A weak year for men's HJ? [split]

[mikli]

Also statistically 2008 was not a good year if one uses mid-late 80s / early 90s as a reference. As Powell pointed out above, if 2008 was a bad year, then the whole 2000s was, and that actually extends back to mid 90s.

[gh]

I agree - at the very top it's much weaker than it used to be. But gh, in his initial post, talked about depth.

I don't see I used the word "depth" anywhere. This thread was about it being a weak year, with the possibility (not probability) of a Russian 1-2-3.

All my statements were couched the from the frame of reference of who was going to be on the medal stand (or, by extension, who would end up in a top-10 formchart, although I didn't specifically state that).

From that viewpoint, "depth" is certainly not there. As specifically cited, a guy with four meets over 2.30 is considered "hot" at this point. The top end of the pyramid doesn't have much of a point.

[gm33]

compared to the 80s it is weak
but then you had Sotomayor, Sjoberg, Paklin, Avdeenko, Mogenburg...

still, i think it's in decent level, certainly not worse than last year...

[Powell]

I don't see I used the word "depth" anywhere. This thread was about it being a weak year, with the possibility (not probability) of a Russian 1-2-3.

But you used the number of people over 2.30 as a measure of quality of the season. That led me to think you were talking of depth, not just of the medal contenders.

[gh]

both! which is the point I was getting at.

Even if you're only at 2.30 at this point, it's not totally off the wall to think that you might earn a medal (at a higher height than that, of course).