Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

world-leading 217-2 for Brown Trafton

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Pego
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Miler
    Most likely his son, Sergey Jr., though I didn't know he was German.

    -edit: yep, same guy. lives and trains in Germany.
    Thank you. It sounded like that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Miler
    replied
    Most likely his son, Sergey Jr., though I didn't know he was German.

    -edit: yep, same guy. lives and trains in Germany.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pego
    replied
    Thank you.
    BTW, I just reviewed the latest e-tn. A German HT-er Litvinov is lited there. Any relation to Sergey?

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    yes..... i apparently inadvertently confused things when I said the original mark was one of three things. At that point only the English conversion had been reported. Any of those three metrics are possible from the tables.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pego
    replied
    Do I understand correctly that the actual measurement was metric with conversion into imperial? That would make sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by Pego
    Where is my error? It drives me nuts.
    Your error is in not realizing that every conversion actually represents a range of possible values. Do the maths on 66.21 and you'll find that it's well short of 217-3 and would therefore have to be converted to 217-2. Unless you know what the actual metric measurement was, you don't know what the proper conversion to feet and inches would be because .19, .20, and .21 would all give you a conversion to 217-2. As gh points out, the most likely conversion in each of those cases would be 217-2.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    metric conversion tables for track & field include a probability factor, since, for example, a throw of 66.21 could be as long as 66.219, which changes what the English was..... it's not a direct conversion, it's "most likely" what the English distance was, since it's not measured directly.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pego
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    details:

    DT: 1. Brown Trafton (Nik) 217-2 (66.21) PR (WL, AL) (3, 6 A) (205-9, 217-2, 213-2, 201-1, 209-10, f) (62.72, 66.21, 64.99, 61.30, 64.00, f);
    2. Powell (Asics) 203-0 (61.87) (203-0, 201-5, 201-4, 199-3, 200-9, 191-5) (612.87, 61.41, 61.38, 650.73, 61.20, 58.34);
    3. Gleeson (PBay) 179-2 (54.62).
    I am confused by 217-2 being calculated as 66.21.
    217 X 12 + 2 X 2.54=66.19

    Where is my error? It drives me nuts.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by gh
    from the story cited to begin with:

    << Though conditions were cool, the wind was mostly of the favorable variety for throwers, coming in from a quartering direction and serving to buffet the discs<<
    Is the writer telling us that they threw the discs and then served them for lunch?

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by jeremyp
    Originally posted by tandfman
    She had seven meets at 63m or better even before Beijing last year.
    But I think all of them were in USA. All I am saying is that I would reserve my opinion about where she stands in the World when she has a solid European season under her belt.
    And how, exactly, would she go about doing that? There are lots of competitive opportunities for her in the US. How many of the top meets in Europe have a women's discus throw? Not very many. Last year, not a single major meet in Europe (GL or SGP) had the event. I don't know if it will be any different this year. It's hard to have a "solid European season" in an event that is largely ignored by the meets that routinely attract Olympic gold medalists in other events.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by jjimbojames
    You do know that you putt the shot, not throw it, right - hence the name? :wink: The comment had nothing to do with golf!
    D'oh! You missed the joke. It's the Shot Put, not Putt. You don't putt a shot, you put it!

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by balzonia
    [...
    Also, in order for a wind to be productive, it has to be at a small window of right quartering (for a rightie). A crosswind, head wind, or tail wind (insert fart joke here) are all detrimental. Despite common belief, many discus rings are not set up for taking advantage of prevailing winds. ....
    from the story cited to begin with:

    <<After Powell-Roos opened at 203-0, Brown Trafton responded with her big throw. Though conditions were cool, the wind was mostly of the favorable variety for throwers, coming in from a quartering direction and serving to buffet the discs as they were propelled onto the FieldTurf surface of CSM's football field.

    "Conditions were really incredible," Powell-Roos said. "The setup is gorgeous. I was blown away by the scenic beauty and the wind was really nice today - perfect for throwers.">>

    Leave a comment:


  • jeremyp
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    She had seven meets at 63m or better even before Beijing last year.
    But I think all of them were in USA. All I am saying is that I would reserve my opinion about where she stands in the World when she has a solid European season under her belt.

    Leave a comment:


  • balzonia
    replied
    This is not to pick on SBT: my original premise was to point out that in the discus, perhaps more than any other event, you can't just take marks at face value.
    I completely understand what you are saying, but please do not assume that windy conditions automatically make for big throws. Throws in these conditions need to be appreciated in their own right, as throwing in windy conditions demands a specific set of skills. You don't just get in the ring and chuck it and miraculously gain 5-15%.

    The thrower has to adjust the attack angles, control the front edge of the discus, and manage to keep the "outside" edge low all while turning at top speed. Even in a perfect wind, any deviation from a perfect release will cause the disc to turnover and die early. Very early.

    Also, in order for a wind to be productive, it has to be at a small window of right quartering (for a rightie). A crosswind, head wind, or tail wind (insert fart joke here) are all detrimental. Despite common belief, many discus rings are not set up for taking advantage of prevailing winds.

    This is why there will never be an asterisk or "wind aided" designation to discus throws. Winds (even good ones) are not like a 6mps tail wind for a 100m runner or long jumper... They do not automatically lead to better results.

    Nice throw, Steph!

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    details:

    DT: 1. Brown Trafton (Nik) 217-2 (66.21) PR (WL, AL) (3, 6 A) (205-9, 217-2, 213-2, 201-1, 209-10, f) (62.72, 66.21, 64.99, 61.30, 64.00, f);
    2. Powell (Asics) 203-0 (61.87) (203-0, 201-5, 201-4, 199-3, 200-9, 191-5) (612.87, 61.41, 61.38, 650.73, 61.20, 58.34);
    3. Gleeson (PBay) 179-2 (54.62).

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X