As a distance fan, I don't really do a lot of research in these events. I know a little bit about some of the US stars and some of the all-time list leaders. And I know that in the last 10+/- years quality standards have had to be redefined.
What I didn't realize, until looking at Peter Larsson's lists, was how MUCH they had been redefined.
Like no all-time top 50 disc performances since 93 and no top 150 since 90. Like only 1 of the top 300 (including ancilliary) since 93 ... or something like that.
Obviously, I know what it has a lot to do with, but I guess I'm still astounded.
I guess I want to believe that there should be NATURALLY big, strong women out there who can throw 70m unaided. Maybe not 250 feet, but surely more 225+.
With the shot, why shouldn't the biggest, strongest girls throw 21m/68 ft.? I know we've had US list revisions with a little more consistency over the years, and we have good younguns like Laura G. ... and also some of the best women may be doing other sports or no sports at all. I mean, shoot, it seems like I see big women walking around all the time that could throw at least 60 feet with some training, surely a few who could do 68.
What do some of you experts in these events think? I don't necessarily want to hear how drug testing or the fall of the Eastern Bloc programs have changed the sport, but whether or not girls can be developed, CLEANLY, to what were the old world-class standards ... at least 21-21.50 in the shot and 70-72m in the disc ... or something like that.
Opinions???
What I didn't realize, until looking at Peter Larsson's lists, was how MUCH they had been redefined.
Like no all-time top 50 disc performances since 93 and no top 150 since 90. Like only 1 of the top 300 (including ancilliary) since 93 ... or something like that.
Obviously, I know what it has a lot to do with, but I guess I'm still astounded.
I guess I want to believe that there should be NATURALLY big, strong women out there who can throw 70m unaided. Maybe not 250 feet, but surely more 225+.
With the shot, why shouldn't the biggest, strongest girls throw 21m/68 ft.? I know we've had US list revisions with a little more consistency over the years, and we have good younguns like Laura G. ... and also some of the best women may be doing other sports or no sports at all. I mean, shoot, it seems like I see big women walking around all the time that could throw at least 60 feet with some training, surely a few who could do 68.
What do some of you experts in these events think? I don't necessarily want to hear how drug testing or the fall of the Eastern Bloc programs have changed the sport, but whether or not girls can be developed, CLEANLY, to what were the old world-class standards ... at least 21-21.50 in the shot and 70-72m in the disc ... or something like that.
Opinions???
Comment