Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • leoesharkey
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Her strength and power was legendary, the only east german athlete male or female to fail a drug test for steroids. A world class male shotputter from the old DDR told me she could squat and pull heavy heavy weights and bench press 200kg plus.

    Leave a comment:


  • lapsus
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Just referencing a story supposedly told by one of the (lesser) male shotputters of the time about Slupianek's strength. These things of course tend to grow in the retelling, and I don't know how many retellings were involved before I heard of it :mrgreen:

    Leave a comment:


  • nianchengyu
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Originally posted by lapsus
    Adams would have beat Fibingerová in '83 and lost on countback to Lisovskaya in '87. Only Ilona "19+ meters with men's shot" Slupianek in '80 and Natalya Lisovskaya in '88 would have outclassed her, but 21.24 would still have been enough for a bronze and a silver. 22 meters wasn't usual in global championships even in the 70s and 80s.
    Only Ilona slupianek"19+ meters with men's shot" is impossible,over 17.50m or maybe 18m .

    Leave a comment:


  • Alan Shank
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Of course, Jillian is a graduate of Woodland High School, where I live, so I was screaming "Woodland Wolves" at her, totally pointlessly of course. Her marriage was a big event in Woodland, covered extensively in the Woodland Democrat, our local rag. I'm sure the Dem had more track coverage this week than in its entire previous history. Unfortunately, when we left my wife had our Democrat delivery suspended, so I won't see it.

    When she threw the 20.18, I thought she had a good shot at a medal if she could just get 20 again. She threw a "Q" on her first put in qualifying, so she was ready. After her second two puts were not too good and she was down to 5th or so, I was worried, but when she went 20.02 I thought she had a great shot at it. I wasn't surprised to see Ostapchuk pass her, but Gong was the big threat. I went berserk when Gong's last throw fell short.

    She was a pretty fair discus thrower in HS, too.
    Cheers,
    Alan Shank
    Woodland, CA, USA

    Leave a comment:


  • Alan Shank
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams defends w/ WL

    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by 26mi235
    Originally posted by CookyMonzta
    Having seen some of those stats, I think Dwight erred on his assertion of Adams' throw being the longest throw this century. There's a 21.46 (70-5) entry from Larisa Peleshenko in Moscow in 2000, to go with Ostapchuk's more recent indoor 71-footer.
    21st Century starts 1/1/2001, not 1/1/2000, despite what common 'preference' is (either that or one of the centuries had only 99 years, but what is more important, some preference or the definition of a century?). [I understand your point, and it is valid, if not without debate.]
    The dictionary clearly defines a century as a period of 100 years. 1852-1961 was a century, for example.

    So when the common man talks "centuries" he doesn't care about the historical starting point, he cares only for what makes the most sense, and that's a 100-year period in which all the years start with the same two numbers. In this case 20.

    Notice the original post, not written for a convention if mathematicians, doesn't say "21st century" it says "this century." It's spot-on.
    Sorry, gh, I disagree. If a century is any 100-year period, then a century begins every second, or microsecond, or whatever the quantum of time is, if any. If you use the term that loosely, you could say it's the longest in this century every throw, i.e. in the century that just began.

    Your "common man" definition including the "same first two numbers" is totally arbitrary, certainly not in the dictionary definition you provided. I think most people, when hearing "this century", are thinking 21st century, which began 1/1/2001.

    In any case, it's a hell of a good put!
    Cheers,
    Alan Shank
    Woodland, CA, USA

    Leave a comment:


  • Powell
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Is JCW the first ever female spinner to go over 20 meters?

    And don't you think she could be throwing even better if she lost a bit of the bulk?

    Leave a comment:


  • Ned Ryerson
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams defends w/ WL

    Originally posted by gh
    So when the common man talks "centuries" he doesn't care about the historical starting point, he cares only for what makes the most sense, and that's a 100-year period in which all the years start with the same two numbers. In this case 20.
    It's also a common belief that the lunar phases are a result of the Earth castiung it's shadow on the Moon. But the proclivity of an idea does not, by itself, substantiate the idea as being fact. Dwight's statement was correct.

    I was elated by both the winning mark, and JCW's well earned medal. That's a huge accomplishment for US women's shot putting, a feat I hope she can replicate next year. During the international English broadcast, Paul Diuckenso and Peter Matthews were musing on what could be thrown wuith a heavier implement. Is there any movement to introduce one?

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Originally posted by lapsus
    Adams would have beat Fibingerová in '83 and lost on countback to Lisovskaya in '87. Only Ilona "19+ meters with men's shot" Slupianek in '80 and Natalya Lisovskaya in '88 would have outclassed her, but 21.24 would still have been enough for a bronze and a silver. 22 meters wasn't usual in global championships even in the 70s and 80s.
    Was the somewhat diminished marks in the champs due to it being one of the places where testing WAS done (out-of-competition testing started after 1988, right?).

    Leave a comment:


  • BCBaroo
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Every time I see video of JCW's smile upon securing the bronze it makes me smile.
    And what makes me smile even more was seeing how happy she was for Adam's big throw.
    Honestly, it's that sort camaraderie and good natured competition that made me fall in love with this sport as a high schooler.
    Thank you women SPers!

    Leave a comment:


  • Moura
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Excellent results on this event and an extraordinary fight for the podium with the exception of first place. Would Adams reach 22m? How many athletes will achieve 20m in 2012? These are good questions for next year. Adams seems unreachable but the other athletes are improving (european, american, chinese), this event promise a lot. My "plus" goes to Adams, my "minus" goes to Mikhnevich (I expected more from her).

    Leave a comment:


  • lapsus
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    Adams would have beat Fibingerová in '83 and lost on countback to Lisovskaya in '87. Only Ilona "19+ meters with men's shot" Slupianek in '80 and Natalya Lisovskaya in '88 would have outclassed her, but 21.24 would still have been enough for a bronze and a silver. 22 meters wasn't usual in global championships even in the 70s and 80s.

    Leave a comment:


  • PCSExponent
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams defends w/ WL

    Originally posted by gh
    The dictionary clearly defines a century as a period of 100 years. 1852-1961 was a century, for example.... It's spot-on.
    Not to belabour the point, but, 1. You're obviously right, and, 2. the argument about a "missing year" or one century having had 99 years is clearly false. Extrapolation to the BOD of the alleged father of christianity leaves a FOUR year hole in the calendar; so if someone wants to walk around with a heavy object up their back-door and claim that the turn of the millennium was in 1/1/2001 rather than 1/1/2000, they might as well accept that it was actually in 1/1/1996.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams defends w/ WL

    Originally posted by 26mi235
    Originally posted by CookyMonzta
    Having seen some of those stats, I think Dwight erred on his assertion of Adams' throw being the longest throw this century. There's a 21.46 (70-5) entry from Larisa Peleshenko in Moscow in 2000, to go with Ostapchuk's more recent indoor 71-footer.
    21st Century starts 1/1/2001, not 1/1/2000, despite what common 'preference' is (either that or one of the centuries had only 99 years, but what is more important, some preference or the definition of a century?). [I understand your point, and it is valid, if not without debate.]
    The dictionary clearly defines a century as a period of 100 years. 1852-1961 was a century, for example.

    So when the common man talks "centuries" he doesn't care about the historical starting point, he cares only for what makes the most sense, and that's a 100-year period in which all the years start with the same two numbers. In this case 20.

    Notice the original post, not written for a convention if mathematicians, doesn't say "21st century" it says "this century." It's spot-on.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rog
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams 21.24 (69-8 1/4)

    I think Valerie is the athlete of the Worlds so far... we're not used to that level of performance from a female shot putter these days. I know in general that standards are down, but still that is the best championship shot result in decades.

    Leave a comment:


  • lefterisp
    replied
    Re: ¶2011 WC: wSP—Adams defends w/ WL

    Originally posted by bushop
    Originally posted by AS
    VALERIE!!!! Equals CR! 21.24!!!
    She's well on her way to T&F News Athlete of the Year... or not?
    quote]

    I was a fierce supporter of Ostapchuk last year for Athlete of the year until she lost the WCup. Adams is in a much better form this year (better than last year's Ostapchuk). If she can pull off one more 21m this year, she has my vote for sure.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X