Really applies mostly to IM. Oly was non-drafting, so the strengths of the athletes at the top were different (i.e. there was a place for uber-bikers like Pigg).

PNF and Erin Baker were every bit as fast/strong as the top athletes today (PNF's 1988 9:01 breakthrough was just mindblowing). Ditto for Mark Allen, and '89 Dave Scott (their marathon's are still FOP even by today's standards); I'd put either of them up against Frodo. It's worth noting that this was before the EPO era.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

For the men, both Smith and Lessing provided an evolutionary boost to Oly distance racing in the early to mid 90s. For the shorter stuff the Aussies ruled. Bevan and Welch were dominant at the F1 style of racing.

By the late 90s, a new kind of non-drafting triathlete was gaining traction, poised for the 2000 Olympics. These swam hard, sat in on the bike and ran a torrid pace to win. You typically didn't see them until half way through the run. Walton was the only one who could get away once in a while.

And then you had a third shift with the Brownlees, going hard from the gun and burning off anyone who thought that they could get a free ride. Now this is the norm. Vincent and the Norwegians are primed for this years race using such an approach.

Having said that, Spencer's 31min dead 10km at the 1998 Windsor tri (one he won 8 times I think), was never bettered by Tim Don or Alistair. Same could be said about some of Lessing's times, but at least he would have been able to hang on longer. There are a lot more pace changes on the run now.

For the women, there wasn't such a depth of field in the 80s or 90s, so certain people dominated; especially PNF over ironman distances. Coming into the first tri Olympics you basically had the swimmers versus the runners; and possibly the chemists. Since then the standard of the running has been very high so I don't think anyone from the 80's could run that fast, and those from the 90's who could, wouldn't have swam or biked to the ability that is required now.

'80s
'90s

---

#swimmingmatters
Laugh hard. Run fast. Be kind.
The Doctor (#12)

Having raced on both the old Mark Allen/Dave Scott era Hawaii course with "The Pit" on it and T2 at the Kona Surf at the end of Ali'i, and the new course, I would agree with that statement, if not going so far as to say they ran as well as Frodo in that the old course IMO was actually a harder run course.

I would say that with today's technology and training know how, Mark Allen, Dave Scott, Paula Newby Fraser and Erin Baker would go toe to toe with any pro today. All of them had FOP swims that would measure with today's lead pack and could run with today's top runners. The real delta is the bike. My guess is with today's bike tech, they would be totally on par. If they are on par on the swim and run, where there is essentially no tech then on the bike their cardio is just as good as anyone today.

I don't know between Mark and Frodo who wins. Mark would just sit on Frodo till they come out of the energy lab and then its a foot race. I think Dave was a slower runner in general than Frodo, but his 89 Kona was pretty well on par with anything that Frodo has run.

I don't think Lange would be in anywhere close to the same zip code during 80's racing. He would not have 10 others to draft off of.

I always thought that in "days of yore" athletes relied a lot more on mental toughness than physical ability. Today, with alot more known about science, biology, and training methods, mental toughness has become less important than having the best plan, training, and equipment.

I'm not saying the top tier of any sport today isn't plenty tough, just that it's not as crucial of a factor.

A David Goggins could have been competitive in the first 10 years of tri, simply due to his mindset. I don't know if that would help him to the same extent now, although he'd certainly be in the top %.

According to Wiki, Mark Allen swam a 51.50, biked a 4.46.35 and ran a 2.42.09 when he won the race in 1995. The conditions that year must have been tough, as he won with more than 10min more 3 times prior to that race (times not available on wiki). Maybe a good year to compare to 2019?

That is 4 min slower than Frodo in the water. Mark would have been swimming with guys like Ben Hoffman from the looks of it. Could he have hung on to the Wurf train? I have a hard time believing that. Having seen how they coasted through the bike in the iron war I think it is reasonable to believe that he would have been out of contention when he reached T2.

I think it was Tim Deboom who said it the best during the 2019 broadcast: "the biggest difference is the bike. We didn't go all that hard on the bike when I won. Now they are killing themselves".

But I am sure the oldtimers will claim that they went even harder back in the day.

If you think Mark Allen from '89-'95 wouldn't be brutally competitive with anyone racing today, it's just because you never raced him...

-bobo

---

"What's good for me ain't necessarily good for the weak-minded."

1995 was one of the worst wind years from that time. Mark biked 4:29 in 1993 on a good wind year AND THEY HAD THE HARDER BIKE COURSE WHERE YOU CLIMBED ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP OF THE Queen K behind Kona and then rocketed down to the Kona surf resort. Then you ran the pit. That course was way harder. And the swim course was longer too. They just shortened it 2 years ago. That 4:29 in 1993 easily translates to a 4:19 with today's tech (if you want to debate this then we have to throw out all the marketing claims of the bike manufacturers). Mark was not even wearing an aero helmet, and he had slow tubular and the first generation of Zipp 440 wheels....plus his Huffy bike was a parachute compared to Frodo's Canyon.

If you don't think Mark could compete with Frodo you just don't know how hard how often this guy could go. In 1989, he raced 20+ races in a row in the lead up to Kona and won them all.

Time to appreciate the greatness of Mark Allen

http://athletenatural.blogspot.com/...lens-parade-lap.html

At the end of his career, he is running down the very best at that time and much younger Lessing. People talk about the so called bike god Mike Pigg being competitive, he wouldn't it's just not about the bike.

Mark ran out of road against the best ITU OD athlete at that time

Pretty impressive!

---

https://www.strava.com/...tes/zachary_mckinney

Put Mark on today’s easier run course with a pair of Next 4% and T2 times not added in and he’s probably running sub 2:35 at his best. There’s no doubt in my mind those older pros would hang today. Give them the same technology and training advances and they’d be right there. They would still have the same competitive drive to crush their competitors.

---

Let food be thy medicine...

Frodo wouldn't have made it to Kona with a schedule like that!

Perhaps the depth has improved but some of those guys were amazingly good.

Most folks do not realize how good a guy like Mark Allen really was. In my view, and of course, this is just silly hypothetical talk, but using today's equipment. Skinsuits, lighter rigid aero bikes, training tool, aero helmet vaporflys, Allen would beat Frodo and break the record.

In 1989, he raced 20+ races in a row in the lead up to Kona and won them all. //

A slight correction on this great streak Mark had. IT was over two years that he went undefeated in those races, not one year. I think the year he won in 89, he might have just done 8 races other than Kona. Have to go back and see his actual schedule during those couple years...Once I croak or get the all timers disease Dev it can be a one year streak, but until then I will continue with my historical corrections... (-;

In other competitive sports isn’t the women’s 800 track pretty much the only record from that era that still stands? And we know why that is.

I find it hard to believe the guys from 80s and 90s would go toe to toe with today’s best. Why should triathlon be different to other sports?

these threads usually go the same way. first people say the old guard wouldn't have been competitive. then others argue they would be. then people start saying that actually, with today's tech, the old guard would have beat today's pros. and now we're edging into the period when people start saying that the old guard today would actually beat the pros, and the course records, and probably beat single-sport pros while we're at it.

"give allen and scott some vaporflys and they'd probably go sub-1:59 at kona! after a 30-minute swim and a 3-hour bike!"

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

Many athletes from the 80s and 90s would be competitive today.
In IM if you consider swimming and running, the times back then hold up now. Don’t forget athletes swam in budgie smugglers as opposed to swim skins and ran in flats as opposed to Nike this or that. The big difference is the bike. Look at Scott in ‘89, he is basically on a road bike with Tri bars!
Over the Olympic distance I would say Lessing, Smith, Bevan, Welch, Stewart and many others would be in the mix in modern times.