Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Zola Budd pushed Mary on purpose !

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #46
    Puica lost because she is not remembered for winning the gold, she is known as the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
      Puica lost because she is not remembered for winning the gold, she is known as the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.
      Well it's not Puica's fault that Mary was incompetent when running with people around her :roll:
      http://twitter.com/Trackside2011

      Comment


      • #48
        Puica lost because she is not remembered for winning the gold, she is known as the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.
        Really? Where was Slaney in the 1.500m when Puica ran to bronze? Where was Slaney in 1987 when Puica ran to silver in the 3.000m in Rome? Moreover, where was Slaney at the 1984 World Cross Country Champs 5.000m... the one Puica won? Or the 1982 World Cross Country Champs 4,7km... the one Puica won?

        I remember Puica as one of the most consistent and fastest runners of her era - one of two Romanians (Paula Ivan) who eventually paved the way for Gabriella Szabo to receive the torch and carry on with her own distinguished career. However, because Puica is only known for winning a race Slaney couldn't finish, I must not know anything, whatsoever, or am delusional.

        Puica averaged 8.33,1 and 3.58,6 over both the 1.500m and 3.000m distances in her top-10 times ever recorded; her winning mark in Los Angeles was only her eighth-best time; she'd eventually run 8,13 seconds faster the following season.

        Slaney hadn't come within almost five seconds of a two-year-old PB in 1984 and hadn't a single sub-4.00 to her credit that season; she entered Los Angeles with an 8.34,91 under her belt from the same track to which she'd ultimately find her life's work tied a couple of months later. Puica had run 0,24 off of her PB that season ahead of Los Angeles -- 8.33,33 to 8.33,57. Furthermore, Puica dropped her 1.500m down to 3.57,22.

        Slaney got lucky with the Russians in 1983. I don't think Puica would have had the same misfortune.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by nevetsllim
          Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
          Puica lost because she is not remembered for winning the gold, she is known as the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.
          Well it's not Puica's fault that Mary was incompetent when running with people around her :roll:

          Actually, Puica became immortalized as an instant trivia question answer.

          Here's another: Who was the American woman to FIRST fall in the 1984 Olympic 3,000 meters?



          >the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.

          Only to tunnel-visioned, fact-ignoring bun-hugger sniffers. Everyone else respects Puica for being the world class runner savvy enough to anticipate probvlems in close quarters while racing and stay on her feet in international competition (unlike two others in that race) and win the race.

          Go over to Romania sometime. Maybe she'll let you see her gold medal, if you promise not steal it so you can return it to it's "rightful owner."
          .

          Comment


          • #50
            Didn't Joan Hansen (?) fall after about three laps?
            http://twitter.com/Trackside2011

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
              Puica lost because she is not remembered for winning the gold, she is known as the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.
              1. You're wrong regarding Puica

              2. Slaney "could" have finished.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
                Puica lost because she is not remembered for winning the gold, she is known as the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.
                william, no offense intended, but please stop saying stupid things. It makes it very difficult to carry on an intelligent conversation.
                But I'll try.

                If the unfortunate events had not occurred in the 3000 in 1984, I don't think we "know" for sure, who would have won, or medalled. We can only form suppositions or opinions. Does anyone disagree with that part?

                Maybe Zola would have won - we just don't know...
                By the way, it was Lynn Williams who won the bronze.

                As to whether Mary was a different runner in 1984 than 1983, well of course she was --- everybody was. The question to me is, is it possible that Mary could have won the gold under different circumstances, and my answer is, yes it is possible. I don't know the odds, but they certainly weren't 0/10.
                And I certainly don't agree that Mary was just "lucky" in 1983 in Helsinki.
                As I saw it, she just out-gritted the Russians in the homestretch - twice.

                And I think using the 1500 at the Trials as a measuring stick does not give full credit to Ruth Wysocki, and how good she was in 1984. Does anyone know if Mary was planning on running both the 1500 and 3000 at the Games?
                I don't know if I saw footage from the 3000 metres at the US Trials. Can anyone provide some information on that race?

                And as for the Romanians, please don't get me started. Of all the countries that seemed able to "produce" elite female runners galore, and very few top male runners, Romania ranks at the top, right up there with China and East Germany, and Russia. I don't how they did that...

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
                  Puica lost because she is not remembered for winning the gold, she is known as the woman who won because mary couldnt finish.
                  You might be the only one, who remembers Puica that way. To most reasonable people, she is a deserved Olympic champion. She was also a member of the Romanian team, the only Soviet block country that defied Moscow and came to LA to compete. Your treatment of Maricica Puica is a disgrace.
                  "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                  by Thomas Henry Huxley

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by rasb
                    And I certainly don't agree that Mary was just "lucky" in 1983 in Helsinki.
                    As I saw it, she just out-gritted the Russians in the homestretch - twice.
                    As to not cause further confusion, the surprise element was available in 1983. It would not have been in 1984. Luck, or catching a good break with her kick, may have been a one championship shot (folks may have started later down the stretch on Slaney rather than running up on her shoulder off the turn).

                    Regarding the Romanians, following Marasescu and Silai, the ones to reach the top during Slaney's time were Puica, Melinte and Ivan. Following a significant time, the torch got passed to Szabo, who had the spotlight in the 3.000m and dueled with Szekely and the late Cioncan in the 1.500m. They've had only three break 8.30,00 for 3.000m, and none during Slaney's tenure on the scene.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      what is a disgrace pego is you defending a paper champion.Everybody knows Mary had that race won.Maybe her a Zola got together before the race.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
                        what is a disgrace pego is you defending a paper champion.Everybody knows Mary had that race won.Maybe her a Zola got together before the race.
                        25 years on and you're still bitter :roll: Puica was a fantastic athlete who achieved more than Slaney in her career and doesn't have a drugs record unlike Whiny Mary.

                        Can't gh just ban people like this who post absolute dribble like this?
                        http://twitter.com/Trackside2011

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          I've always been of the opinion that Puica was going to win that race regardless of what happened to Decker. Decker's loss at the trials was the first sign that she was not as dominant as before. I liken it to Liz McColgan who ran pretty much the same 10000 race in 91 and 92 championship races. In 91 in Tokyo, her 15:30-ish opening 5000 dropped pretty much everyone. In 92 in Barcelona, the she opened the first 5000 at about the same pace, and there were about 9 runners still there. Everyone in the world had a year to prepare for something that they knew would happen.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Nevetsllim who are you to even mention the word ban! In america its called freedom of speech or do you go for the 1800 idealisms?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Brian you are a follower , so I understand you have to agree with the masses.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by williamwindhamjr
                                what is a disgrace pego is you defending a paper champion.Everybody knows Mary had that race won.Maybe her a Zola got together before the race.
                                How can anybody take you seriously? At the time of the collision, it was anybody's race. You are the only one who "knows Mary had that race won". Even the biggest Mary's fans did not know it at that time.
                                Budd and Puica conspired against Mary and Zola sacrificed herself for Puica? Is that what you are saying? How preposterous!
                                "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
                                by Thomas Henry Huxley

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X