Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jelmini =HSR in discus, now HSR plus #2 shot

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by highjumpfan
    Also safe to say single greatest one day throws double in HS regardless of Gender. In fact probably single greatest any one day double in HS. Can any one think of a better one?
    There was a guy back in 1933 at the Chicago National Interscholastics on Jun 17.

    Ran HSR 9.4 100y (2nd on the HS all-time list at the time was Frank Wykoff 9.5 in 1928), HSR 20.7 220 straight (2nd HS atl 20.8 200m Wykoff '28), and #2 performance ever in the long jump (24-9 5/8, behind his own record set earlier that year of 24-11 1/4; #2 HS atl was Eddie Hamm 24-2 1/2 '24).

    The guy was named Jesse Owens.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by balzonia
      Originally posted by gh
      Being good in two events doesn't magically transform someone into the greatest. There are many (many-many) HS athletes who still rate far above her. What an incredible piece of overblown hyperbole!
      With all due respect she isn't "good" in two events...

      She is the best ever in the history of USA HS athletics in one event and #2 in another. How many others are even in the top ten of two different events? (I hope the stat guys can answer that for me? I am actually curious...)

      When you demean the best performance in history to "good" that illustrates some bias against the discipline... it is patronizing.

      Additionally, the Shot and Discus are often lumped together as "similar events" and therefore discounted when someone is "good" in both. They are as similar as the Long Jump and the High Jump. These disciplines are much more different than, say, the 100 and 200 or 1600 and 3200.

      It is disappointing and borderline offensive when the Bible of the Sport refers to a national record performance and a #2 national performance as "good."

      (edited to clarify last paragraph)
      Performances have to be rated according to how they match up to other performances. Having two top ATB in events that the US is traditionallly weak in hardly counts. Without even looking this up I absolutely bet that Russia alone has a dozen+ girls(young ladies) who have exceeded these performances. Ask anybody on this board what girls performances are better and I guarantee you'll get a consensus that there are many. Just off the top of my head: 100,200,400,800,LJ,HJ, 100H,400H are intrinsically better.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by balzonia
        Imagine how many internet servers would explode if Hasay ran the #1 time in the 1600 and the #2 time in the 3200... Let's give this thrower her due respect!
        Hasay already is the number one US HS four-lapper and number two US HS eight-lapper of all time. And Jimini is definitely the greatest female US HS thrower of all time.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by bad hammy
          Hasay already is the number one US HS four-lapper and number two US HS eight-lapper of all time. And Jimini is definitely the greatest female US HS thrower of all time.
          Well put. Jimini is indeed a phenom, but the US has many other HS phenoms at this or higher level, and as pointed out, so do other nations. There is no reason to try and quantify it more than that. There's plenty of room at the top!!

          Comment


          • #35
            Having two top ATB in events that the US is traditionallly weak in hardly counts. Without even looking this up I absolutely bet that Russia alone has a dozen+ girls(young ladies) who have exceeded these performances. Ask anybody on this board what girls performances are better and I guarantee you'll get a consensus that there are many. Just off the top of my head: 100,200,400,800,LJ,HJ, 100H,400H are intrinsically better.
            Really? Forgive my skepticism but 190'+ isn't better than (or at least equal to) 6'4" in the high jump? or 50.6 in the 400? Someone with more time than I have (or a great memory) can look at the results of major international competitions and see where 190' would have placed relative to 6'4" or 50.6

            In "relative terms" it is also important to realize that the field events (the technical events) will always trail the running times for "relative strength." It takes nearly a decade to build any highly substantial technical proficiency in the field events. Efficient running takes much less time to develop so the women who run will have distinct advantage in any "relative comparison" in regards to stopwatch events vs. tape measure events at the HS level.

            Traditional weakness has nothing to do with the ultimate mark. For arguments sake, let's say the girls' Hammer is the "weakest" record on the HS books. If a girl throws 220' (which would be comparable to the 190' DT mark), that takes nothing away from the new HT record.

            By your logic, the level of competition should be considered when a record is set. If a girl runs 10.8 in the 100m and second place runs 13.4 in the same race, the 10.8 would be less impressive than if the second place runner ran 11.1. I don't agree.

            As for the Eastern Bloc analysis/comparison, I posted a question in the historical board asking what some other 18 year old ladies from around the globe have done in the past for perspective on Jelmini's accomplishments.

            Obviously Ilke Wyludda comes to mind but when discussing Eastern Euro womens throws one would be naive not to consider the PED issue. How many comparable women have been developed in Europe in the past 8-10 years (or since the end of the systematic drug days)?

            Comment


            • #36
              For a little background info, here's the profile Az St did when she signed with them

              http://thesundevils.cstv.com/sports/c-t ... 09aah.html

              Comment


              • #37
                Story from the Bakersfield paper:

                http://www.bakersfield.com/news/sports/ ... n-shot-put

                Comment


                • #38
                  Putting it into the global context Jelmini's 57.40m (or thereabouts) would have ranked her in the following positions in recent years for juniors (i.e. under 20) and amongst HSers (i'm going with anyone who isn't 19 or over):

                  2008: 1, 1
                  2007: 4, 2 (top marks: 60.47, 57.58)
                  2006: =4, =2 (60.63, 60.63)
                  2005: 4, 4 (58.88, 58.88)
                  2004: 5, 1 (58.85, 56.06)
                  2003: 3, 3 (60.20, 60.20)
                  2002: 4, 2 (62.54, 58.85)
                  2001: 5, 3 (59.97, 58.65)

                  She is worth getting excited about, and what also becomes apparent from the lists is that junior success in this event has translated pretty well in recent years. Two of the more prominent early achievers on these rankings have kept it up as they transitioned to senior ranks (although moreso with with the first one):

                  Dani Samuels (born 26 May 1988
                  2009 62.69
                  2008 62.95 9th OG
                  2007 60.47 13th WC
                  2006 60.63 3rd CG, 1st WJ
                  2005 58.52 1st WY

                  Xuejen Ma (26 March 1985)
                  2009 60.55
                  2008 61.92 23rd OG
                  2007 62.57 9th WC
                  2006 65.00
                  2005 61.87
                  2004 57.85 1st WJ
                  2003 60.20
                  2002 58.85 1st WJ
                  2001 58.65 1st WY

                  The SP (16.58) is less impressive, just cracking #9 last year (#5 amongst 18yos) and almost 3m down on #1, and 2m on #2...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I see she rates a wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Jelmini

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by balzonia
                      Additionally, the Shot and Discus are... as similar as the Long Jump and the High Jump.

                      :!:

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Half Miler
                        Originally posted by balzonia
                        Additionally, the Shot and Discus are... as similar as the Long Jump and the High Jump.
                        :!:
                        I appreciate the difference between the SP/DT and HJ/LJ, but you'll find many more SP/DT combos than you will HJ/LJ. It's more akin to LJ/TJ. Scan the HS and college results and you'll often see the same names on the leaderboard of the SP/DT and LJ/TJ, but far fewer on the HJ/LJ.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Borrowing your pet phrase, zackly!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by balzonia
                            [
                            Really? Forgive my skepticism but 190'+ isn't better than (or at least equal to) 6'4" in the high jump? or 50.6 in the 400? Someone with more time than I have (or a great memory) can look at the results of major international competitions and see where 190' would have placed relative to 6'4" or 50.6
                            If we're assumedly comparing a HS Discus, then there is a big difference. 50.6 would have been 10th best last year for Senior women, while 6'4 would have also have been 10th best (performance) for seniors. A 57m discus senior throw wouldn't have been in top 45. So a HS implement puts her way down.

                            n "relative terms" it is also important to realize that the field events (the technical events) will always trail the running times for "relative strength." It takes nearly a decade to build any highly substantial technical proficiency in the field events. Efficient running takes much less time to develop so the women who run will have distinct advantage in any "relative comparison" in regards to stopwatch events vs. tape measure events at the HS level.
                            Subjective, irrelevant argument. By this argument a "developing" athlete is better than an "arrived" athlete. We're dealing with the here and now not the future.

                            Traditional weakness has nothing to do with the ultimate mark. For arguments sake, let's say the girls' Hammer is the "weakest" record on the HS books. If a girl throws 220' (which would be comparable to the 190' DT mark), that takes nothing away from the new HT record.
                            A mark can be compared to other marks in the same age range. A 10th best mark in an event beats a 50+ mark.

                            By your logic, the level of competition should be considered when a record is set. If a girl runs 10.8 in the 100m and second place runs 13.4 in the same race, the 10.8 would be less impressive than if the second place runner ran 11.1. I don't agree.
                            Have no clue what your arguing here. I could care less how much someone wins by. It's the intrinsic mark that matters.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by jeremyp
                              If we're assumedly comparing a HS Discus, then there is a big difference. 50.6 would have been 10th best last year for Senior women, while 6'4 would have also have been 10th best (performance) for seniors. A 57m discus senior throw wouldn't have been in top 45. So a HS implement puts her way down.
                              I presumed HS women threw a senior discus (as do junior women globally): 1 kg.

                              The 2009 US lists would seem to support this:

                              http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/lists/ ... &year=2009

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                If we're assumedly comparing a HS Discus, then there is a big difference. 50.6 would have been 10th best last year for Senior women, while 6'4 would have also have been 10th best (performance) for seniors. A 57m discus senior throw wouldn't have been in top 45. So a HS implement puts her way down.
                                FYI... HS women throw the exact same implement as international and collegiate female athletes... the list I see here:
                                http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/lis...id=W&year=2008
                                puts Jelmini as the #10 DT in the senior division with 6'4 and 50.6 also 10th... I don't know on what list you see 50.6 and 6'4 as 10th and 58m (190'4") as 45th. I guess my gut feeling was dead on! I love it when that happens...

                                A mark can be compared to other marks in the same age range. A 10th best mark in an event beats a 50+ mark.
                                I have no idea what you are saying here...

                                [/quote] I could care less how much someone wins by. It's the intrinsic mark that matters.[/quote]

                                I completely agree the intrinsic mark is what matters. That is why I have no idea why you would opine that:
                                "Having two top ATB in events that the US is traditionallly weak in hardly counts." (sic)

                                You demeaned Jelmini's marks by saying they "hardly count." Another patronizing comment that clearly illustrates a lack of appreciation for the magnitude of these performances likely due to ignorance of the events contested. Fair enough...

                                BTW, I appreciate all the comments in this thread even if I disagree with many.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X