Top Americans on World A-T Lists

[James Fields]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

To the list of sources for aaronk compilations, consider including this website:

http://www.alltime-athletics.com/

I've been providing data to that site for just one event (Women's Steeplechase) since the 1990s and am awed by how much listmeister Peter Larsson displays overall -- and quickly.

[Powell]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Not sure (Can't remember!), but maybe I just felt that EVERYBODY had Top 25 lists, so I wanted to be different.

Wouldn't it make more sense to try to do better than everybody and do a top 26 list? :P

[aaronk]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

What's the significance of the number 24? :wink:

When I first started my book, in the 60's...and maybe even when I re-started it in the mid-70's, I had my lists at Top 25.

Not sure (Can't remember!), but maybe I just felt that EVERYBODY had Top 25 lists, so I wanted to be different.
Then I came up with a NAME for my lists....Double Dandy Dozen (DDD)....and that was that!!

But, as I said, sometimes the list goes longer than 24 because of ties.

ADD: It could also be because my favorite baseball player was/is Willie Mays, who wore # 24.
And my birthday is June 24th!

[Powell]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

What's the significance of the number 24? :wink:

[aaronk]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Where does Rock's 44.35 for Silver in Helsinki place him?

My book has just the top 24 performers per event.
However, I checked my 2013 Athletics Annual, and found Andrew Rock's PR of 44.35 at # 36......as of the end of 2012!!
That's on the World list.
On my USA list, #24 is a tie at 44.34.
So I'm assuming that Rock's PR would place him # 26 on the A-T USA list!!

[26mi235]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Where does Rock's 44.35 for Silver in Helsinki place him?

[aaronk]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Really interesting stuff; thanks for posting it. How long have you been keeping this? Would be fun to compare the current list to those from other decades.

I started my T&F Record Book in the 60's.
But during my hippie years, I lost it!
So, about 1973, I started the whole thing over again...from scratch.....doing all the meticulous research....going through EVERY results agate and list in EVERY issue of T&FN....and that was just for starters!!

In the beginning (in the 70's, I mean), I had even MORE records than I do now.
I used to have (but have since eliminated) records for best HS marks, by state!!
In other words, best mile for a North Dakota or Alabama boy or girl, etc etc.
Also had collegiate bests....by individual college....such as best marks by a UCLA or LSU athlete.
Also used to have road lists, other than the marathon.

But it was just too much work, so I trimmed it down a bit.
Yet my book is STILL over 500 pages!!!

As for comparing marks by decade, that IS possible!!
See Roberto Quercetani's book, Athletics: A History of Modern Track and Field Athletics (1860-2000).
It has a GREAT appendix of marks and lists, including the best marks BY DECADE!!
EXCELLENT book, well-written, as complete as can be, and covers ALL events, men and women, up through 2000!!
(Buy it through Amazon for the cheapest prices!!)

[aaronk]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

"NOTE: I include ALL Chinese marks on my World lists!"

I was curious about this so I compared TF&N's AT lists with IAAF's. The first does NOT include the 1993 and 1997 marks by Chinese athletes (just looking at 1,500 for now) but the latter does. I'd be interested to know your rationale for including them, since they obviously are huge outliers.

My Record Book was (and is) compiled from marks gathered from various sources:
T&FN
Athletics Annuals
FAST Annuals
HS Track editions
various other sources

All the above....EXCEPT T&FN......includes the 1993-97 Chinese marks on their A-T lists, and as WR's, where they prevail.

Same for Flojo's 10.49.
Despite strong doubts about that mark, FAST and AA have that as the WR.

Unless and until the Chinese marks and Flojo's 10.49 are deemed by ALL sources as ILLEGAL (for whatever reason!!), I will include them on my lists too......however reluctantly!!

BTW, you could say the same for all or most of the Eastern European throws marks (SP, DT, HT) from the 80's!!

[ridge004]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Really interesting stuff; thanks for posting it. How long have you been keeping this? Would be fun to compare the current list to those from other decades.

[huntinwr]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

"NOTE: I include ALL Chinese marks on my World lists!"

I was curious about this so I compared TF&N's AT lists with IAAF's. The first does NOT include the 1993 and 1997 marks by Chinese athletes (just looking at 1,500 for now) but the latter does. I'd be interested to know your rationale for including them, since they obviously are huge outliers.

[huntinwr]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

"our women are really bad from 800 to the marathon."

Well, maybe now there is someone who can change that! I'm sure I don't need to name her

[aaronk]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Hello Aaronk.
First,as much as I maliciously enjoy needling you about Mary Cain (because you never fail to bite), I enjoy your posts because of the great repository of the data and information you share with all of us.

Second, thanks for this info. I enjoyed reading it and recognising some of the athletes I had the privilege of knowing and competing with.

The USA is VERY strong in the 100, 200, and 400

Third, perhaps the US is not quite as strong as you think in the men's 100

100-------Gay (2nd), Carter (5th),.......

You might want to reconsider Nesta Carter's wearing of the Stars and Stripes.

You're right about Nesta Carter.
While typing, I was going mostly by my World list, extrapoling American names off of that, rather than going back and forth between the World and USA lists.
My error!! ops:
Also, I MIGHT have been thinking of XAVIAR Carter, who is on the 200 list!! He's NOT on the USA (or World) 100 list!! (Top 24!)
In my record book, which is entirely handwritten, I use mostly just LAST names (to speed things up!)....sometimes with a first name initial......so that's another reason I mistook Xaviar for Nesta.....or vice versa!!

[Tuariki]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Given the relative success of male throwers there is no genetic biological reason for not having good female throwers. So what is the reason. I think there are two reasons.
Probably the main reason is that while men who are huge and powerful are in the USA generally admired and/or encouraged it is the exact opposite for females.
The second reason is that there was not a USA Government sponsored (forced sponsorship) that identified genetically large females and enrolled them into a mandatory feeding programme.

[Tuariki]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Hello Aaronk.
First,as much as I maliciously enjoy needling you about Mary Cain (because you never fail to bite), I enjoy your posts because of the great repository of the data and information you share with all of us.

Second, thanks for this info. I enjoyed reading it and recognising some of the athletes I had the privilege of knowing and competing with.

The USA is VERY strong in the 100, 200, and 400

Third, perhaps the US is not quite as strong as you think in the men's 100

100-------Gay (2nd), Carter (5th),.......

You might want to reconsider Nesta Carter's wearing of the Stars and Stripes.

[aaronk]

Re: Top Americans on World A-T Lists

Conclusions......all of which, I'm sure, are already known to most of you, and/or pretty easy to figure out or assume.

Men (Outdoor)

The USA is VERY strong in the 100, 200, and 400.
Our middle distances are VERY weak, even in the mile, where we were once dominant.
The distances are even worse, while both hurdles are excellent!
In the field events, we're best in the LJ and SP.
We're weakest in the JT and HT, with the rest in the mid-ranges.

Men (Indoor)

Again, we're strongest in the 3 flat sprints and the hurdles.
From the 800 to the 5K, we're best in the "American" events, the 1 and 2 mile, but even there, we're not at all dominant.
In field events, we dominate the WT, which is rarely held outside our borders, and are strong in the LJ and SP.
We're okay, but could be better, in the HJ, PV, and TJ.

Women (outdoor)

Our women are excellent in the 100 and 200.....but why not also the 400??
Except for the USA-centric 2 mile, our women are really bad from 800 to the marathon.
We're excellent in the 100H, and good in the long hurdles.
We have 4 women in the PV, but 3 to zero in the rest of the field/multi events!

Women (Indoor)

Same as outdoors, we dominate the lists for the 60 and 200, but are infrequent visitors on the 400 list!
We''re also pretty good in the 60H, though nowhere near as strong as on the 100H list outdoors!!
The 800 to the 5K are not good, except, again, for the "American" 2 mile.
We completely rule the WT, with the PV and LJ getting 4, the HJ 3, with the TJ and SP being shutouts for the "other side"!!