Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • andyjgt
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

    In other words, Kelly Holmes won't get in before Daley Thompson.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

    I can't say so definitively, but I'm guessing the WR requirement is also one that applies only to this first class.

    Leave a comment:


  • mump boy
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

    Originally posted by Ned Ryerson
    Originally posted by gh
    OK, my bleating provoked a reaction. I'm now reliably informed that the 2-medal stricture applies only to this original class (of 24).

    (I still think they're wrong excluding Brumel from the first 12, but that's a matter of personal opinion)
    I think the WR requirement is what really throws this off. No Allen Johnson, even after an Olympic gold medal, four world outdoor titles and three world indoor titles? No Carolina Kluft? And virtually no women sprinters, middle distance runners or shot/discus gals that have had careers in the last two decades?
    those 2 aren't even the GOATs at their events but where's Irena ??

    Leave a comment:


  • Ned Ryerson
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

    Originally posted by gh
    OK, my bleating provoked a reaction. I'm now reliably informed that the 2-medal stricture applies only to this original class (of 24).

    (I still think they're wrong excluding Brumel from the first 12, but that's a matter of personal opinion)
    I think the WR requirement is what really throws this off. No Allen Johnson, even after an Olympic gold medal, four world outdoor titles and three world indoor titles? No Carolina Kluft? And virtually no women sprinters, middle distance runners or shot/discus gals that have had careers in the last two decades?

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

    not sure I'd make Cuthbert even first among my Aussie women (think Strickland-delaHunty). And if they wanted an Oceanian, way top of the heap is Snell (but he throws off the sex balance)

    Leave a comment:


  • Vault-emort
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    Originally posted by gh
    I have no problem with Wang as a Hall of Famer, but for her (and da Silva) (and maybe Bikila and Cuthbert) to be in the symbolic first class is indeed unsettling.
    I would have thought the only woman to have won Olympic golds in 100m, 200m and 400m - with world records at 60m, 200m, 220y and 440y - plus being a teenager when she won her first three Olympic gold medals - would have been a no-brainer for the first class category.

    5 of these 10 were in my Top 20 favourite athletes picks for our poll (though surprisingly not Cuthbert lol)

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

    OK, my bleating provoked a reaction. I'm now reliably informed that the 2-medal stricture applies only to this original class (of 24).

    (I still think they're wrong excluding Brumel from the first 12, but that's a matter of personal opinion)

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong? [Hall Of Fame]

    In working on my personal top 12, I discover that another of my potential candidates is ineligible. Merely the greatest high jumper ever, Valeriy Brumel!!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    in reading IAAF material more fully, I see they were up-front about the distribution of the first 24:

    <<These 24 athletes will represent all IAAF Areas and include all major event groups (sprint, middle distance, long distance, hurdles, jumps, throws, combined events, race walk, and road running)>>

    So there will by definition be a walker in the second 12.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    Originally posted by gh

    And if you're a WWII-era athlete, you get no OG chance through no fault of your own.

    So Dutch Warmerdam and Rudolf Harbig will never make the grade?!!!! The mind boggles.
    What pressing reason is there to have a HoF for track?

    Another reason these Hall of Fames are all pretty idiotic.

    Leave a comment:


  • preston
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    I have no problem with Wang! Battaglia is wrong for his muck-raking article and if I could be IAAF president for the year I would pull his accreditation as a journalist to show IAAF disproval. This type of "news" is worse than the drug announcements that gh despises because with no proof needed to sully an athletes reputation it makes ALL athletes dirty. As I said in a previous thread: there needs to be a spectators and journalist oath for the Games and WC.

    Anyway, where's Bob Mathias or Michael Johnson shouldn't they be first-ballot?

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    I'm still wrestling with who my 12 would be, but in thinking about that please tell me that the rules haven't legislated out somebody who might be in first dozen!

    I'm talking about requirement of having OG/WC titles.
    <<1) Athletes must have won at least two Olympic or World Championships gold medals AND at set least one World record,>>

    Forgetting for a minute the fact that they're treating them as equal, which they're certainly not, if you're from the pre-WC era the chance of two medals becomes excruciatingly tough.

    And if you're a WWII-era athlete, you get no OG chance through no fault of your own.

    So Dutch Warmerdam and Rudolf Harbig will never make the grade?!!!! The mind boggles.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    I have no problem with Wang as a Hall of Famer, but for her (and da Silva) (and maybe Bikila and Cuthbert) to be in the symbolic first class is indeed unsettling.

    One hopes that Monaco just wanted all its constituencies represented from the get-go but from now on we won't have a need for x% from each continent.

    Leave a comment:


  • guru
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    Originally posted by Ned Ryerson
    Originally posted by guru

    How can they have Wang and not Flo-Jo...
    Only one Joyner at a time.

    Well played!

    Leave a comment:


  • Ned Ryerson
    replied
    Re: which of these doesn't belong?

    Originally posted by guru
    Originally posted by Grasshopper
    Originally posted by gh
    Jesse Owens, Carl Lewis, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, Abebe Bikila, Paavo Nurmi, Emil Zatopek, Al Oerter, Adhemar da Silva, Ed Moses, Fanny Blankers-Koen, Betty Cuthbert and Wang Junxia.
    How can they have da Silva on there and not Saneyev?
    How can they have Wang and not Flo-Jo...
    Only one Joyner at a time.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X