Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mt. SAC 2021

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • wamego relays champ
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post

    She was Illinois and for a while was relatively better than her brother. I remember officiating a meet at Wisconsin where she was vaulting 430-440 or so; very likely the Big Ten Meet and she was young then (FR or SO?)
    She was five-time Big-10 champion (3 outdoors, two indoors), and 3rd outdoors as a freshman.

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
    Wait a cotton-pickin-minute!

    At the Azusa meet there's a 14' wPVer named Stephanie Richartz.

    A little sleuthing finds it's his sister.
    She was Illinois and for a while was relatively better than her brother. I remember officiating a meet at Wisconsin where she was vaulting 430-440 or so; very likely the Big Ten Meet and she was young then (FR or SO?)

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Wait a cotton-pickin-minute!

    At the Azusa meet there's a 14' wPVer named Stephanie Richartz.

    A little sleuthing finds it's his sister.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    I meant to comment on Nate Richartz (ex-ND) in the PV. He equaled his outdoor PR, 18-8. His indoor is 18-10.

    In this meet he finished second, beating OT prospects

    Ludwig
    Irwin
    Lightfoot
    Wyatt
    Houston
    Wooten

    Is he the next Cole Walsh, a guy who sticks around after graduation and is rewarded with a OG/WC berth?

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    at this point we return you to the purpose of this thread......

    Leave a comment:


  • NotDutra5
    replied
    Ms. Jones shouldn't have been included in that listing of otherwise correct individuals and it is no shame to simply say "yeah...you're right" instead of trying to argue a losing position. Unless, of course, you really don't know much about Marion Jones through her collegiate years.

    Leave a comment:


  • bad hammy
    replied
    Marion was far more qualified to play in the WNBA than Michael Jordan was in attempting to break into MLB, or Skeets in the NFL for that matter . . .

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    The fact that Marion played TWO years in the WNBA suggests she was good enough to make the cut. Better than 99% of Div I NCAA players ever did, right out of college. The PR value wore off after the first year.

    Leave a comment:


  • jazzcyclist
    replied
    Originally posted by Soijai View Post

    You also said: "None of these people had any training to suggest..." Which is true for the others, but totally false for Marion. You wanted to put Marion in a group with people who tried a sport they had no skills in and were trying it without any previous qualification, and that didn't work.
    Marion Jones playing in the WNBA after 12 years away from basketball is the equivalent of Charlie Ward playing in the NFL after retiring from pro basketball.

    Leave a comment:


  • Soijai
    replied
    Originally posted by mungo man View Post

    I am not sure what your point is. One thing is for certain. Marion Jones was never gonna succeed at basketball after being away for 12 years and being 34 or 35. I don't know why they kept her on the team. Maybe she was good for publicity or maybe the coaches were delusional or maybe the owners really liked her. Either way she did not make it. Better players have been cut in training camp and did not even make the final roster. Young players who excelled in college and had far more upside.
    You also said: "None of these people had any training to suggest..." Which is true for the others, but totally false for Marion. You wanted to put Marion in a group with people who tried a sport they had no skills in and were trying it without any previous qualification, and that didn't work.
    Last edited by Soijai; 05-13-2021, 02:44 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by deca View Post
    I remember David Hemery wrote a whole book about it and floating being easier on energy. I mean the book was about his gold, but he talked a lot about 400h tech and strategy. A tall and fast hurdler might do 12 step the whole way if they “floated” over the hurdles. Might cost 0.1 per hurdle in the air but save 0.25 per hurdle in steps. Thinking out loud.
    At a slightly ( ) slower rate of speed, I always tried to 'float' over hurdles also. That doesn't mean go high, it means not having aggressive form over the hurdle (lead and trail leg 'snap'). Being an aggressive hurdler (as in the 110s) is faster but takes a LOT more energy, something most hurdlers are running out of by Hurdle 9.

    Leave a comment:


  • deca
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post
    In the 110h it is really important to get the lead leg down fast. However in the 400h it makes it easier to hit a slightly stretched out step pattern (trying to hit 13s), so it might not cost much. McMaster might have touched down before RB but did he gain any noticeable ground?
    I remember David Hemery wrote a whole book about it and floating being easier on energy. I mean the book was about his gold, but he talked a lot about 400h tech and strategy. A tall and fast hurdler might do 12 step the whole way if they “floated” over the hurdles. Might cost 0.1 per hurdle in the air but save 0.25 per hurdle in steps. Thinking out loud.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tuariki
    replied
    Originally posted by gm View Post
    I may be wrong, but it appears Richardson is only the third woman ever to run 10.7x twice in one day, the others being:

    Fraser-Pryce at Berlin on Aug 17 09
    Griffith-Joyner on Jul 17 88
    Flo Jo ran 10.61 and 10.70
    Not 10.7x

    Leave a comment:


  • 1.609
    replied
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
    Because the sprinter is trying to 'hit harder' in order to go farther in each stride and is not landing from an 'elevated' height (that would be bounding). The hurdler doesn't want o go higher over the hurdle because s/he will be having to deal with increased load on their muscles, which is the same reasons elite TJers don't take off as high as LJers - they won't be able to handle the stress of landing, which decelerates them. That was Jonathan Edward's gift, he didn't lose much speed through the phases because he found the ideal angle to go through each of the phases.
    Thank you. It sounds like what they're losing by going higher is primarily momentum, and to a lesser degree, energy. Go up too high and when you land your forward momentum is reduced. The muscles also have to work a bit harder to absorb that returning energy dictated by Newton's 3rd law, so it stands to reason some energy is parted with too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fortius19
    replied
    Thanks all for the input on 4H arms! I hope KW breaks the WR before RB gets his form dialed in and destroys it.



    Originally posted by gm View Post
    I may be wrong, but it appears Richardson is only the third woman ever to run 10.7x twice in one day, the others being:

    Fraser-Pryce at Berlin on Aug 17 09
    Griffith-Joyner on Jul 17 88
    Excellent! Thanks for posting. I was wondering this after her comp, but had no idea how to look up the answer.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X