Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Men's Performance Of The Year

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by DrJay
    Originally posted by Marlow
    ...and the helium enema to make him lighter! :roll:
    Them'd be some funny soundin' farts!

    Oh, I'd vote for the 200, though the OG marathon might be a close second. Hard to compare the two, apples and oranges.
    LOL ...that's the funniest fart joke i've laughed at for years.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Mighty Favog
      Henry Rono, 1978: #2 (13:08.4), #3 (8:05.4), #4 (27:22.5) and #5 (7:32.1)
      OK, I'll ask - what was the numero uno performance that year?

      Comment


      • #48
        My guess is 8:05; it will still get you a medal in the Olympics even with a fast race. Note that it is still better than the AR while all of the others have been beaten by Americans.

        Comment


        • #49
          [quote=bad hammy]
          Originally posted by "Mighty Favog":2lm7ew5n
          Henry Rono, 1978: #2 (13:08.4), #3 (8:05.4), #4 (27:22.5) and #5 (7:32.1)
          OK, I'll ask - what was the numero uno performance that year?[/quote:2lm7ew5n]

          I thought the same thing. I'm guessing Yashchenko HJ. Schmidt DT? Riehm HT?

          In retrospect, I can't think of any field event mark that should have been in the top two at least.

          Comment


          • #50
            [quote=bad hammy]
            Originally posted by "Mighty Favog":3soylsgu
            Henry Rono, 1978: #2 (13:08.4), #3 (8:05.4), #4 (27:22.5) and #5 (7:32.1)
            OK, I'll ask - what was the numero uno performance that year?[/quote:3soylsgu]

            2.35m - that would be 7' something

            Comment


            • #51
              [quote=marknhj]
              Originally posted by bad hammy
              Originally posted by "Mighty Favog":200any06
              Henry Rono, 1978: #2 (13:08.4), #3 (8:05.4), #4 (27:22.5) and #5 (7:32.1)
              OK, I'll ask - what was the numero uno performance that year?
              2.35m - that would be 7' something [/quote:200any06]
              No, that would be weak!

              Comment


              • #52
                200m without a doot.

                And I was shot down for suggesting that record would go so that makes it even sweeter! 8-)

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by mojo
                  And I was shot down for suggesting that record would go so that makes it even sweeter! 8-)
                  Yeah, I am also on record around here multiple times indicating that 19.32 was not the all-time outlier that many/most thought it was.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Men's Performance Of The Year

                    Originally posted by gh
                    So the question is, if you had a vote, would it be for Bolt's 100 or 200?
                    I just have to go with the 100. The manner in which Bolt performed in that race is the most stunning thing I have ever witnessed in sports.

                    Sure he beat MJ's incredible 19.32 but after the 100 that was not totally unexpected. Maybe I would have felt differently had he run the 200 first but the way it is I just can't get past that 100.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Men's Performance Of The Year

                      Originally posted by Per Andersen
                      Originally posted by gh
                      So the question is, if you had a vote, would it be for Bolt's 100 or 200?
                      I just have to go with the 100. The manner in which Bolt performed in that race is the most stunning thing I have ever witnessed in sports.

                      Sure he beat MJ's incredible 19.32 but after the 100 that was not totally unexpected. Maybe I would have felt differently had he run the 200 first but the way it is I just can't get past that 100.
                      Good point Per. The 100 came first and in that sense was the most shocking.
                      phsstt!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        [quote=bad hammy][quote=marknhj]
                        Originally posted by "bad hammy":38e01tol
                        Originally posted by "Mighty Favog":38e01tol
                        Henry Rono, 1978: #2 (13:08.4), #3 (8:05.4), #4 (27:22.5) and #5 (7:32.1)
                        OK, I'll ask - what was the numero uno performance that year?
                        2.35m - that would be 7' something [/quote:38e01tol]
                        No, that would be weak![/quote:38e01tol]The link in my post takes you to:
                        1978 1 Yashchenko, Vladimir URS 2.35 HJ

                        Some of these don't make a whole lot of sense in retrospect.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Mighty Favog
                          The link in my post takes you to:
                          1978 1 Yashchenko, Vladimir URS 2.35 HJ

                          Some of these don't make a whole lot of sense in retrospect.
                          Perhaps some don't, but IMO this one does. Nowadays 2.35 will get you farther than 8:05 and A LOT farther than 13:08 or 27:22.
                          Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Easily the 200. The 100 record is vulnerable to being broken by Asafa and Gay (and Bolt himself, of course) as early as next year, but nobody on the scene today except Bolt will break 19.30.

                            And even Bolt himself might never break 19.30, given how history has shown that the greatest 200m performances are usually never subsequently approached by those who did them ... not Tommie Smith, not Mennea, not Mike Marsh, not MJ, not Fredericks, not X-man, not Spearmon.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              200
                              Period
                              why don't people pronounce vowels anymore

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I've still not come to any inner peace on this subject; I can't find a good enough reason to separate the 100 and 200 yet (although I'll have to when I vote because we don't allow ties).... of course, that may be my vote for No. 2: I'm turning into one of those that thinks the Wanjiru run may indeed be the most impressive.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X