Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"New" World Records

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Re:

    Well, I personally don't think the Chinese were doped. If they were we would have seen more performances similar to what they ran (don't tell me they found a magic drug no one else found). Its 1000 times more likely that the track was short. I would bet quite a bit of money on that.

    FloJo is another matter. I had just forgotten about her btw. If we implicate FloJo then we have to implicate MJ too. Both did similar things no?

    With FloJos case isn't the wind reading suspect? I would guess she has the WRs stuill, but that the marks from that one day should probably be stricken.

    M

    Comment


    • #17
      Re:

      Which MJ do you mean - Michael Johnson or Marion Jones?
      Either way, the difference is of course that Flo-Jo set her records prior to the introduction of out-of-competition drug testing. Somehow people tend to remember that when the talk is of records set by East European athletes, but not by Americans...
      Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: New WRs

        The problem with this to me is the arbitrary choice of 2000. Garry's idea of using the introduction of WADA makes some sense, but I've always wondered why no one proposes using the begining of out-of-comptetition testing. You could even argue that this is a rule change that changes the event(s) just like changing the jav specs or the decath scoring tables. I'm not sure when out-of-comp testing started, but I'm sure it wouldn't remove the chinese distance records but it would remove the East Germans and Flo-jo. If someone could tell me when out-of-comp testing started I'll work out the new WRs. By the way, I think the whole idea of scraping the records is kind of silly, but if it was to be done it should at least have some (even if flimsy) rationale.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: New WRs

          The new WR's should start only when we have the drug problem eradicated. We clearly are not there yet, and I don't think WADA is going to get us there any time soon. GH seems to think it will never happen. I'd like to be more optimistic than that, but right now there's more evidence on his side than mine on the question of whether the sport will ever be drug free.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: New WRs

            looking at it very pessimistically, would everyone really want to totally get rid of illegal performance enhancers, when it would probably mean far fewer if any records, which would probably mean less attendance and coverage of track even in europe, the competition would still be great, with photo finishes, upsets,breakthroughs etc. it would be great if everything was honest and fair, but realistically what are the odds everyone would be fair. i remember in college a teacher said that athletes were asked the question if there was a magic pill you could take that would make you the best in the world, but the catch was you would die withen a year would you take it? i forget the number but the majority of athletes asked anonymously said they would take it.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: New WRs

              I said this afew months ago, but I will say it again:

              Sad to say, but it's time to give up on this issue. If people want to ingest something into their bady that is not against the law, well, it's their life. If they die , that's their problem.

              Drop all restrictions on Drugs and let 'em run/jump/throw.

              Prohibition did not work in the USA in the 20's and Drug prohibitions are not enforceable.

              So........ juice up and go get 'em !!!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: New WRs

                To the guy who said that drugs should be allowed. Uhm no. How am I supposed to compete with a drugged athlete when I don't believe in taking them? Allowing drugs assumes everyone is willing to take them. That is not the case.

                How much would it suck if drugs were allowed and everyone was suddenly running 12:30 in the 5k and Geb refused to go on the stuff and ran "only" 12:39. Why should he be punished for wanting to take care of his body?

                M

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: New WRs

                  If you think it makes me happy to talk of dropping the whole issue, that sure is not so. It's just that I am so sick and tired of it all that on an emotional level it compels me to make that suggestion. Being rational about it, you are right and I am wrong.

                  Inside, where I live, I think any athlete that takes illegal drugs is lower than whale**** on the bottom of the ocean, and should be lined up against a wall and shot.

                  But look at baseball, and even more so, look at football. All those NFL interior linemen are juicing up because they know if they don't they won't cut it... because the other guys are doing it ! Very sad.

                  And I only changed my handle because I messed up my computer link somehow.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: New WRs

                    I am against abolishing the WR's
                    Firstly why are wanting to do this in the first place, I think everyone can aknowledge that some of the current records are dodgey, but are we just saying that these marks are to unacheivable lets bring them back. Even in the complete abscence of drugs their will be exceptional athletes who come along and set seemingly impossible marks. It appears as though athletics has evolved so far as a sport that WR's are a rare and special thing, their rarity is what makes them so great. Take swimming for instance WR are broken at every major champs, often by the same poeple. The reason for this is that they are just not at the same standard yet. It is what make poeple such as El G and M Johnson such absolute superstars that they are so much better than the rest.
                    Secondly if the previous records were abolished, you abolish peoples memory, and new world record holders who have not run as fast as previous people will not be taken seriously until they do, is say someone ran 19.6 in the 200m while they may be officially the 200m Wr holder everyone will still think of MJ as the fastest man over the distance.
                    In summary history and statistics is what makes t&f great, and to take it away would never work.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: New WRs

                      Difference in perspective??? Most folks
                      >on this board talk about tainted east European
                      >records. This eurosport article says "The
                      >Nordic countries expect stiff opposition,
                      >particularly from the United States, which holds
                      >many of the records in question and is still
                      >smarting from a drug investigation earlier this
                      >year that implicated the country's top past
                      >champions"

                      On the iaaf board, they say the United States winds up with neither a net loss or net gain because it gains several new records but some Eastern European countries and Ethiopia would have an overall loss

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: New WRs

                        hubby is right. Let's just forget about "new" world records, try to keep the sport as clean as possible, and move on.

                        And if we are not going to abolish Drug restrictions, then go all the way in the other direction. One offense, you are history.... for life.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: New WRs

                          Good one, Hubby! If you start over on the records, it is only a meaningless title that you bestow upon the record holder. Everyone (including the record holder) will know what the REAL record is. It is like having state records that can only be set in the state meet. It is called a state record, but it is often not the REAL state record, as possibly many athletes may have bettered that mark.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: New WRs

                            It's over now. The IAAF rejected the idea today.
                            http://www.sport.scotsman.com/athletics ... =889232003

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: New WRs

                              The IAAF has more than ample proof that the East Germans, including Marita Koch, were using drugs. Koch admitted as much in some correspondence found (in STASI files, I believe) after the collapse of the DDR, in which she was whining about rival Barbel Wockel getting more/better drugs than she was receiving. The IAAF's VERY hypocritical stance on this issue was to allow her, to this day, to retain the world 400 record. However, she isn't the German national record holder, because the German Federation, to their credit, threw out all the contaminated performances made by DDR athletes prior to reunification. Ruth Fuchs, Olympic javelin gold medallist in 1972 (and 1976?) admitted publicly to having taken drugs. She never had to hand over her medals. Canadian sprinter Angella Issajenko admitted to taking drugs and had her named erased from the list of medallists at the world indoor championships, and lost her world indoor 50 metre record. The IAAF doesn't apply its "rules" consistently or fairly, and it's pretty hard to take them seriously anymore.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: New WRs

                                At the time when they threw out my world record in the 50m 6.06, they let the 6.11 run by Marita stand. And how stupid that the world record and German national record isnt the same. Is Marita not a German citizen.
                                Also the rule at the time was one had to test positive not admit to steroid use. I could have taken them to court which I can still do but really cannot be bothered. Also people whom I competed against who tested positive and blamed it on contaminated supplements and got off the hook. How could the govering body of our sport believe such nonsence.
                                I wonder what will come of the doping scandal in the United States, will they erace all the results of those involved? will they even publish the exact numbers. What if its say 50 people . This will almost destroy the sport of Track and Field.
                                They made such a sacrifice of Ben, its a shame. My god Carl Lewis tested positive for stimulants before the 88 Olympics so he should not have been there I do not hear the IOC asking for his medal. I guess Linford Christie should get the Gold Medal. now isnt this really funny
                                cheers
                                Angella

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X