to the same kind of statistical analysis that baseball does.

Which is not to say that it cannot be analyzed statistically; it just includes FAR more variables than a man only equipped with an undergraduate math degree could ever deal with. For example...

1) Major championships. We all know the Olympics are a huge deal, but not all Olympic finals are equal. In '76, '80 and '84 they were compromised by boycotts, and some events more than others. In 1992 the decathlon was compromised by the USA's do-or-die team selection system. In 1948 the decathlon was compromised by the absence of the USSR. And literally hundreds more examples can be found among major international championships. Accounting for them all boggles the mind.

2) There are lots of other competitions besides international championships. How do you account for all of those?

3) World records are important in track, but not all world records are equal. There have been spates of records at times (example: introduction of fiberglass poles) and droughts at others. Which is better, Uwe Hohn's massive javelin throw of 343' 10" in '84 under the old specs or Jan Železný's 323'1" under the current ones? And what about the obvious effects of stricter doping control? Yikes.

Fortunately, I don't have to balance all these things. A committee does that for me every year, and has done so since 1947. Track & Field News' annual World Rankings sorts it out for me. I use those rankings.

So here's what I do. I compile a career rankings record for each athlete. I assign points for that ranking (10 for #1 on down to 1 for #10). An athlete's best four-year span gets doubled. The remainder of their best eight-year span gets added in. And any points earned outside that eight-year window go in at half value.

If an athlete ranks in multiple events in one year, as often happens with sprinters and distance runners, only their best ranking counts.

Now, not all #1 seasons are equal. Some are strong (example: Jim Ryun in the mile in '67) and some are not. How is this taken into consideration?

Well, every year T&FN also comes up with an Athlete of the Year. Not just an AOY, but a top ten ranking for them. They also choose a Performance of the Year, and I've kept track of their top five. Athletes can earn additional points from these.

Problem: AOY choices were only made from '59 to the present, and top tens only from '65. POY choices have an even shorter history. In the November 1969 issue of T&FN, co-founder Cordner Nelson made retroactive picks for AOY going back to 1947, but didn't fill out a top ten. So I'm in the process of doing so, a task I'm doing carefully and none too quick.

What about prior to 1947? There's a man out there working on what he calls "retro-rankings" and is darned good at them. But he's in no hurry to release them to the public. I'm working on it.

Next up...a scoring sample.

Superfan HOF--Jesse Owens

(To all the mouth-breathing Star Wars collectors out there: Yes, I know i's worth more if it's still in the packaging. You think I'm parting with this?)

Born September 12, 1913, Danville AL
Died March 31, 1980, Tucson AZ

Official site -- Wikipedia -- Foundation -- Museum -- Olympic Oak -- Ferry Field marker

Owens might be the best-known athlete* of the period between the wars, certainly the best-known American athlete. Partly this is due to his superior accomplishments, and partly due to time and place. He qualifies for the Hall of Fame on his three individual Olympic gold medals alone, and then there's the world records and AAU titles as well. He's the second-highest scoring pre-WWII athlete in the Supefan HOF system (after Paavo Nurmi).
(*athlete=one who competes in the sport of athletics)

There are quite a few myths floating around out there about Owens, many put forth by the man himself. Jeremy Schaap's recent book Triumph puts them to rest. But another myth is that he was a dominant sprinter.

The fact is that he was the world's top 100 man for just one year, 1936 (this according to the indesputable Maxwell Stiles). He ran the first official 10.2 clocking, but Charley Paddock undoubtedly ran the same time fifteen years earlier. Owens was much better in the 200, as he was at least the equal of Ralph Metcalfe in the pre-Olympic years. His famous five-world-record day rested partly on a rarely-competed event (220y hurdles), partly on getting two-for-one records (yards/meters), and also on being the umpteenth man to tie the 100y record.

In the long jump his dominance can not be overstated. He was the world's best long jumper starting with his senior year at Cleveland's East Tech High School and extending to the premature end to his career. His world-record jump in the midst of his five-record day was a leap into the future--it stood longer than Bob Beamon's record. Owens could have matched Carl Lewis's long-term dominance of the event had he not been prematurely kicked out of the sport.

Year	Event	Rank	Mark	Meets, etc.
1933	100	n/a	9.4y	3)AAU
	200	n/a	20.7yS
	LJ	1	24' 11¼"	1)AAU
1934	100	n/a	9.4y / 10.4	2)AAU
	200	n/a	21.0yS
	LJ	1	25' 7/8"	1)AAU
1935	100	n/a	9.4y	1)NCAA, 3)AAU
	200	1	20.3yS WR	1)NCAA
	LJ	1	26' 8¼" WR	1)NCAA, 2)AAU
	would have been Athlete of the Year
1936	100	1	9.4y / 10.2 WR	1)NCAA, 1)AAU, 1)Oly Trials, 1)Oly Gms
	200	1	20.7 WR	1)NCAA, 1)Oly Trials, 1)Oly Gms
	LJ	1	26' 3"	1)NCAA, 1)AAU, 1)Oly Trials, 1)Oly Gms
	would have been Athlete of the Year

S = race on a straightaway

Superfan HOF--Lee Evans

(Note: As much as possible, the images used in the Hall of Fame series of posts will come from my collection of track & field trading cards, memorabilia, personal photos, and other assorted crap.)

Lee Evans is the first inductee into the Superfan Hall of Fame. They say "May you live in interesting times" is a Chinese curse; Evans' peak year was in 1968, the most interesting yet disturbing year of the post-World War II period. His biography, The Last Protest, is without a doubt the most interesting athletic biography I've ever read.

While Tommie Smith and John Carlos get the attention for their protest at the Mexico City Olympics, Evans was every bit as much the "instigator" as the other two. Yet the truth is that they instigated nothing; T&FN recently republished a 1967 interview with Evans and Smith that reveals much. To get more detail, read the book.

Evans is one of the most accomplished quarter-milers of all time, yet he barely qualified under my points system. He won an Olympic gold medal (one point), earned exactly 75 points in the World Rankings (one point), ranked #1 four times (one point), and set one official world record (one point). Had there been biennial World Championships in his day, he doubtlessly would have walked away with multiple golds; he won five AAU championships (his fifth and qualifying point), all over fields of the world's best quartermilers.

The most amazing thing about Evans as a runner was that he never was caught from behind in the 400m/440y.

Evans joined up with the ITA in 1973 and ran with the outfit through the 1975 season. Since then he has spent his time coaching for various universities and national teams; currently he is at the University of South Alabama. He's currently most known for taking a public and controversial position on AIDS tests; based on what I know about him, I'm not going to reject it out-of-hand as ravings from the tinfoil-hat crowd.

Evans, of course, is not afraid to make verbal bombshells. Upon his induction to the US Olympic Hall of Fame, said "he did not want to be joined there by anyone who has used drugs or steroids to enhance athletic performance". This hardly seems controversial, until you realize that steroids were legal in 1968 and one-third of his 1968 Olympic teammates freely admitted using them.

Year	Event	Rank	Mark	Meets, etc.
1966	200m	--	20.9*
	400m	1	45.2	1)AAU; undefeated (14 meets)
1967	400m	1	44.9	1)AAU, 1) Pan-Am
1968	200m	--	20.8*
	400m	1	43.86A / 45.0	1)NCAA, 1)AAU, 1)FOT, 1)Oly Gms
	Third in Athlete of the Year voting; set WR that stood for 19 years
1969	200m	7	20.4
	400m	2	44.5	2)NCAA, 1)AAU
	Seventh in Athlete of the Year voting
1970	200m	--	20.8
	400m	1	45.5+	2)AAU
1971	400m	9	45.6*	dnf-inj)AAU
1972	400m	3	44.3*	1)AAU, 4)FOT
1974	400m	--	45.9*	competed in ITA
1975	400m	--	45.9*	competed in ITA

* = 440y time less 0.3 seconds, + = en route to 440y
Wikipedia -- USATF HOF

A Hall of Fame

When the Mitchell Report hit the fan a few weeks ago, the various talking heads on ESPN’s Sports Reporters took the position that baseball’s steroid problem was fundamentally different than that of other sports. This is because of the game’s historic nature; there is a reverence for records, and doping had done perhaps irreparable harm to the record book. As track fans, I think we can empathize.

The reporters also said that even though attempts at doping control were delayed and weak, the BBWAA can take its own action: refuse to elect dirty players to the Hall of Fame. In fact, it appears unlikely that Mark McGwire will ever gain entry. While this kind of punishment might seem a slap on the wrist, considering baseball’s hero-worship of the legends it might be the most appropriate punishment possible. It is final, and it is forever.

All of this led me to think about track’s Hall of Fame—or more accurately, lack of one. USA Track & Field has its own hall, but that’s only for Americans. There are international halls of fame for golf, swimming, tennis, boxing, bowling, gymnastics, motor sports, yadda yadda yadda. But track has none, and it might be the most international sport of all, maybe even more than soccer (which, oddly enough, also lacks a worldwide hall of fame).

One knock on USATF’s hall of fame is that politics play too large a role in who gains entry and who does not. I’ve always liked the LPGA’s approach, where accomplishments alone are the requirements and active players can be members. Measuring accomplishments in track & field is a bit more difficult, but of course I’ve come up with a workable system.

Athletes must earn a total of at least five points from a number of categories listed below.

World Rankings. 100 or more rankings points earn an athlete three Hall of Fame points; between 75 and 99 earn one point. Five #1 rankings earn three points, while three or four earn one point. (Events ranked only five-deep are scored 5-4-3-2-1, and the #1 position only counts half.)

Included in these point totals are Athlete of the Year and Performance of the Year rankings (respectively ranked ten-deep and five-deep). After all, someone has to be #1 every year, but some seasons are obviously stronger than others—Bob Beamon in 1968 or Yuriy Syedikh in 1986 come to mind as examples.

Since World Rankings began in 1947 (men), 1955 (women) and 1970 (men’s walks), athletes from the pre-rankings era need only four Hall of Fame points to gain entry.

Olympic Games. Here is where the legends are made, which is why the fight about Jerome Young and Marion Jones have been so bitter. Multiple Olympic gold medals earn three points; one gold earns one point. Three medals of any type earn three points, while multiple medals earn one point. (Yes, I’m aware that two golds actually add up to four points, while three golds make six points—these are the Olympics!)

Relays don’t count, and neither do now-defunct events (except those which have been “replaced”—the men’s 10k walk and several women’s events). Results predating the first truly modern games of 1912 don’t count either.

World Championships. Being held more often and of a somewhat lesser importance, the Worlds require higher numbers. Three points require three or more golds, or four or more medals; one point is earned from two golds or three or more medals. Similarly, relays don’t count.

For athletes predating the Worlds era, other championships count. Points are earned for the same number of medals at pre-1980s European Championships in distance or field events (Commonwealth Games for non-European athletes). In traditionally strong US events—the sprints, hurdles, jumps, throws, and multis—six AAU/TAC championships from 1980 or earlier earns three points, while three championships earns one point. As the Euros began in 1934, points are earned for the same number of AAA championships (’31 and earlier).

World Records. Official IAAF records in Olympic/Worlds events only, no relays, and outdoor only. An athlete who set multiple records gets three points, and those who set just one get one point, but with certain exceptions.

The IAAF kept records for both imperial and metric distances up through 1976, giving running-event athletes many chances for world records. The pole vault has also produced a huge number of records as compared to other events. So to get three points, you need three world records if you’re a pole-vaulter or set them in running events prior to 1977.

Other things. Some athletes got screwed or unfairly helped by Olympic boycotts. Others had their chances nicked by world wars. Athletes from before 1912 mostly get shut out of this system altogether. I’ll deal with them on a case-by-case basis.

And then there’s the doping issue. Up until the implosion of East European totalitarianism in 1992, doping was only nominally against the rules—it was a free-for-all. I’ll just let it be. But any athlete who, after 1992, either served a major doping ban or admitted to use is barred from my Superfan Hall of Fame.

Once or twice a week I’ll post another athlete who has made it in. Who I get to next will be more or less random.