Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Zola Budd pushed Mary on purpose !

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by lovetorun

    One thing I am most sure of is that, barring the incident that took MS out, she would have won handily. I have to smile when people say Puica would have won anyway.
    I would agree but I'm a guy and, as anyone who pays attention knows, men HATE Mary Slaney.

    Comment


    • #32
      You may be saying the hate thing with tongue in check, but I'm one guy who admires her...and likes her. We all have our warts and dysfunctions...it's no reason to hate or even dislike someone.

      She is probably the most talented USA distance runner ever...and I admire her for going on for many years with all the injuries and surgeries she suffered.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by lovetorun
        You may be saying the hate thing with tongue in check, but I'm one guy who admires her...and likes her. We all have our warts and dysfunctions...it's no reason to hate or even dislike someone.

        She is probably the most talented USA distance runner ever...and I admire her for going on for many years with all the injuries and surgeries she suffered.
        I can read the venom between the lines.

        Comment


        • #34
          Mary has left a bar, which no american woman distance runner has be able to jump.

          Comment


          • #35
            Decker experienced the same trouble in the 1983 world champs when Zamira Zaitseva got a step on Slaney on the last turn and cut in on her - not illegally, but it was a close step which caused Slaney to have to adjust. Said Slaney, "It was the kind of rough tactics you get in big races. That's one reason I'm here, to get used to dealing with things like that."

            On a race run one year later, williamwyndhamjr believes Budd used illegal tactics against Decker.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
              Mary has left a bar,
              Is she heading to "Intervention"?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Zola Budd pushed Mary on purpose !

                Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
                I have looked at the tape over and over, and have come to the conclusion that it was not an accident. The whole race Zola was running next to Mary like she was her mama, not giving her any room.As a matter of fact she was all over the place.As far as Im concerned Mary is the gold medal winner.Yeah I Know my opinion doesnt count but that [email protected]$%&^ruined Marys Legacy
                That '84 3k final was an accident by Budd not done on purpose

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Brian
                  Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
                  I think you lonepoof and breyers need to get glasses.Mary had the inside of the track when zola thud starts stumbling.If you really knew your history, it wasnt the first time zola had problems like that in a race

                  Breyers?

                  Someone brought ice cream...?
                  Now I really don't want to know what a lone poof is......

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by lovetorun
                    One thing I am most sure of is that, barring the incident that took MS out, she would have won handily. I have to smile when people say Puica would have won anyway.

                    Uh, looking back at the race, Slaney was doing her predictable front-running/try to get away stuff, either to get a break or simply spread out the field and get away from all but the real contenders.

                    Trouble was, everyone was a "real contender." And everyone knew her tactic and stuck to her like glue.

                    Slaney had a taped up calf and--truthfully or otherwise--admitted later to having a minor flareup that affected her training. So Slaney perhaps wasn't 100% (give her the benefit of the doubt). Any problem in training would hurt either sharpness (careful to not re-injure by doing too much pure speed) or stamina (having to cut back losing the edge strength-wise).

                    [Also, there was a belief by some in the know that Slaney's rock-solid confidence had been shaken by her Olympic Trials loss in the 1500m. to...Ruth Wysocki! --Not so much because she lost to another American, but because the loss showed she wasn't the same runner as the previous year; again, giving her the benefit of the doubt, perhaps to something being lost to injury-related training cut-back.]


                    Keep watching. Not being able to break away, Slaney slows, claiming later it was no big deal, she just wanted the pack to catch up so she could rest up for a big push in the later stages (or something like that; again, not a bad strategy, if true and not simply post-race rationalizing).

                    So by the time the race in halfway finished there are still a bunch of legitimate contenders in position to win the race. Puica had the best finishing kick and was just as strong as anyone in the field: advantage, Puica.

                    Puica finishes with a HUGE kick, Slaney or no Slaney.

                    So keep smiling. The way the race was run, regardless of the fall, Puica would almost certainly have had it. And if Slaney would have managed to win, it would NOT have been "handily." To any knowlegable observer, she was in trouble as soon as it became apparent she couldn't shake the field with the fast early pace!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Brian,
                      I guess it's cool to have an opinion about a hypothetical situation, for which there will never be a real answer. Yes, Puica ran well on the day, and deserved the win, because.....she won. I would suggest the win became a lot easier after Zola and Mary got tangled up. She may have won regardless, or maybe not.
                      I don't know if you were in Helsinki in 1983 or not. I was, and I saw Mary out-kick some pretty damned good runners over the last 100 metres in 2 events. So your theory about her having to run everyone off their feet from the front, holds no water with me... But maybe I'm just not a "knowledgeable observer".

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by rasb
                        Brian,
                        I guess it's cool to have an opinion about a hypothetical situation, for which there will never be a real answer. Yes, Puica ran well on the day, and deserved the win, because.....she won. I would suggest the win became a lot easier after Zola and Mary got tangled up. She may have won regardless, or maybe not.
                        I don't know if you were in Helsinki in 1983 or not. I was, and I saw Mary out-kick some pretty damned good runners over the last 100 metres in 2 events. So your theory about her having to run everyone off their feet from the front, holds no water with me... But maybe I'm just not a "knowledgeable observer".
                        Brian was pretty careful to say that her 1500 OT loss made it clear that she "was not the same runner as the previous year." She was fabulous in '83, no question...

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by rasb
                          Helsinki in 1983 or not. I was, and I saw Mary out-kick some pretty damned good runners over the last 100 metres in 2 events. So your theory about her having to run everyone off their feet from the front, holds no water with me... But maybe I'm just not a "knowledgeable observer".

                          You misread my post. I never said she HAD to do that in order to win, merely that she CHOSE to first try that tactic (as she did in Helsinki, as you must remember since you were there).

                          [And it wasn't a bad strategy, as assumedly everyone in LA would be keying off her.]

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by rasb
                            Brian,
                            I guess it's cool to have an opinion about a hypothetical situation, for which there will never be a real answer. Yes, Puica ran well on the day, and deserved the win, because.....she won. I would suggest the win became a lot easier after Zola and Mary got tangled up. She may have won regardless, or maybe not.
                            I don't know if you were in Helsinki in 1983 or not. I was, and I saw Mary out-kick some pretty damned good runners over the last 100 metres in 2 events. So your theory about her having to run everyone off their feet from the front, holds no water with me... But maybe I'm just not a "knowledgeable observer".
                            Slaney wasn't the same runner in '84 as she was in '83.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Oh for crying out loud :roll: Get a life - I've watched this race on numerous occasions and Zola did not push her. Why would she if there was a chance that she could have fallen too, not to mention she was her idol?

                              Quite frankly I'm glad whiny Mary didn't win gold. Puica was a hugely deserving winner and one of my favourite athletes from the 1980s.
                              http://twitter.com/Trackside2011

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Dutra
                                Slaney wasn't the same runner in '84 as she was in '83.

                                Or in 1985 for that matter (sub 4:20 Mile, wins over Budd and Puica). Which gives greater credence to the (understandably underplayed at the time) injury-induced training setback in 1984.

                                And Brigette Kraus and Wendy Smith-Sly showed some fine closing speed, too. An injured Slaney might have come up without any medal at all.


                                As someone in Boulder (from the business end of the running business) told me later in 1984, if she (Slaney) wasn't going to win, being unable to finish through no fault or questionably debatable fault of her own was the best thing that could have happened to her, financially, in terms of public opinion and continued marketability.

                                This person may have had a good point: LA was the American hometown stage for an athlete, in the eyes of the general public, to either succeed or "fail" and (unfairly) the oft-times ignorant American sporting public has shown to have little stomache for "losers." As John Walker once said about his Montreal 1500m. win with all the pressure, "No one cares about second or third in the Olympic Games. You can win a silver or bronze medal, no one really cares. It's the champion...winning is everything. If you don't win, you're nothing."
                                [--The Supermilers videocassette, early '80's.]


                                Because of what happened and how it happened, Slaney neither won nor lost.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X