RE: t-and-f: World XC
On reflection (my track books are all at home) I think it was 1964 and 13:04.8 for Lindgren. David Dallman On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, David Dallman wrote: I first saw Gerry Lindgren at London's White City stadium in, I think, 1965. Ron Clarke had taken the world 3 mile record down from about 13:14 to just over 13 minutes and this day was about to take another 8 seconds off. In those days Ron just ran away from everybody much of the time, and the best British runners were nowhere after a couple of laps that day. But this little American guy, not looking at all like a runner next to the rather majestic style of Clarke, stayed with him all the way until about the last 2 laps, and finished in 13:07 something, which must have been second best all-time at the time. Hard to appreciate for you younger guys when we are talking about these times or better for the 5000 these days, but it was great running at the time, really going into unexplored territory in a fearless way. David Dallman On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, William Bahnfleth wrote: html If that's what Rich meant (and on second reading, it appears that way), I agree.br br Wish I had been old enough to see/appreciate Lindgren in his prime.nbsp; Unfortunately, my direct memories are of disappointing OT performance late in his career.br br Bill Bahnflethbr br At 08:26 AM 3/27/2001 -0800, Dave Cameron wrote:br blockquote type=cite class=cite citeDon't mean to speak for Rich McC - but I believe he's onlybr talking about their performances through high school.nbsp; br He's saying that Lindgren and Ryun were running with worldbr class runners in high school, Virgin and Pre were not.br br FWIW, (as you know), Virgin was an awesome runner in highbr school.nbsp; He ran for a no-name school in central/southernbr Illinois - lapped the competition in every 2 mile racebr until the state meet (where he won by 20+ seconds).nbsp; Wonbr two cross country championships by 30 seconds each over thebr nearest competitor.nbsp;nbsp; Ran a time on the Illinois Highbr School State XC course (still in use today) that stillbr stands as the record despite names like Jim Spivey, Tombr Graves, Jorge Torres, and Donald Sage all trying to take itbr down.nbsp;nbsp; But... Virgin wasn't competing with the world classbr guys until college.br br As far as impact in college (and beyond), I completelybr agree - you can't separate.nbsp;nbsp; I also agree that Virgin'sbr 2-time victory in the World XC championship is a phenomenalbr feat that is often overlooked.br br Dave Cameronbr [EMAIL PROTECTED]br nbsp; br --- William Bahnfleth lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]gt; wrote:br br lt;HRgt;br How can you put Virgin, who won an NCAA cross-country championship (defeating Nick Rose and John Ngeno), was a member of the ill-fated 1980 US Olympic team, and won two world cross-country championships, in the category of quot;dominating HS competitionquot;nbsp; somewhere below Lindgren?!nbsp; Pre held just about every AR.nbsp; Distinguishing among these two and Lindgren is really slicing it too thin.br br Bill Bahnflethbr br At 02:57 PM 3/26/01 -0800, you wrote:br blockquote type=cite class=cite citeAt 01:57 PM 3/26/2001 -0800, rric wrote:br blockquote type=cite class=cite citefont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF"Richard McCann said-/font dlfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt; /fontThe World's have been run in muddy terrible conditions before and the US has consistently FAILEDfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt;... /fontto rise to the occassion.nbsp; I think the fact the three athletes that most of this list wouldfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt; /fontagree are among our top half dozen distance runners (with 2 not being there) were font face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt;nbsp; /fontable to put together outstanding performances in these conditions could very well be font face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt;nbsp; /fontindicative of their stepping up to a new competitive level for the coming yearfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddHere, here./font ddnbsp;font face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt; /fontAs for Ritzenhein, he seems to be the next Virgin or Prefont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddnbsp;Agreed. But the really great news is that there is a candidate for a Virgin or Pre or Decker or Benoit in every region. /font ddnbsp;font face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" dd-Linda Honikman/font/blockquote /dlbr br br There are lots of great HS runners rising up right now.nbsp; However, I sort the athletes historically into several tiers.nbsp; At the top are Lindgren and Ryun who impacted world class competition.nbsp; Then Virgin and Pre who set new HS standards and dominated all HS
t-and-f: Gerry Lindgren (WAS World XC)
The race was in 1965, and Lindgren's time (for three miles) was 13:04.02. When converted to 5000m using the Portuguese Tables (arguably the world's best at that stage) the time became 13:33.6. But ten months later he ran 12:53.0 at Seattle, equivalent to 13:22.2. Pretty good even today, they then ranked 5th and 2nd in the world all-time lists for 3M/5k. --"That horse's but's, P.N. from New Zealand" - M M Rohl (hopefully he meant horse's butt) --- On Mar28 David Dallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On reflection (my track books are all at home) I think it was 1964 and 13:04.8 for Lindgren. Earlier on Mar28 he wrote: I first saw Gerry Lindgren at London's White City stadium in, I think, 1965. Ron Clarke had taken the world 3 mile record down from about 13:14 to just over 13 minutes and this day was about to take another 8 seconds off. In those days Ron just ran away from everybody much of the time, and the best British runners were nowhere after a couple of laps that day. But this little American guy, not looking at all like a runner next to the rather majestic style of Clarke, stayed with him all the way until about the last 2 laps, and finished in 13:07 something, which must have been second best all-time at the time. Hard to appreciate for you younger guys when we are talking about these times or better for the 5000 these days, but it was great running at the time, really going into unexplored territory in a fearless way.
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
In fact, Shorter had a better overall career than Lindgren. Olympic gold medal in 1972 (only American man to win since 1912), olympic sliver medal in 1976 -- how many Olympic medals did Lindgren win? -- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 8:18 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats In a message dated Tue, 27 Mar 2001 6:34:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're right. I am looking at their high school careers not overall careers. For example, I'm not considering either Frank Shorter or Bob Kennedy, who really blossomed collegiately and later but have to be considered on the same level as Pre and Virgin career-wise, and better than Lindgren. You're joking, right? Neither Shorter, Pre, Virgin nor Kennedy have an OVERALL career that remotely compares with Lindgren's. He absolutely stomps the crap out of any of them as both a prep and a collegian, and his forays into the open ranks on the track are right up there with any of the others. I don't know whether to laugh or cry every year when a stiff who couldn't carry his jock gets into the Hall of Fame and he's not even nominated. gh
t-and-f: Results in newspapers/anywhere
Bravo, Reuben! I would additionally ask, how much of us, list members, have been reporting results to list? I guess it's great minority. Most of us let this work to others - it's much simpler to chat about ANYTHING around sports, not actually sports itself. Providing results needs some work and accuracy, chatting does not. Best wishes to all, Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 19:18:40 -0800 (PST) From: Reuben Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Fwd: Re: results in newspapers We've gone over this many times before. Newspaper editors fill their pages with what they believe people want to read. Period. Of course there are exceptions, but the vast majority aren't pro-anything or aren't anti-anything. They're not biased against TF. They are simply trying to do their job. Sports editors don't sit around thinking how they can screw track and field today. They sit around asking what they can do to better serve their readers. And it's easy to rip newspapers for not going big with world junior XC, but most sports editors (including mine, who has a long TF background) had no idea Ritz's third-place finish was significant when the results came across their computers. When Webb ran 3:59, it got huge play everywhere. Editors across the U.S. instantly recognized that this was big. Not the same with world junior XC, even if it might have been a greater accomplishment in the big picture. Hey, how do you expect sports editors to react when all they see at major televised meets is empty seats? Roob Enn Endjrv, decathlon statistician Tallinn, Estonia [EMAIL PROTECTED] Look for decathlon information at www.decathlon2000.ee
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
gh pontificated: Neither Shorter, Pre, Virgin nor Kennedy have an OVERALL career that remotely compares with Lindgren's. He absolutely stomps the crap out of any of them as both a prep and a collegian, and his forays into the open ranks on the track are right up there with any of the others. I would definitely agree with the prep part of the Lindgren vs. Pre assessment, but I wonder about the collegiate part. Seven NCAA titles is pretty tough on Pre's part. Seems like Lingren had more uppper range at that point with some great 6 mile/10,000 runs, but I don't think that stomped the crap out of Pre. The problem with comparing the two is that the last memory we have of a head to head match up is of the 72 trials where Lindgren was a non factor after the gun went off. Could it be a bit of WSU bias coming out? :-) Keith Whitman Head Cross Country Coach Assistant Track Field Coach University of Nebraska at Kearney Office (308) 865-8070 Home (308) 338-1115 http://www.unk.edu/athletics/track/ Fax # (308) 865-8187
Re: t-and-f: Slaney decision
I glanced at the court's opinion. I have doubts whether it was really necessary, in addition to ruling against Ms. Slaney, to compound matters by including the five-sentence replay of Los Angeles in the opening paragraph under I. Background. Also, the preceding third sentence of the paragraph is flatly inaccurate. Justice Flaum must have missed the U.S.-Soviet dual in...Minsk?...in 1973, not to mention the rest of the track field season that same year. Some kind soul needs to give Justice Flaum the Kenny Moore book for Christmas. Grumpy lately, Chris Kuykendall Austin, Texas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: t-and-f: World XC
David, You have an excellent memory. Amazingly enough, I just read an account of that exact race you've described from memory it was actually July 10, 1965 at the AAA Championships at White City as you remember. Derrick Young wrote of the race in his book, "The Ten Greatest Races". It certainly lived up to that billing at the time of the printing of book (1972). Clarke won with a world record 12:52.2, While Lingren placed 2nd in an American Record of 13:04.2. Thanks for the eyewitness account. It was a great time for distance running in the mid 60's. Bill Brist David Dallman wrote: On reflection (my track books are all at home) I think it was 1964 and 13:04.8 for Lindgren. David Dallman On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, David Dallman wrote: I first saw Gerry Lindgren at London's White City stadium in, I think, 1965. Ron Clarke had taken the world 3 mile record down from about 13:14 to just over 13 minutes and this day was about to take another 8 seconds off. In those days Ron just ran away from everybody much of the time, and the best British runners were nowhere after a couple of laps that day. But this little American guy, not looking at all like a runner next to the rather majestic style of Clarke, stayed with him all the way until about the last 2 laps, and finished in 13:07 something, which must have been second best all-time at the time. Hard to appreciate for you younger guys when we are talking about these times or better for the 5000 these days, but it was great running at the time, really going into unexplored territory in a fearless way. David Dallman On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, William Bahnfleth wrote: html If that's what Rich meant (and on second reading, it appears that way), I agree.br br Wish I had been old enough to see/appreciate Lindgren in his prime.nbsp; Unfortunately, my direct memories are of disappointing OT performance late in his career.br br Bill Bahnflethbr br At 08:26 AM 3/27/2001 -0800, Dave Cameron wrote:br blockquote type=cite class=cite citeDon't mean to speak for Rich McC - but I believe he's onlybr talking about their performances through high school.nbsp; br He's saying that Lindgren and Ryun were running with worldbr class runners in high school, Virgin and Pre were not.br br FWIW, (as you know), Virgin was an awesome runner in highbr school.nbsp; He ran for a no-name school in central/southernbr Illinois - lapped the competition in every 2 mile racebr until the state meet (where he won by 20+ seconds).nbsp; Wonbr two cross country championships by 30 seconds each over thebr nearest competitor.nbsp;nbsp; Ran a time on the Illinois Highbr School State XC course (still in use today) that stillbr stands as the record despite names like Jim Spivey, Tombr Graves, Jorge Torres, and Donald Sage all trying to take itbr down.nbsp;nbsp; But... Virgin wasn't competing with the world classbr guys until college.br br As far as impact in college (and beyond), I completelybr agree - you can't separate.nbsp;nbsp; I also agree that Virgin'sbr 2-time victory in the World XC championship is a phenomenalbr feat that is often overlooked.br br Dave Cameronbr [EMAIL PROTECTED]br nbsp; br --- William Bahnfleth lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]gt; wrote:br br lt;HRgt;br How can you put Virgin, who won an NCAA cross-country championship (defeating Nick Rose and John Ngeno), was a member of the ill-fated 1980 US Olympic team, and won two world cross-country championships, in the category of quot;dominating HS competitionquot;nbsp; somewhere below Lindgren?!nbsp; Pre held just about every AR.nbsp; Distinguishing among these two and Lindgren is really slicing it too thin.br br Bill Bahnflethbr br At 02:57 PM 3/26/01 -0800, you wrote:br blockquote type=cite class=cite citeAt 01:57 PM 3/26/2001 -0800, rric wrote:br blockquote type=cite class=cite citefont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF"Richard McCann said-/font dlfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt; /fontThe World's have been run in muddy terrible conditions before and the US has consistently FAILEDfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt;... /fontto rise to the occassion.nbsp; I think the fact the three athletes that most of this list wouldfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt; /fontagree are among our top half dozen distance runners (with 2 not being there) were font face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt;nbsp; /fontable to put together outstanding performances in these conditions could very well be font face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddgt;nbsp; /fontindicative of their stepping up to a new competitive level for the coming yearfont face="arial" size=2 color="#FF" ddHere, here./font
RE: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
You opened up a debate that you probably didn't want to ... To say that the OVERALL career (of these men) doesn't "remotely compare" to Lindgren ... is to say that he is head-and-shoulders above every distance runner in American history. He was great ... he was ONE of the American greats ... with better management and better luck he may have been the best ever. But, it is an exxageration to say that these guys are not in the same ballpark that Lindgren was. In the group of Americans mentioned, every one of them had an AR, some won Olympic medals, some won World Chamipnships. Thumbnail sketch of WHY: Virgin: * 5 - State Titles ... National HS Records (8:40.9) 13:58 as an 11th grader * NCAA titles * THREE olympic teams * 2X World Champ XC * 2 ARs at 10k/world class at 5k * World class maratons - 2:10 * World bests on the road Shorter: * 5th in Olympic 10k, and a couple medals that should have been GOLDS * 2 ARs in 10k Pre: * ALL the AR's ... 2k-10k * when he ran a serious 10 ... it was #6 all-time. It is certainly true that some of those all-time greats mentioned were weaker in HS, College or both ... but all FOUR have enough achievement to take a BACK SEAT TO NO ONE. I would also like to understand better how Gerry Lindgren had a collegiate career that "absolutely stomps the crap out of (Steve Prefontaine) as ... a collegian." i guess i will go to the library adn check out TF News from the 60's and see how that happened. It seems to me that "stomping the crap out of" Pre would mean you had to win every XC title and two indoor titles a year and 2 each outdoor season, and hold every distance record indoors and out when you graduated. Maybe your definition of "stomping crap" is differnt though. i know he was ineligible as a frosh, and it is in the eye-of-the-beholder whether he was BETTER than these other greats ... but to say that he was on a differnt plane when judged over his whole career ... No WAY. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 11:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats In a message dated Tue, 27 Mar 2001 6:34:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're right. I am looking at their high school careers not overall careers. For example, I'm not considering either Frank Shorter or Bob Kennedy, who really blossomed collegiately and later but have to be considered on the same level as Pre and Virgin career-wise, and better than Lindgren. You're joking, right? Neither Shorter, Pre, Virgin nor Kennedy have an OVERALL career that remotely compares with Lindgren's. He absolutely stomps the crap out of any of them as both a prep and a collegian, and his forays into the open ranks on the track are right up there with any of the others. I don't know whether to laugh or cry every year when a stiff who couldn't carry his jock gets into the Hall of Fame and he's not even nominated. gh
Re: t-and-f: Slaney decision
Now the IAAF needs to go after her for the money ($25,000?, plus interest!) that she got for second place at the '95 World Indoor Championships. -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - Coach Bill Sudeck (1926-2000)
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
I would definitely agree with the prep part of the Lindgren vs. Pre assessment, but I wonder about the collegiate part. Seven NCAA titles is pretty tough on Pre's part. I think what GH was getting at, was how did the athlete compete against the REST OF THE WORLD during his collegian years, not how he competed against other U.S. collegians. In that regard, Lindgren probably ranked a strong #2 in the world behind Clarke, while Pre was probably more like somewhere between #4 and #6 (it's subjective) at the peak of his collegiate years. Of course Pre had to face a slew of people like Viren and Gammoudi, while Lindgren only had Clarke as a serious contender. RT
t-and-f: un@#$@#^%!believeable!
A very good source I can't reveal tells me that the NCAA coaches have voted to eliminate the semis in the 200 in Eugene. Of course, this is in keeping with the anti-competitive mentality of the kill-the-regionals forces. Why don't they just eliminate the meet altogether and mail in the year's best performances? The once--the-greatest-meet falls even deeper into mediocrity. gh
t-and-f: Distance runners
Title: Distance runners I think a lot of you are missing perhaps the "toughest distance runner" the USA has ever had...George Young. Look at his career and he will stack up against anyone...and there wasn't anyone tough. His first marathon ever...he won the trials.
Re: t-and-f: un@#$@#^%!believeable!
Someone make sense of this to me? So they re taking 18 athletes, many of whom will be doublers and not compete in the 200 m. Or are they going to have 3 semi heats, and take the unfair, top 2 and next fastest 2. Or is it the heat winners and the next fastest 5? I do not see the thought process behind it all. DGS Faith is a road seldom traveled
Re: t-and-f: Slaney decision
Of course they re going after her money. What other compulsion do they have for the things they do. What, for the sake of fairness? yeah right DGS Faith is a road seldom traveled
Re: t-and-f: un@#$@#^%!believeable!
In a message dated Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:42:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, Dgs1170 writes: Someone make sense of this to me? So they re taking 18 athletes, many of whom will be doublers and not compete in the 200 m. Or are they going to have 3 semi heats, and take the unfair, top 2 and next fastest 2. Or is it the heat winners and the next fastest 5? I do not see the thought process behind it all. How about a horror-scenario where they decide not to use the inner 2 lanes (becuase it wouldn't be fair for time-based qualifying) and end up with 5 heats, qualifying winners +3?! as for "thought process," all i can think of is that in these days of small squad sizes, coaches want to load up on sprinters who can run the 1, 2 and a relay, maybe both relays, without burning out. gh
RE: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Mcewen, Brian T wrote: Shorter: * 5th in Olympic 10k, and a couple medals that should have been GOLDS * 2 ARs in 10k With regards to Shorter I think we have to consider, because he was a marathoner, other important races. Fukuoka was the de facto world championship in the marathon for awhile and Shorter won it, I think, four times. If you include the OG marathons, Shorter came out on top of the world five (and arguably 6) times. That is dominantion that is unlikely to be replicated by anyone. Paul *** Paul Talbot Department of Geography/ Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado, Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0260 (303) 492-3248 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t-and-f: Brisbane WAVA entries falling short
Greetings, all: Brisbane organizers of the 14th World Veterans Athletic Championships are outwardly optimistic but privately nervous about entries for the biennial masters meet July 4-14, 2001, in northeast coastal Australia. The event even risks falling short of the size of the 1987 WAVA meet in Melbourne. Meet officials have pushed back the entry deadline from March 1 to April 20 (with the U.S. deadline being April 15). Other evidence for a shortfall of competitors comes from Germany, a traditional WAVA power, where masters webmaster Robert Koop reports: "My last information about the German entries is a number of 350/400 masters (registered to attend). This is 20 percent less than the (1997) Durban or (1999) Gateshead entries from Germany." In the United States, WAVA team manager Don Austin says he has 384 masters athletes registered -- a 30 percent drop from the 540 who went to Gateshead two years ago and far less than the 600 expected this year. "With the extension, I don't expect too many more entries," Austin reports. He thinks the lower numbers are a result of several factors, including the expense of an Australian trip, the current shaky status of the U.S. economy, "no challenge of qualifying standards" and competition from three major U.S. masters meets (the just-concluded Boston indoor nationals plus two national meets this summer in Baton Rouge, Louisiana). Austin also suspects that some athletes are waiting until the last minute to see if they are healthy enough -- and are waiting for meet rosters to be posted online to see who's entered -- and if they have a chance of winning. The world WAVA meet has been held every off-numbered year since 1975, when Toronto hosted 1,408 athletes -- almost all paying their own way to a meet with five-year age groups starting at 35 for women and 40 for men. The progression since then: 1977 Gothenberg, Sweden, 2,750 1979 Hannover, Germany, 3,126 1981 Christchurch, New Zealand, 2,400 1983 San Juan, Puerto Rico, 1,935 1985 Rome 4,330 1987 Melbourne 4,817 1989 Eugene, Oregon, USA 4,754 1991 Turku, Finland, 4,802 1993 Miyazaki, Japan, 12,178 (the number was inflated by the huge number of Japan entries in the marathon) 1995 Buffalo, New York, USA,5,335 1997 Durban, South Africa, 5,788 1999 Gateshead, Great Britain, 5,804 Meanwhile, no word has arrived yet on the fate of the 2003 world WAVA meet. Originally awarded to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, based on a vote by the WAVA General Assembly in 1999 at Gateshead, the Malaysian meet was yanked by the WAVA Council in January 2001. WAVA's official statement by President Torsten Carlius of Sweden has not been updated since its posting on the WAVA Web site (http://www.wava.org) in mid-January: It said: "(Carlius) states that last March, when some question arose, he and several others of the WAVA Council visited Kuala Lumpur to specifically investigate the local organizing committee (LOC) organization and its plans to conduct the Championships. "They were favorably impressed with the facilities and the level and ability of the LOC personnel in place at that time. Therefore, they recommended that the Championships go on as planned. "However, since that time, the composition of the LOC has changed considerably and some of the most influential members have left or have been forced out. All of this has occurred without notification or consultation with WAVA. "President Carlius visited again last fall and carefully set clear minimum objectives for the LOC and a clear deadline of the 22nd of December for achieving those objectives. That deadline, and a generous grace period, passed without any positive action and lead directly to the withdrawal of the Championships by WAVA. He further states that the 2003 Championship is currently being offered to Puerto Rico, who was the runner-up in the competitive bid held at the 1999 WAVA General Assembly in Gateshead, England. "Puerto Rico is now checking facility and housing availability, and public and private support and sponsorship. They are also considering their ability to put together an effective LOC to organize, fund, staff, and prepare for the Championships in the two and one-half years remaining." The last time I checked -- in the past week -- no verdict had been rendered on Puerto Rico hosting the 2003 WAVA meet. Why? Carlius was on vacation. Meanwhile, the slate of candidates to host the 2005 WAVA meet firmed up, with USATF Masters Committee choosing Sacramento, California, as America's bid city. This comes three months after USATF Masters voted against supporting Sacramento's bid since other cities weren't invited to submit their own bids. USATF Masters TF Chairman George Mathews has reported: "Since that time, site visits have been made to Sacramento and solicitation to other cities has been made. Sacramento did very well on the site visits. Baton Rouge showed interest in holding the event
Re: t-and-f: un@#$@#^%!believeable!
GH wrote: In a message dated Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:42:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, Dgs1170 writes: Someone make sense of this to me? So they re taking 18 athletes, many of whom will be doublers and not compete in the 200 m. Or are they going to have 3 semi heats, and take the unfair, top 2 and next fastest 2. Or is it the heat winners and the next fastest 5? I do not see the thought process behind it all. How about a horror-scenario where they decide not to use the inner 2 lanes (becuase it wouldn't be fair for time-based qualifying) and end up with 5 heats, qualifying winners +3?! as for "thought process," all i can think of is that in these days of small squad sizes, coaches want to load up on sprinters who can run the 1, 2 and a relay, maybe both relays, without burning out. This has got to be some kind of joke ... They would seriously consider any of the aforementioned options a form of qualifying ??? Why not just put em all on the track and from a scratch start let em run and first 8 go to the final ?!?!?!? How absurd ... All I can say is better be in the fastest heat because it will all boil down to heat seeding ... That and wind readings ... Hopefully the heatsare not run during any gusty winds ... And I'm also guessing that the injury rate goes up which would be worse than the athletes having to run an extra round ... Conway HillGet your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
t-and-f: NCAA 200m
as for "thought process," all i can think of is that in these days of small squad sizes, coaches want to load up on sprinters who can run the 1, 2 and a relay, maybe both relays, without burning out. gh You're probably right about that. So much for encouraging competition. What do they do with the 400m at NCAA? - ed Parrot
t-and-f: AIAW question (American collegiate interest)
Netters, Can anyone tell me what it took to make All American in the AIAW in terms of place? I have been told that it was top 3, can anyone verify that info? Thanks in advance for the help. Keith Whitman Head Cross Country Coach Assistant Track Field Coach University of Nebraska at Kearney Office (308) 865-8070 Home (308) 338-1115 http://www.unk.edu/athletics/track/ Fax # (308) 865-8187
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
Garry You're showing your Wazzoo bias. (I knew Gerry 20 years ago, as well.) Yes Lindgren is among the greatest American distance runners, and yes both his high school and collegiate careers are only surpassed by Pre and Nyambui. And I agree absolutely that he should be in the Hall of Fame. But his world class career really is only comparable to Shorter's, and Shorter performed better in the Olympics, and was at the top of US running when it was at its best. Kennedy's performances are overshadowed by the emergence of the African runners, who were barely a presence during Lindgren's career. I don't rate Shorter and Kennedy as far ahead of Lindgren, but a step. Of course, this question is impossible to resolve and is based on our respective opinions. RMc Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 23:18:51 EST From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats In a message dated Tue, 27 Mar 2001 6:34:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're right. I am looking at their high school careers not overall careers. For example, I'm not considering either Frank Shorter or Bob Kennedy, who really blossomed collegiately and later but have to be considered on the same level as Pre and Virgin career-wise, and better than Lindgren. You're joking, right? Neither Shorter, Pre, Virgin nor Kennedy have an OVERALL career that remotely compares with Lindgren's. He absolutely stomps the crap out of any of them as both a prep and a collegian, and his forays into the open ranks on the track are right up there with any of the others. I don't know whether to laugh or cry every year when a stiff who couldn't carry his jock gets into the Hall of Fame and he's not even nominated. gh
RE: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
After thinking over (over lunch hour!) what Garry Hill said about Gerry
Lindgren (pasted below) and how his OVERALL career compares with the others
...
I have to admit he is right when you look at a CAREER in THREE PARTS:
1) HS: Lindgren hands-down. Higher level than anyone before or since.
4:01y all the way to 29:17 for 10k. Better marks than any at 5k and the
3-Mile.
LINDGREN: 1
2) College: Lindgren probably somewhat better than any, and only Pre was
really close. Tons of titles, impressive times, consistency at the highest
level (NCAA Championships). I think he had a 27:11 six-mile .. a .1 loss
(or same-time?) to Mills in 1965. I think they were given the same time of
27:11.0, a WR for the six-mile at the time. (NOTE: Garry was actually
THERE (in NCAA track) and is clearly more knowledgeable about NCAA history
than myself).
LINDGREN: 1
3) Open: Hard to judge with all the misfortune he had. But, it is fair to
say that many, many Americans had a better palmares' after college. This
includes some guys that came BEFORE Lindgren (like Dellinger and Bob Schul).
The physical ability between age 24-and-28 that allows most distance runners
to reach their peak came much earlier for Lindgren ( a squeaky-voiced boy
among men), making his running in his 20's not-so-great.
LINDGREN: 0
Judging them in this "electoral vote" way, makes Lindgren the clear winner
in two rounds of three, making his OVERALL career "better" than those
mentioned.
I guess it is also fair to say that he "stomps the crap out of any of them
as both a prep and a collegian" (with the exception of Pre).
Willing to see it "another's" way,
-Brian McEwen
("Splitting hairs and I know no one cares.")
you're joking, right?
Neither Shorter, Pre, Virgin nor Kennedy have an OVERALL career that
remotely compares with Lindgren's. He absolutely stomps the crap out of any
of them as both a prep and a collegian, and his forays into the open ranks
on the track are right up there with any of the others.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry every year when a stiff who couldn't
carry his jock gets into the Hall of Fame and he's not even nominated.
gh
t-and-f: Fwd: Men's and Women's Track and Field Compete at Stanford Invite
Keith Conning 735 Brookside Drive Vacaville, CA 95688-3509 FAX: 707-778-7667 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WEB: http://hometown.aol.com/conning/myhomepage/index.html Men's and Women's Track and Field Compete at Stanford Invite Blair, Adkins compete in first multi-event meet at UC Davis. March 26, 2001 BERKELEY - BEARS TRAVEL TO STANFORD INVITATIONAL, UC DAVIS MULTIS Coming off first-place team finishes at UC Davis last weekend, the California men's and women's track and field teams compete at the non-scoring Stanford Invitational Sat.-Sun., March 31-April 1. The Stanford Invite is one of the largest collegiate track and field meets in the country. Collegiate track competition begins Saturday at 2:05 p.m., with the women's 100mH and ends at 10:05 p.m., with the final heat of the women's 5,000m. Field events begin Saturday at noon with the women's javelin. Sunday's track competition begins at 9 a.m. with the women's 1500m and concludes at 3:45 p.m., with the men's 4x400m relay. Sunday's field events begin at 9 a.m. with the women's hammer. Juniors Matt Blair and Shawna Adkins look to qualify for Pac-10s and nationals Thurs.-Fri., March 29-30, at the UC Davis Multi-Event competition. The heptathlon begins each day at noon, and the decathlon starts at 1 p.m. each day. LAST YEAR'S STANFORD INVITATIONAL IN REVIEW Bolota Asmerom ran a then-career-best and NCAA automatic qualifying time of 13:42.79 in the 5000m on the first day of the 2000 Stanford Invitational. Triple jumpers Reynda King and Jerriod Mack led the way for the Bears on the second day of competition. King placed third overall and first among collegiate competitors in the triple jump with a then-career-best and NCAA provisional qualifying mark of 42-0.75. Mack won his third-consecutive triple jump competition of the spring with a mark of 50-1.25. BEARS MEN, WOMEN PLACE FIRST AT UC DAVIS The California men's and women's teams each finished first at the UC Davis Invitational Saturday at Woody Wilson Track. The Golden Bears women posted 188 points to outdistance Nevada (166.5), Washington (160.5) and UC Davis (148). The Bear men won a slightly closer competition with 198 points, just ahead of Washington (184). UC Davis took third at 169, and Chico State finished fourth at 94. BEAR MEN WIN EIGHT EVENTS, WOMEN SEVEN AT UC DAVIS The Cal men grabbed top honors in eight events at UC Davis. First-place finishes went to Wayne Boddy in the 400m (48.75), Bolota Asmerom in the 3000m (8:26.79), Martin Conrad in the 3000mSC (PR: 9:30.66), Ahmad Wright in the 400mH (53.14), Bubba McLean in the pole vault (16-6.75), Rhuben Williams in the shot put (PR: 58-0.5) and Garrett Collier in the hammer (182-10). The Cal women won seven events with Reynda King leading the way with victories in PR fashion in the long jump (20-2.5) and the triple jump (42-1.5w-NCAA provisional mark). Dana Lawson also finished first in two events - the shot put (50-7.5-NCAA prov.) and the discus (162-11). Meanwhile, Zhauntel Holman took top honors in the 100m (12.07), Tiffany Barnett in the high jump (5-6.5) and Jennifer Joyce did so in the hammer (195-1). DID YOU KNOW? Cal freshman hurdler Stephanie Cowling is the daughter of Larry Cowling, who has held the Bear records in both the 110mH (13.39) and the 400mH (48.46) since 1982. LAWSON TO WRITE DIARY EACH WEEK ON CAL WEB SITE Check out Cal senior Dana Lawson's weekly diary on the Cal Web site. The senior All-American captain takes an inside look at being a Golden Bear track and field athlete each week throughout the season. .
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
In a message dated Wed, 28 Mar 2001 2:33:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: But his world class career really is only comparable to Shorter's, and Shorter performed better in the Olympics You missed the qualifying statement in my original post. In reference to his open career I specified "on the track," considering the marathon as an outlier relative to the whole career-long tack, since it isn't part of the prep or collegiate scenes. gh
Re: t-and-f: NCAA 200m
In a message dated 03/28/2001 11:25:50 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're probably right about that. So much for encouraging competition. What do they do with the 400 m at NCAA? - ed Parrot Oh that is easy Ed. One round, an aggregate of times. Cuts down on time, and keeps the athletes fresh for the 4x400 m. Just think what they will do to the distance races, just mail in your times, and they will send you your medals. Jumps get 2 attempts, period. DGS Faith is a road seldom traveled
t-and-f: Greene and Moses/HBO
Maurice Greene and Edwin Moses are scheduled to appear on Bob Costas' show on HBO tonight at 11pm(EST). Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
GH wrote: As for Pre vs. Lindgren, I had a far better personal relationship with the former, and if I were to make judgments based on that kind of bias, Pre would get my nod. Lindgren, as David Dallman pointed out, had a true impact on the world scene; the others weren't in the same league. Not sure I would dismiss Pre's impact on the world scene quite so easily ... Pre was a world record breaker/holder ... And I'm not sure anyone had as much impact in terms of shaping the outcomes of races as Pre did ... Pre made the 72 Olympic 5000 final the race that it turned out to be ... Had it not been for his untimely death, he was the only runner around that would have been able to run up to the level of the Africans as they were just coming on the world scene ... Lindgren did not have that type of competition to contend with ... Nor the Viren type ... Pre also did something that we are talking about today is needed in the sport (at least here domestically) and that is a charisma that brought the fans to the track ... And while that is not necessarily the equivalent of wins and loses it should count for something in terms of rating an individuals impact on the sport ... Conway HillGet your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
RE: t-and-f: NCAA 200m
Is this a situation where the 200m is not taken seriously as an event? Or could it be that it attracts too many runners (100m going up + 400m going down) for the NCAAs taste? Like provisional qualifying that allows the NCAA to place a limit on the number of competitors in each event of a championship meet, this seems to be one of those situations where "the man" feels that he is more important than the athlete or the team. The NCAA. I didn't like them when I ran. I don't like them as a fan. Why doesn't the NCAA just hold a potato sack race to determine the qualifiers in the 200m? Guy -Guy OekermanResearch Director KWBP-TV (WB32)[EMAIL PROTECTED] 503.644.3232 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 1:10 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA 200mIn a message dated 03/28/2001 11:25:50 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're probably right about that. So much for encouraging competition. What do they do with the 400 m at NCAA? - ed Parrot Oh that is easy Ed. One round, an aggregate of times. Cuts down on time, and keeps the athletes fresh for the 4x400 m. Just think what they will do to the distance races, just mail in your times, and they will send you your medals. Jumps get 2 attempts, period. DGS Faith is a road seldom traveled
Re: t-and-f: Distance runners
Mike wrote: Jeff beat me to this. George Young is indeed the most overlooked runner in the U.S. And he is one of the runners that I point too as support for my theory that the golden age of american distance running was 1964 to about 1976 and that it was after the "running boom" and the rise of the African nations that fortunes began to fall. Question: With respect to the "running boom" did it perhaps make running too "recreational" in this country ??? And in so doing change the mindset of distance running/runners ?? I ask this as there has been no similar "boom" in any other aspect of the sport, yet the sector that got the "boom" is the one that has seemed to have fallen off in this country ... Just a question .. Conway Hill Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: t-and-f: Distance runners
Netters Conway wrote: Question: With respect to the "running boom" did it perhaps make running too "recreational" in this country ??? And in so doing change the mindset of distance running/runners ?? That is exactly what I think. The "recreational mindset" permeates distance running. Even when planning training for myself or Michelle or even some of the other open and master athletes I coach I find myself falling into "joggers world" approaches. Thankfully I shake out of them. :)
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
Conway wrote: Not sure I would dismiss Pre's impact on the world scene quite so easily ... Pre was a world record breaker/holder ... And I'm not sure anyone had as much impact in terms of shaping the outcomes of races as Pre did ... Pre made the 72 Olympic 5000 final the race that it turned out to be ... I can't really agree with that. The ability to shape a race by taking the lead with 4 or 5 laps to go (as in Munich) or going out too fast from he gun (as in most other races) is impressive, but is not the same kind "impact" we are talking about with Lindgren. If you discount the one Olympic Games, where Pre did not even medal, Lindgren was probably closer to the best in the world than Pre. AND: Had it not been for his untimely death, he was the only runner around that would have been able to run up to the level of the Africans as they were just coming on the world scene ... Lindgren did not have that type of competition to contend with ... Nor the Viren type We'll never know how good Pre would have been, but that is irrelevent. And by the logic about less competition, guys like Zatopek or Nurmi are also-rans because the competition really stank when they were winning. I'd say the fact that Lindgren didn't have the competition makes what he did all that much more impressive. I would rate their open careers about equal, with Lindgren getting a strong nod in high school and a slight nod in NCAA competition. The kind of dominanceLindgren had over his peers matches only that of Ryun in terms of American males on the track. No, he didn't have a long career, and no he didn't run as fast as Pre a decade later or any number of others subsequently, but at the time he was just about as good as we've ever had. - ed Parrot
RE: t-and-f: NCAA 200m
Guy we are starting to get a little harsh here, the NCAA uses this system at the indoor championships and they use it for the 400 outdoors. If you look at it closely you will see that most conference meets use the format as well. Also look at the NCAA results form the past few years, the first round of the 200 usually only gets rid of 2 or 3 guys and then there are several guys who end up running overt 21 seconds in the semi. There are a lot worse thing that they could do, and it isn't a done deal to my knowledge, just a proposal. "Guy Oekerman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/28/01 04:37PM Is this a situation where the 200m is not taken seriously as an event? Or could it be that it attracts too many runners (100m going up + 400m going down) for the NCAAs taste? Like provisional qualifying that allows the NCAA to place a limit on the number of competitors in each event of a championship meet, this seems to be one of those situations where "the man" feels that he is more important than the athlete or the team. The NCAA. I didn't like them when I ran. I don't like them as a fan. Why doesn't the NCAA just hold a potato sack race to determine the qualifiers in the 200m? Guy - Guy Oekerman Research Director . KWBP-TV (WB32) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 503.644.3232 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 1:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA 200m In a message dated 03/28/2001 11:25:50 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're probably right about that. So much for encouraging competition. What do they do with the 400 m at NCAA? - ed Parrot Oh that is easy Ed. One round, an aggregate of times. Cuts down on time, and keeps the athletes fresh for the 4x400 m. Just think what they will do to the distance races, just mail in your times, and they will send you your medals. Jumps get 2 attempts, period. DGS Faith is a road seldom traveled
t-and-f: track athlete kicked off team for being a stripper
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/2000/20010328/lo/345491_1.html
RE: t-and-f: Distance runners
Actually, the facts don't quite paint the same picture. From 1976-1985 more Americans ranked in the world scene at distances than ever before. http://digilander.iol.it/rzocca/ malmo Jeff beat me to this. George Young is indeed the most overlooked runner in the U.S. And he is one of the runners that I point too as support for my theory that the golden age of american distance running was 1964 to about 1976 and that it was after the "running boom" and the rise of the African nations that fortunes began to fall. Mike
RE: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Richard McCann Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 2:30 PM To: TFMail List Cc: Garry Hill; e. garry Subject: Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren? (was: Ranking HS distance greats Garry You're showing your Wazzoo bias. (I knew Gerry 20 years ago, as well.) Yes Lindgren is among the greatest American distance runners, and yes both his high school and collegiate careers are only surpassed by Pre and Nyambui. Nyambui American? If you include Nyambui into any listing of all-time college runners you've forgotten about this feller by name of RO-NO.
RE: t-and-f: Distance runners
Malmo wrote: Actually, the facts don't quite paint the same picture. From 1976-1985 more Americans ranked in the world scene at distances than ever before. But those athletes would have already been in the "system" so to speak ... They were trianing and involved in the sport prior to the "running boom" ... those athletes that grew up during the boom and beyond have done progressively and markedly worse ... These past couple of years of high schoolers with Webb, Ritz, Hall and others is the first truly brihgt spot in a very long time ... ConwayGet your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
t-and-f: nationals in Eugene
have they made the schedule yet for USAtfs this summer? My parents want to book a flight and hotel room for the 1500 but we dont know when the trials or final for the event are. anybody in the know? Dan Wilson _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Re: t-and-f: better than Lindgren?
Lindgren, as David Dallman pointed out, had a true impact on the world scene; the others weren't in the same league. gh Winning the Olympic marathon and then a silver doesn't count as an impact on the world scene? Finishing 4th in the Olympics before reaching one's prime (which was cut short) is not an impact? Maybe Kennedy hasn't had the same impact, but the world scene is now much deeper than it was in 1965. BTW, I try to be as cool and numeric as possible in my assessments. (I'm not taking your comment as being aimed at me, however.) I doubt anyone else on the list relies as much on actual statistical principles and methods as I do. RMc
Re: t-and-f: track athlete kicked off team for being a stripper
Great Story.. If I remember my NCAA handbook correctly, if she was receiving any institutional financial aid and she was really good at her "after school job", she probably would be in violation of NCAA by-laws after only a very short time on the stage, regardless of any code of conduct rules. I believe it works something like this... (Institutional Financial Aid + Income Earned) (Full Grant in Aid + $2,000) = Violation ??? Please correct me if I am wrong Dave Cohen
Re: t-and-f: Distance runners
I do not believe the downfall of U.S. distance running began with the first running boom that started in the mid 1970's and peaked in the very early 1980's. As others have pointed out, the U.S. had plenty of world caliber runners during that time, even though the Africans were already beginning to come on the scene. And although many of them got into the "system" before the running boom started, many of them also rode the running boom to their success. That first running boom was about RACING, not jogging. Quite a lot of people who raced regularly ran 50-100 miles per week (or more), and focused on improving. Races offered very little and there was little reason to do them except to race. The second running boom, which began sometime between 1985 and 1990 has been led by the 5K's and the marathons, two events that have specifically appealed to slower and/or less dedicated runners. At any given race, only a tiny handful of runners regularly run 50 miles per week or more, and even many decent local runners get by on a "less is more" philosophy. The non-competitive nature of this latest surge in participation has, along with other factors, undoubtedly contributed to a decline, particularly in the depth of U.S. distance running. As has been pointed out on this list before, the very best in any given event and level (high school, college, open) are not really much worse than they used to be - it's just that there are fewer of them. - ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: track athlete kicked off team for being a stripper
Great Story.. If I remember my NCAA handbook correctly, if she was receiving any institutional financial aid and she was really good at her "after school job", she probably would be in violation of NCAA by-laws after only a very short time on the stage, regardless of any code of conduct rules. I believe it works something like this... (Institutional Financial Aid + Income Earned) (Full Grant in Aid + $2,000) = Violation ??? Please correct me if I am wrong Dave Cohen
No Subject
This message was emailed to you from sacbee.com. Message: Story about Sac State track program Freshman sprinter-jumper Shanita Bryant is the type of athlete coach Joe Neff, right, hopes to attract to Sac State. Bee/Anne Chadwick Williams Sac State wants a run of success: Track program looks to build off Olympic Trials By Quwan Spears Bee Staff Writer (Published March 28, 2001) The success of the U.S. Olympic Track and Field Trials here last summer, and the NCAA Championships in 2003 and the Trials again in 2004, has helped Sacramento shed its image as a rest stop along the way to more prestigious track and field events. Now, Sacramento State wants to better its image in the sport. In an effort to bolster its program, the university wants to add nearly $80,000 to the team's budget for four assistant coaches, two additional scholarships, supplies, recruiting and travel. The money, as yet unauthorized, would come from several state funding sources. With increased funding, Hornets coach Joe Neff says the track program would finally have all the ingredients to rise to prominence. "We have a combination of good things going for us," Neff said. "We have one of the best facilities in the world. Our funding has improved. Plus, we've got tremendous exposure from the Trials." You can see the remainder of this story at: http://www.sacbee.com/sports/news/sports06_20010328.html
Re: t-and-f: track athlete kicked off team for being a stripper
Regardless of your individual feeling as to the moraility of stripping, I hope you are all offended by this story. A coach has prevented an athlete from competing because she has a perfectly legal and legitimate job that he doesn't personally approve of. Suppose her job was working for the N.R.A. or the A.C.L.U. and he didn't approve of that. It's not that big a leap. The coach is the one who should be off the team. -Original Message- From: Shawn Devereaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: TF Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 7:01 PM Subject: t-and-f: track athlete kicked off team for being a stripper http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/2000/20010328/lo/345491_1.html
