Tsatoumas does it again, 8.54!!!

[gh]

It's not as if this guy came out of nowhere: he was No. 8 in the World Rankings last year, after all.

FWIW, note that at 6-1 1/2 (1.87) he was also the second tallest of all of last year's rankers.

[Kurt Francis]

I wish the guy good luck. I personally like to see great performances no matter where they come from. However, I remain skeptical based on the evidence presented to me in the 2 YouTube videos I saw. Skepticism is a part of my nature. I'm an engineer

Kurt

[tafnut]

Skepticism is a part of my nature. I'm an engineer

So after you design a bridge, you tell the clients, 'Well I THINK it MIGHT hold up under heavy traffic, but I kinda doubt it!'

[Daisy]

Skepticism is a part of my nature. I'm an engineer

So after you design a bridge, you tell the clients, 'Well I THINK it MIGHT hold up under heavy traffic, but I kinda doubt it!'

All depends if by 'heavy' you mean exceeding the design load.

[lonewolf]

Finally found the clip... the pit seems to be extra wide with a temporary 2x4 left curb reducing it to a single wide.. the area outside the curb and at the extreme end of the pit is pretty messy but the landing area is reasonably well maintained and does not seem excessily "low". There is no point of reference for distance and I see no basis to question the reported distance...this jumpers credentials are certainly superior to Beamon's prior to Mexico City and he never again duplicated, or even approached his WR

[tafnut]

he never again duplicated, or even approached his WR

since it was allegedly a wind-aided (not to mention, altitude-aided) foul, that's not surprising! Or is that just an 'urban legend'?

[lonewolf]

I dunno bout all that... maybe some of the 'rithmatic guys can figure out what speed tail wind is required to blow a jumper an incremental 22 inches.

[gh]

he never again duplicated, or even approached his WR

since it was allegedly a wind-aided (not to mention, altitude-aided) foul, that's not surprising! Or is that just an 'urban legend'?

Nobody has ever hinted that Beamon's mark was a foul.

[lonewolf]

Yep. Nope. I have heard THE JUMP attributed wind, altitude and even PEDS but don't recall anyone ever claiming it was a foul... of course, someone would have noticed a 22" foul.. .. maybe...
Stange but True Division: I once worked a national championship where plasticine was being used.. the pc appointed board judge took the "no mark-no foul" rule so literally he did not call a foul when a jumper took off competely beyond the toe board/plasticine tray because he did not leave a mark....
The board judge was summarily relieved on the spot....

[Daisy]

he did not call a foul when a jumper took off competely beyond the toe board/plasticine tray because he did not leave a mark....
The board judge was summarily relieved on the spot....

Lonewolf, did you ever consider writing a book! Priceless stuff. (memoir as opposed to Court Houses for your Coffee Table)

[paulthefan]

Tons of US athletes fall in the same category. Are you questioning any of them?

Tatiana Kotova jumped 7.42m in 2002 (at the European Cup) but her next best jump is currently 7.12m. So according to the what you say her jump was not legit because she was never able to repeat it.

If an athlete can not come within 20 inches of his PR when the chips are really down, then either 1) the first mark is questionable, 2) He/she is an irrelevant competitor... i.e. they are not to be taken terribly seriously as competitive athletes a nd their PRs are to be ignored.

Regarding Kotova, I can only refer vgbasil to a course in logic. In this case Kotov she had her biggest jump (by about a foot, 12inches ) on one of the most important stages (EURO Cup)... quite the OPPOSITE of what we would call in irrelevant jump. QED.

So back to the Tsatamous jump, I discounted the jump by no more than a decimeter and that due soley to the grooming of the pit, that makes it an 8.5 jump, certainly over 8.4.

[lonewolf]

I may already have written it if I could gather up my random ramblings...

I don't remember if I have posted the incident where I was invited by a well known jump coach to work a meet at his school , which was woefully lacking in horizontal jump officials, and conduct a sort of on-the-job training seminar..

I was handed a half-dozen eager, if inexperienced, men who I interviewed briefly to make initial assignments.. only one man professed competence in calling fouls at the board.. so he got that job..
I positioned myself as the pit judge/marker... the takeoff board was a 12" board with the front 4" painted red.. the first jumper took off completely behind the board.. no apparent problem in the measurement.. the second jumper appeared to to have a teensy-weensy foul but from my position 15' away I did not question it.. the third jumper obviously fouled by 3+ inches but still on the board .. the board judge called it fair... I walked back and challeged the judge that the jumper was "three inches in the red".. he said, "What red? I'm color blind.." I changed places with him.

[gh]

......The Tone Belt incident had nothing to do with the condition of the pit.. under NCAA rules foul jumps are judged visually instantly and not by committee or an appeals jury. The official on the board correctly declined to measure a foul jump, which request/demand, btw, was not made by the jumper but by people yelling from the stands.. we do not take directions from the stands.

Tone Belt expressed natural disappointment at the narrow foul but, to his credit, did not challenge the call. It was a one cm foul like a thousand other one cm fouls.. he may have been the best jumper there but not when it counted.. he had six jumps and fouled five of them.. being the favorite does not earn any favoritism.. there is no provision in the rules to allow the favorite to jump until he wins....

Since I assume you were there, I'd like to see your reaction to this e-mail from somebody who was on the field

<<...Seemingly, Belt did not leave a mark in the plasticene, but the official said he saw his foot over the line. To compound the situation, as Belt was protesting, the official instructed the pit crew to "get it raked, quickly!". >>

[lonewolf]

......The Tone Belt incident had nothing to do with the condition of the pit.. under NCAA rules foul jumps are judged visually instantly and not by committee or an appeals jury. The official on the board correctly declined to measure a foul jump, which request/demand, btw, was not made by the jumper but by people yelling from the stands.. we do not take directions from the stands.

Tone Belt expressed natural disappointment at the narrow foul but, to his credit, did not challenge the call. It was a one cm foul like a thousand other one cm fouls.. he may have been the best jumper there but not when it counted.. he had six jumps and fouled five of them.. being the favorite does not earn any favoritism.. there is no provision in the rules to allow the favorite to jump until he wins....

Since I assume you were there, I'd like to see your reaction to this e-mail from somebody who was on the field

<<...Seemingly, Belt did not leave a mark in the plasticene, but the official said he saw his foot over the line. To compound the situation, as Belt was protesting, the official instructed the pit crew to "get it raked, quickly!". >>

Yes, I was there. Here is my reaction to this curious "hearsay" testimony...
In the first place, plasticine was not being used.. The board official is an experienced, highly respected jump official. He did not "say" he saw Belt's foot over the line. He saw his foot over the line. I was directly on the line and I saw his foot over the line.. the NCAA rep seated behind the board judge commented, "good call"..Belt was obviously and understandably disappointed but did not "protest" or challege the call.. how could he? over the line is a foul, whether it is one cm or ten.. thankfully, we have not descended to allowing jumpers to call their own fouls.. the official denies that he told the pit crew to "get it raked quickly" .. he told them to rake the pit... he had no "dog in this fight" and no reason to further delay the competition.. we do not measure fouls.. you can protest rule interpretation but not judgement calls.

[gh]

glad to hear.