Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Australia giving up on the sprints?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    paulthefan
    Senior Member

  • paulthefan
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    There's a bad pun in there about Marion, sorry..... :P
    yeah, I saw that AFTER I wrote it and just left it as is. Whoda thunk that Conte was actually telling the truth for once?! :roll:
    for once... Proving that Marlow is as naive as tafnut was.

    Leave a comment:

  • Vault-emort
    Senior Member

  • Vault-emort
    replied
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    It would seem Boyle has a big fan club to this day, or at least a few around here who are vocal. Who was the bigger phenomenon in Australia, her or Freeman? That may seem like a dumb question, given that Freeman did what Raelene never quite managed to pull off, in front of a home crowd, but I've been told by Aussies that she was considered a huge star.
    I think overall Cathy was a bigger icon. Pretty much every Aussie (whether a sports fan or not) knows of her. I'd say Raelene was a tiny bit below but as a star from 1968 to 1982 she had longevity rarely equalled. And Australians LOVE a larrikin like Raelene who states her mind and gives officialdom a hard time. Making three successive Olympic 100m finals (and she woulda done this at 200m as well except for her horror Montreal sf) is impressive in any era.

    I'll never forget the whole Moscow boycott controversy and seeing Raelene in a meet where I think she won the 100 and/or 400. After her race the track interviewer asked "And what do you think about going to Moscow?". Her reply - "I'm not going to Moscow....I'm going to the Olympic Games" was, I thought. the perfect reply to the politicians.

    Leave a comment:

  • Marlow
    Senior Member

  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    There's a bad pun in there about Marion, sorry..... :P
    yeah, I saw that AFTER I wrote it and just left it as is. Whoda thunk that Conte was actually telling the truth for once?! :roll:

    Leave a comment:

  • Mennisco
    Senior Member

  • Mennisco
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    That woman had more star power in her personality than a dozen American and Jamaican sprinters, not counting Merlene Ottey or Flojo [but then Flojo just does not count, period....]
    My sun first rose with Wilma Rudolph, it then blazed with Evelyn Ashford, I then thought Marion was my nova, but it turned out she was a shooting star that burned out, but now I am illuminated by Allyson Felix! :wink:
    There's a bad pun in there about Marion, sorry..... :P

    Down under has always held my fancy....

    Leave a comment:

  • Marlow
    Senior Member

  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    That woman had more star power in her personality than a dozen American and Jamaican sprinters, not counting Merlene Ottey or Flojo [but then Flojo just does not count, period....]
    My sun first rose with Wilma Rudolph, it then blazed with Evelyn Ashford, I then thought Marion was my nova, but it turned out she was a shooting star that burned out, but now I am illuminated by Allyson Felix! :wink:

    Leave a comment:

  • Flumpy
    Senior Member

  • Flumpy
    replied
    Originally posted by rasb

    To be brutally honest, and totally non-racist, this is a major issue for our sport around the World. The fact that runners of West-African/Caribbean descent totally dominate the sprint events is obvious. It is at least equally obvious that runners of East-African/North-African descent dominate the distance events. There seems to be an increasing number of nations/runners at least considering the possibility of not being able to compete in a lot of these events, at least in terms of making an Olympic final or World Top 16. Of course, this does not mean that any individual, of any race (no pun), in any Country may not be able to take on the challenge. But it certainly seems to mean that some/many are losing interest. This is one of my principle reasons for being opposed to having more than 3/4 per Country in Olympic/World events. Thoughts ?
    Agree completely.

    Leave a comment:

  • paulthefan
    Senior Member

  • paulthefan
    replied
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    Originally posted by AS
    The problem with all of this discussion is the issue of exceptionalism...

    The gist of the problem appears to be that somehow Australian athletics has "failed" for not producing another Raelene Boyle...

    The same could be said for a lot of nations
    Oh yes, the United States has failed miserably for never producing a single Raelene Boyle, while manufacturing a zillion porn stars with amazing legs.

    :wink:
    a culture that will pay what it does for a woman to perform the oldest tiredest tricks and yet pay nothing for a woman to shine as an example for countless generations is a culture not long for this world.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mennisco
    Senior Member

  • Mennisco
    replied
    Thank you Vault-E! Those pics were definitely a few vaulteasers.....I recall reading Track and Field News' Olympic edition 1976 in which it was stated that Boyle finished fastest of all.

    At least I get to cheer for one of my two favorite all-time sprinters without generating choruses of boos from across the pond [like sometimes happens with Ashford]......

    It would seem Boyle has a big fan club to this day, or at least a few around here who are vocal. Who was the bigger phenomenon in Australia, her or Freeman? That may seem like a dumb question, given that Freeman did what Raelene never quite managed to pull off, in front of a home crowd, but I've been told by Aussies that she was considered a huge star.

    Leave a comment:

  • Vault-emort
    Senior Member

  • Vault-emort
    replied
    Since this thread seems to have turned into the Boyle fan club, you might like these ones too Mennisco and Paul


    1974 - Raelene at Commonwealth Games recovering from serious injury to run 11.25/22.50


    midrace of the Montreal Olympic final with five of the greatest sprinters of their time - Boyle, Richter, Gohr, Ashford, Stecher


    and the finish. Boyle not far back despite her poor start.

    Leave a comment:

  • paulthefan
    Senior Member

  • paulthefan
    replied
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    be still my heart!

    Leave a comment:

  • Mennisco
    Senior Member

  • Mennisco
    replied
    Originally posted by Vault-emort
    Boyle's best time in Montreal was her (non-altitude) PB of 11.22. It's worth remembering that in the 100m final she was charged with a false start (there was at least one more if I recall - maybe from Brit Andrea Lynch) and Raelene got away badly when the field got away legally.
    Thanks for pointing that out. I sure wish we could see reaction times in the sprints from that era, plus 100 splits in the 200s. Raelene was trailing Stecher by how much coming off the bend in Munich? The one sound bite I have always remembered since being 11 years old and watching the Munich final is ...."AND here comes Raelene Boyle!! "

    That woman had more star power in her personality than a dozen American and Jamaican sprinters, not counting Merlene Ottey or Flojo [but then Flojo just does not count, period....]

    Leave a comment:

  • Mennisco
    Senior Member

  • Mennisco
    replied
    Originally posted by AS
    The problem with all of this discussion is the issue of exceptionalism...

    The gist of the problem appears to be that somehow Australian athletics has "failed" for not producing another Raelene Boyle...

    The same could be said for a lot of nations
    Oh yes, the United States has failed miserably for never producing a single Raelene Boyle, while manufacturing a zillion porn stars with amazing legs.

    :wink:

    Leave a comment:

  • eldrick
    Senior Member

  • eldrick
    replied
    give her 11.15 then - bad start normally doesn't cost you more than 1/10th, unless it's absolutely appalling

    that gives a limit of 21.75

    most even energy distribution to do this is

    "straight 100m" effort on curve + 0.20 or 0.25 s for the curve + flying equivalent of same "sraight" 100m on stretch, which is 1.0s slower = 21.75

    -> straight 100m + 0.20 or 0.25 + straight 100m - 1.0 = 21.75

    -> straight 100m = ~ 11.25 - 11.275s

    this means for a 11.15 gal she had to put in this "effort" on the curve ( about 0.10 - 0.125s off her pb ) & same again on the stretch

    it can be done on the curve, but you can't do it on the stretch after

    look at mj's 19.32 :

    10.12 + 9.20

    i give him maybe 9.87 ability that day & maybe 0.15s for gentler modern curves - that's 9.87 + 0.15s = 10.02 possible fastest on the curve ( about 0.10s off the 10.12 split he ran & comparable to above ) - however, he came back in the stretch in 9.20, which is an open 100 of ~ 10.20 ( over 3/10ths off his possible 100m pb )

    situation for bolt's 19.30 is even more dramatic : 9.96 + 9.34

    he had 9.69pb ( call it 9.60 with no celebrating & better RT )

    he ran a 9.96 split, which with 0.15s for curve is ~ 9.81 effort, or more than 0.20s off his 100m pb

    he runs the stretch in 9.34 which is an open 100m of ~ 10.34 !

    bottom line, you can't run within ~1/10th effort of your 100m pb on the curve & same again on the stretch

    Leave a comment:

  • Vault-emort
    Senior Member

  • Vault-emort
    replied
    Originally posted by Mennisco
    Originally posted by eldrick

    she didn't break 11.2 in that meet...........21.7 can't be done off 11.2
    I agree, 21.7 is a far stretch. But she said herself she had trained exclusively for the 200, and 100 champion Richter said the Germans considered her the favorite for the 200. Her 11.23 in the dead air of Montreal with a 0.0 wind was sufficiently better than her 11.23 in Munich to project a significant improvement over the '72 22.45; she'd likely have won the gold with ~ 22.30, or maybe even a WR.
    Boyle's best time in Montreal was her (non-altitude) PB of 11.22. It's worth remembering that in the 100m final she was charged with a false start (there was at least one more if I recall - maybe from Brit Andrea Lynch) and Raelene got away badly when the field got away legally.

    Leave a comment:

  • eldrick
    Senior Member

  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    Elliot was a giant in any era... he would be a 1500m champ today, and he never reached his potential.
    he certainly was a giant & unbeaten, but his era was weak - his 3'35.6 on cinders is maybe 3'31.8 on synthetic ( off 1s/lap improvement )

    i woudn't have backed him against snell who was probably a 3'30 guy, keino who's mexico run musta been 3'30 at sea-level & certainly not ryun who was worth 3'27/3'28 in '67

    he'd have had a helluva battle with vassala who had 1'44-speed & apparently looked unbeatable in '72, but didn't run a really fast paced 1500

    i doubt he wouda beaten walker in '76 who claimed he couda run 3'31 in the final ( or was it 3'30 ? )

    he wasn't going to beat coe in '80/'84, nor cacho a 3'28.9 guy in '92 nor obviously morceli nor ngeny ( 3'43 ) nor hicham nor ramzi ( his prelim looked to show 3'28 ability )

    only guy he wouda definitely beaten was rono in '88

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X