Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greatest meet ever?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • bambam
    replied
    Re: Greatest Meet Ever?

    Originally posted by Per Andersen
    Don't forget that Hary had one false start against him in the final and had to be somewhat careful.

    But also don't forget that Hary still had by far the fastest start - photos of the start show that. Anything faster would likely have been recalled and he would have been DQed.

    I think Sime at his absolute "may" have beaten Hary, but Sime was really only at his absolute best for a few weeks early in 1956. He was injured a lot. The race is about who was best on that day and that was Hary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Per Andersen
    replied
    Re: Greatest Meet Ever?

    Originally posted by paulthefan


    Get Sime out of lane 1 and he wins... there, I said it! ... by the way, i would love to see a normal speed version of the video, seems there is only a slow motion version floaing around the computer ether. The 1960 Sime was a 1/2 (real) step behind Sime at his best, (I dont care what the clocks say). Hary of 1960 was the best Hary ever. Every once in awhile (Borzov, Wells, Christie) the euro rises.
    Don't forget that Hary had one false start against him in the final and had to be somewhat careful.

    The problem with Sime was that he never had a dependable, decent start. I don't think it is clear when he was at his best. The weeks in 1960 or in 1956. He was supposed to be in top shape at the NCAA 100 in '56 when Morrow beat him by 2 yards.

    Hary was one of the truly great 100 sprinters with a great start and a phenomenal pick-up. Sure, with a decent start Sime would have beaten him but that's the way it was.

    Leave a comment:


  • paulthefan
    replied
    Re: Greatest Meet Ever?

    Originally posted by Powell
    Originally posted by Bauchwalzer
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    that was a very very short stride, certainly not one of Hary's or Sime's.
    The finish line photos clearly show that it was by a stride.
    The automatic times were 10.32 for Hary, 10.35 for Sime. I don't know any top sprinters with a one-foot stride, either.
    Get Sime out of lane 1 and he wins... there, I said it! ... by the way, i would love to see a normal speed version of the video, seems there is only a slow motion version floaing around the computer ether. The 1960 Sime was a 1/2 (real) step behind Sime at his best, (I dont care what the clocks say). Hary of 1960 was the best Hary ever. Every once in awhile (Borzov, Wells, Christie) the euro rises.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian
    replied
    Re: Greatest meet ever?

    Originally posted by Anonymous
    So what's the greatest track meet ever? Olympics, Worlds, and other contests that take a week or more just don't count as a "meet". Immediately the 1962 US-USSR dual comes to mind.

    What do you guys think?

    For distance fans, the 1974 Commonwealth Games have to be right up there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Powell
    replied
    Re: Greatest Meet Ever?

    Originally posted by Bauchwalzer
    Originally posted by paulthefan
    that was a very very short stride, certainly not one of Hary's or Sime's.
    The finish line photos clearly show that it was by a stride.
    The automatic times were 10.32 for Hary, 10.35 for Sime. I don't know any top sprinters with a one-foot stride, either.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bauchwalzer
    replied
    Re: Greatest Meet Ever?

    Originally posted by paulthefan
    Originally posted by Bauchwalzer
    The '60 Olympics would be my pick. Hary beats Sime by a stride in the 100 ...,
    that was a very very short stride, certainly not one of Hary's or Sime's.
    The finish line photos clearly show that it was by a stride. Another meet that has to go down in the annals would be the Pre-Olympic meet at Mt SAC on Aug 12, '60. Sime tied the AR with 10.1, Woods beat Johnson and Carney (and Morrow ran his last race) in the 200, Burleson set an AR in the 1500, Soth set an AR in the 5000, both 4X400 teams broke the WR, Calhoun tied the AR in the HH, Boston set a WR, Nieder set a WR and Babka tied the WR. Sime was quoted after Rome (where he finished three times behind Hary, "I peaked two weeks before the Games."

    Leave a comment:


  • paulthefan
    replied
    Re: Greatest Meet Ever?

    Originally posted by Bauchwalzer
    The '60 Olympics would be my pick. Hary beats Sime by a stride in the 100 ...,
    that was a very very short stride, certainly not one of Hary's or Sime's.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jake
    replied
    The USA v British Commonwealth match in LA in July 1967 was a great meet:

    -World 1500m record by Jim Ryun (3.33.1), slicing 2.5 off Elliott's previous WR.
    -Jim Hines beating Tommie Smith and John Carlos in the 200m.
    -Willie Davenport edging out Richmond Flowers (later an NFL player) in the 110mH.
    -US men's 4x1 team equal the WR (39.0).

    -The emergence of Britain's Lillian Board, who pulled off a shock last-to-first victory in the women's 400m.
    -A treble for GB women, with Mary Rand taking the LJ and Linda Knowles the HJ.

    USA won overall but the team spoils were shared - victories for the US men and Commonwealth women.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bauchwalzer
    replied
    Greatest Meet Ever?

    The '60 Olympics would be my pick. Hary beats Sime by a stride in the 100 with Sime crashing to the track, Berruti ties the WR in the 200 (after tying it in the semis) beating two other co-holders of the record, Norton and Johnson, and falling, despite his best efforts, to the track, Davis beating Kaufmann, who crashes to the track, in a WR 400 by a hundreth of a second, Snell beating WR holder Moens in the 800, Elliott destroying the 1500 field in a WR, Halberg hanging on to win the 5000, Bikila's epic run, the dramatic decathlon with Johnson beating Yang (who had beaten Johnson in seven of the 10 events), the 4X100 where Sime came from behind to nip Lauer at the tape only to find out that it had been in vain (while the team from GB also passed out of their zone but got away with it and received the bronze medal), the 4X400 team which set a WR, the HH where Calhoun nipped May by a hundreth of a second and went down on the track, the HJ where Thomas was upset and the LJ where Boston beat Roberson by 3/8 of an inch,

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Greatest meet ever?

    >>There are (many) Americans for whom going to Canada makes you a world traveler, for sheer economic reasons if nothing else.<<

    I know many people who cannot afford to travel beyond the US and Canada. But I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that going to Canada makes you a world traveler. Maybe delusional is a better word than provincial to describe such people. But people who are not provincial realize that there's a great big world out there. They don't re-define a large part of that world out of existence just because traveling there is beyond their financial means.


    >> you pompous ass.<<

    My opinion of you and your argument is diminished by your name-calling. Not that it was very high to begin with.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Greatest meet ever?

    The piece in your original post that was most offensive/demeaning was when you suggested that somebody who thought that Canada was great was "provincial." There are (many) Americans for whom going to Canada makes you a world traveler, for sheer economic reasons if nothing else. To impugn someone of lesser financial means as provincial is a slap in the face. There are undoubtedly many who have never travelled to Europe (or any other foreign country) who are far more more "worldly" than you, you pompous ass.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Greatest meet ever?

    >>Spoken like a true elitist pig. There are millions and millions of Americans who don't ever get 50 miles away from home, let alone into another state. For them a trip to Canada is undoubtedly far more satisfying to them than any of your jet-setting to Europe is for you.<<<


    Get off your populist horse. My comment was a response to the statement that Canada is the best place for an American to visit. Period. He didn't say cheapest, or most convenient. He said best. That's like saying that a used Chevy Cavalier is the best car for an American to buy. Well maybe it is, if that's all you can afford. But nobody in his right mind would make an unqualified statement that it's the best car to buy. And if he did, most people would agree that if you could afford one, you'd find that Mercedes, Lexus, Rolls-Royce, etc. made cars that are better to buy.

    That's all I said and that's all I meant to say. I've been to Edmonton and I've been to all those other places and believe me, those other places are better. I will not apologize for being able to afford to travel. And I really do feel sorry for anyone who thinks that a small Chevy is the ultimate car or that Edmonton is the ultimate tourist destination.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Greatest meet ever?

    <<Better than London? Paris? Rome? Madrid?
    You gotta be kidding. If not, you're just very provincial. Yes, Canada is easy for an American to be. A place like
    >Edmonton is very much like any American city of
    >a comparable size. Same language, same or
    >similar customs, food, etc. But Edmonton is not
    >one of the great cities of the world, and if you
    >seriously think that traveling to Edmonton is
    >better than traveling to Paris, I feel sorry for
    >you.>>

    Spoken like a true elitist pig. There are millions and millions of Americans who don't ever get 50 miles away from home, let alone into another state. For them a trip to Canada is undoubtedly far more satisfying to them than any of your jet-setting to Europe is for you.

    Leave a comment:


  • MJD
    replied
    Re: Greatest meet ever?

    >The classic travel
    >destinations are classics for a reason. But you
    >can't just up and go to Paris or Rome unless
    >you've got a lot of cash on hand.

    P.J O'Rourke has some reasonably funny pieces about what he believes are overrated Euro destinations.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: Greatest meet ever?

    >>>Canada has to be the best place for an American
    >to travel.<<

    Better than London? Paris?
    >Rome? Madrid?
    You gotta be kidding. If not,
    >you're just very provincial. Yes, Canada is
    >easy for an American to be. A place like
    >Edmonton is very much like any American city of
    >a comparable size. Same language, same or
    >similar customs, food, etc. But Edmonton is not
    >one of the great cities of the world, and if you
    >seriously think that traveling to Edmonton is
    >better than traveling to Paris, I feel sorry for
    >you.

    Canada is an easy place for Americans to visit -- it takes no planning whatsoever, and it's dirt cheap. It's also far safer tan the USA, but then so is nearly everywhere.

    The classic travel destinations are classics for a reason. But you can't just up and go to Paris or Rome unless you've got a lot of cash on hand.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X