Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2015 NCAA & USA Mens Decathlon/Multis

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • DecFan
    replied
    As stated above, I posted on Gunnar Nixon's facebook page back in September, "Can you update your fans on plans for 2016? We're hoping you'll be in the mix for the Olympic team." He replied Oct 19: "Update coming soon. And, yes, that's the goal."

    Leave a comment:


  • DecFan
    replied
    I'm fluent in both Imperial and metric at the elite level for most events. So tell me a PV is 20' or 6m, I don't care.

    But I know the PRs of most of the top decathletes in meters. And, without doing arithmetic in my head, I don't know what a 5.15m vault is in Imperial (or a 45m DT, or a 55m JT). So, for the multis, give me metric every time.

    And here I go continuing to divert a decathlon thread from its main subject. Shame on me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally Posted by Atticus
    It should be noted that both T&FN and TN report all marks in BOTH and have for a good while. It's only this message board, whose main demographic is Geezer-American, that continues so much in Imperial.
    You clearly don't sit in the stands with everyday fans much.
    I worded that poorly. I meant in the T&FN context. T&FN/TN is both; this site is heavily Imperial. Yes, I know that the hoi polloi are Imperialists! But . . . I'm betting that most post-collegiates are more comfy in metric. If you know this not to be true, I am ready to defer.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
    ….
    It should be noted that both T&FN and TN report all marks in BOTH and have for a good while. It's only this message board, whose main demographic is Geezer-American, that continues so much in Imperial.
    You clearly don't sit in the stands with everyday fans much.

    Leave a comment:


  • donley2
    replied
    I really did not want to get in the middle of another imperial versus metric discussion, but it is significant that Atticus is a high school coach and deals with feet and inches all the time in that role. Someone like myself, who is fairly rapidly approaching geezerdom (maybe not quite there yet) has an advantage in that I am almost solely a fan of elite/world level track and field. So after 30+ years of fandom and particularly in the last 15 to 20 years with the advent of real-time results on the internet being almost exclusively in metric, I am almost completely converted at this point.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by DecFan View Post
    Atticus, even this American appreciates the translation to metric.
    We've gone round and round on this subject, and while I always appreciate gh's gallant defenses of Imperial, he and are are dinosaurs. American T&F has got itself into a jam in this regard. All high school marks are in Imperial, but all college marks are metric. So the vast majority of USA T&F fans still think in feet, while the elite coming out of our farm system (NCAA) are very familiar with metric and most probably prefer it.
    I was born and raised in Imperial, but in the last 10 years, I have slowly been lured to the dark side and can 'feel' metric marks in the jumps, but not the throws, to any significant degree - I know exactly what a 70 vs. 71 vs. 72 vs 73 shot mark meets but 21.x, 22.x just means 'good' to me. In DT 220 - 225 - 230 MEANS something far more than 68 or 70 tells me. Similarly, 260 - 265 - 270 in HT and 280 - 285 - 290 in JT.

    I want my marks in Imperial and luckily for me, my co-dinosaur has my back, but I can hear the train-a-comin. When he and I shuffle off this mortal coil, most Ami marks will indeed be reported in metric. I shall endeavor to note both.

    It should be noted that both T&FN and TN report all marks in BOTH and have for a good while. It's only this message board, whose main demographic is Geezer-American, that continues so much in Imperial.

    Leave a comment:


  • olorin
    replied
    Originally posted by user4 View Post
    I think you have a typo on your 1500 numbers for ZZ.
    Thanks corrected (the improvement was from 5:19 to 4:56 - for a gain of 23 second).
    You are obviously entitle to your opinion (and I will be very happy if you will be right) but this type of improvement is very rare among decathletes. I think that ZZ if remains healthy can improve to ~8,350 points.

    Leave a comment:


  • DecFan
    replied
    Thanks, olorin. Great summary as usual. And, Atticus, even this American appreciates the translation to metric.

    Nixon really is a mystery. Nothing on his twitter feed, no update to his website, no Facebook posts since April (at that point he was hoping to compete at Gotzis, USATF, and Beijing). I posted on his Facebook timeline - we'll see if he replies.

    Leave a comment:


  • user4
    replied
    Originally posted by olorin View Post
    Need to keep some sort of objectivity when predicting these results.
    In 400 ZZ PB in 2012 was 51.52. today his PB is 49.89 for an improvement of 1.63. Yet you predict 1.69 in a single year.
    In the 100h he improved from 15.48 to 14.78 (0.7) yet you predict another 0.88 in a single year.
    In the 1,500 he improved from 3:19.93 to 3:16.66 or 23.27 second yet you predict another 26 second in one year.
    I think that ZZ is a great talent. But these seems to me as completely bias estimations.
    I think you have a typo on your 1500 numbers for ZZ.

    I have a lean guy with great balance and athleticism at 6'5" with 10.6 speed with a PR of 14.7, to me 13.9 is doable next year. It requires good coaching and intense practice. This is an olympic year, I expect big gains.

    Looking at his 400 trajectory it seems like an event that he never trained for until this year. How else to explain a 10.6/.7 dasher that runs a 51.X ?..Maybe his coach realized he was embarrassing himself and his athlete with that performance. His improvement this late summer says that he started to do something about it. I think he goes sub 49 for sure.

    Yes I am a bit biased but not completely.

    Leave a comment:


  • unclezadok
    replied
    I wonder if Harrison Williams might make a run at it. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where enough men ranked ahead of him don't finish and he improves enough to meet the qualifying mark.

    Leave a comment:


  • olorin
    replied
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post

    translated:
    LJ ~ 7.50
    DT ~ 50m
    PV ~ 5.20
    SP ~ 15.50-16.00
    HJ ~ 2.13 = PR
    JT ~ 68m
    Originally posted by Atticus View Post

    translated:
    LJ ~ 7.50
    DT ~ 50m
    PV ~ 5.20
    SP ~ 15.50-16.00
    HJ ~ 2.13 = PR
    JT ~ 68m
    Thanks for this atticus. Of course there was no intention to shame you but more to tell GH to stay away (which of course he ignored).
    Now back to the fun part...
    I would have thought that you will be more optimistic taking into account Scantling's fast pace of improvement in recent years. These predictions sound reasonable for me and will ensure that he will be a genuine contender come Eugene. I think that the DT and LJ are key events for Scantling as they add ~150 points to his fire power.
    As a side note - there were many reports about Eaton's ability to throw 50m since 2013 that didn't materialise until today.

    Leave a comment:


  • Atticus
    replied
    Originally posted by olorin View Post
    a personal request from someone that we share the same interest to make a little effort in order to make his posts more enjoyable for me. In short this is between me and atticus (which following his request I spent few hours doing the decathlon summary)
    You shame me, sir, and I entreat your forgiveness! Here you go (and thank you, gh, for defending my 'right' to speak in my own tongue)

    Originally posted by Atticus View Post
    Long Jump - mid-to-high 24
    DT - 160s (his nemesis - has been due for a big jump for a while, judging from some practice throws)
    PV - 17+
    SP - already over 50 feet, could nudge that up a little bit.
    HJ - his 6'11.75 PR is near his max, given his higher weight.
    JT - Already over 220. Could improve a little.
    translated:
    LJ ~ 7.50
    DT ~ 50m
    PV ~ 5.20
    SP ~ 15.50-16.00
    HJ ~ 2.13 = PR
    JT ~ 68m

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    if you call somebody out for "courtesy" on these forums it becomes very much my business.

    Leave a comment:


  • olorin
    replied
    Originally posted by gh View Post
    courtesy cuts both ways; why don't you give double measure when you quote meters? This is an American-centric board, after all.
    I thought that the universal language of T&F is in meters. Weird that this is coming from you gh.
    Regardless, this is not an opening to meters/Imperial debate but simply a personal request from someone that we share the same interest to make a little effort in order to make his posts more enjoyable for me. In short this is between me and atticus (which following his request I spent few hours doing the decathlon summary) and frankly not your concern.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    courtesy cuts both ways; why don't you give double measure when you quote meters? This is an American-centric board, after all.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X