Phil Shinnick confirmed as world long jump record holder

[Conor Dary]

Here is the WR book on it... so the decision was basically since the officials didn't bother to read the wind it should still count... no matter what...

[Conor Dary]

The first isn't true...

[Conor Dary]

In case those new to these message boards are wondering why this topic strikes a nerve with some posters, there is a long history going back 18 years here, including posts by Shinnick himself.

https://forum.trackandfieldnews.com/...expert-support

https://forum.trackandfieldnews.com/...merican-record

https://forum.trackandfieldnews.com/...3-world-record

https://forum.trackandfieldnews.com/...40-years-later

I remember all those...

[proofs in the pudd'in]

Well good for him!

[Tuariki]

Attention: GH

Greetings from the boondocks in the mountains north of Wellington

Tried to send a PM to you but not possible - but on reflection, for obvious reasons.

My friend who sent me the extracts of the Shinnick decision has just asked me to take down the posting of that decision as he says the decision is embargoed until 28 May 2021.

He didn't send me the whole decision, just the extracts I posted. And he didn't mention that it was embargoed.

I leave it up to you to decide what to do about the thread, although I don't see how it is possible to put this cat back in its cage.

[Conor Dary]

Well god for him!

Not sure how much God would care but that certainly would explain the decision.

[Powell]

But what does this decision mean in practical terms anyway? I don't believe WA publishes a WR progression on its website. The only place I have seen the official progression is the book that gets published every few years. I guess what they can do in the next edition is what they did with the 10.49, i.e. state it was officially recognized, but call BS on it. Here's an excerpt from the 2011 edition:

IMG_20210524_014958 (2).jpg

[Conor Dary]

But what does this decision mean in practical terms anyway? I don't believe WA publishes a WR progression on its website. The only place I have seen the official progression is the book that gets published every few years. I guess what they can do in the next edition is what they did with the 10.49, i.e. state it was officially recognized, but call BS on it. Here's an excerpt from the 2011 edition:

IMG_20210524_014958 (2).jpg

Yes I could see them doing that...

[proofs in the pudd'in]

Not sure how much God would care but that certainly would explain the decision.

Ha! Maybe he prayed for some help

[rhymans]

Assuming I'm still alive and well for the next edition, the Shinnick mark will be included, together with what I think is appropriate comment

[bambam1729]

But what does this decision mean in practical terms anyway? I don't believe WA publishes a WR progression on its website. The only place I have seen the official progression is the book that gets published every few years. I guess what they can do in the next edition is what they did with the 10.49, i.e. state it was officially recognized, but call BS on it. Here's an excerpt from the 2011 edition:

IMG_20210524_014958 (2).jpg

Just to be clear, the World Record Progression Book is published by WA/IAAF, but it is almost entirely the work of Richard Hymans, a frequent poster herein. A number of us on here have helped Richard a little, but at least 90%+ of the work is his alone.

[Tuariki]

Still to be amended by WA

Screenshot_20210531_072150_com.google.android.googlequicksearchbox.jpg

[Conor Dary]

Assuming I'm still alive and well for the next edition, the Shinnick mark will be included, together with what I think is appropriate comment

I'll look forward to that.