Re: t-and-f: Willie Gault an Actor?
>From the where are they now file. During the 1980's and early 90's (?) Willie Gault graced the world stage as a hurdler, a reciever and kick off returner with the NFL (da Bears?). Now, I believe, he has re-emerged as an Actor on a great television show. In the credits of last night brilliant "The West Wing" episode I saw the name Willie Gault, Agent #2. Our Willie? Regardless it was great to see a name from the 80's. Dave Hunt University of Toronto Track and Field >
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
--- Joe Rubio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why are they faster at all distances except the marathon? Seems like a pretty straight forward issue. The marathon, for all intents and purposes, is a rather extreme outlier in terms of distance, when compared to the "all [other] distances." To be as fast or faster at other distances, it would make sense that the endurance would be sacrificed somewhat in favor of speed, which could easily result in what we're seeing today. I'm probably starting to sound like a broken record, but the marathon is not the holy grail for *all* distance runners. Same for the commonly held belief that you should keep moving up in distance until you win... Some people are quite happy in the event they're currently in, which may well be the 10k (plenty long for most folks). Dan = http://AccountBiller.com - MyCalendar, D-Man, ReSearch, etc. http://Run-Down.com - 10,000 Running Links, Free Contests... @o Dan Kaplan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] <|\/ <^- ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) _/ \ \/\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (lifetime forwarding address) / / (503)370-9969 phone/fax __ Do You Yahoo!? NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
So what the heck are we gonna do about this? Lots of complaining, not a lot of people taking the lead and showing the way...Heck I don't know what to do, so I'm part of the problem. I mean I was not very good and neither was my old roommate, but we ran 2:18 and 2:19. I based the "not very good" on the fact that in our little town I had a diffrenet roommate at 2:12 (28:32), plus some other local at 2:13 (8:16 Steeple), plus another 2:13 (28:26 10k) guy in our club. So a bunch of knuckleheads running 2:12-19 here local and the thing was, 2:13 wasn't a big deal. It was the type of time you'd say, "yeah, that's decent but a guy under 29:00 should be able to run 2:13 in his sleep". Thing is I only broke 30 once for 10k and got a 2:18. My buddy ran a 30:08 best and got a 2:19:26. I mean even Joe Karnes and Dave Frank made the damn Trials (exactly, who are Joe Karnes or Dave Frank?) and Frankie was a 29:52 guy turning out a 2:18:36. I just don't get it why we have 28:XX guys running 2:17's and above. I know too many guys who were sorry 10k runners who ran sub 2:20 years ago. No way we trained harder than the current crop, maybe different but not harder. And definitely no way we were faster cause their 10k times are something I only dreamed of approaching. Yet I read what these guys are doing today and just can't figure it out. Why are they faster at all distances except the marathon? I looked at my old logs and I'm pretty sure I never took drugs, so it ain't that either (beer and coffee yes, drugs no). Simply put we were 30 flat guys running 2:18/19 and now we have 28/29 flat 10k guys running the same times for 42k. Something ain't smelling right. But what's your opinion on US marathoning needs? Is it more stuff like the Fila or the Team USA camps? Is is moving to Japan and running for a corporate team over there? Alan thinks it's flirting with 200 MPW. People are training in the good ol' US of A and running sub 2:20 for women and sub 2:08 for men. Has anyone every approached the Japanese in Boulder and asked, can I train with you for a few months to help figure it out? What's Kahlid doing in Central Park? What are they doing in S Korea, S Africa, Spain, Japan that we can steal and use here I don't know, but I want to know. Tell me what they're doing and what we're not because I want the data so I can form an opinion. What in the name of Buddy Edelen is wrong here? We used to know how to get it done. I mean Squires had a steady stream of guys running sub 2:10 at Boston. Thomas, Rogers, Meyer and a young Salazar ain't a bad crew to have helped developed. Sev knows how to get it done, he had some lady from Maine running 2:22 and taking a victory stroll around the track in LA. Guys used to run around 28:xx and get sub 2:11's, maybe sub 2:13 at worst. Now we have the 28:xx's, we're getting nothing close to 2:12. We are starting to see plenty of sub 29's again. Hate to see it turn into 2:17's. Diver down flag here. Help me out cause I'm just don't get it. Joe alan tobin wrote: > > I wonder where 2:19:46 would have been 15-20 years ago? 100th?...maybe? Oh > how the mighty have fallen. If we had 100 runners running an average of > 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? > Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 > years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. > > Alan > > >From: "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Track Canada" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >CC: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Track & Field List" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bruce and Rosemary Deacon" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! > >Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:46:47 -0700 > >Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id > >MHotMailBD83ADBE00804004310A80DF8E0DF17F0; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:58:53 -0700 > >Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) > >id f930sV918454for t-and-f-outgoing; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:31 -0700 (PDT) > >Received: from cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com > >[207.46.181.87])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id > >f930sUA18448for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:30 > >-0700 (PDT) > >Received: from c1721414b ([24.254.11.149]) by cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com > >with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:53:45 -0700 > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:59:46 -0700 > >Message-ID: <000f01c14ba4$e1ecd940$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >References: <015101c14b9f$974131c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >X-Priority: 3 > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 > >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 > >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2001 00:53:45.0406 (UTC) > >FILETIME=[DAB4E5E0:01C14BA5] > >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Precedence: bulk > > >
t-and-f: Stanford XC ?
In all the Women's XC rankings, Jillian Mastroianni is listed as a returnee to the Stanford team. Yet the Stanford website does not list her on the Roster. I do not think she ran in the spring either. Does anyone know the details on her disappearance? Did she redshirt, get hurt, or dropout/quit? MJR
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
I know better than to comment on Garry's observation regarding Michelle Rohl...shooot all hell could break out on the list over something like that ;} Mike Fanelli "your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource" Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. (415) 447 - 6254 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.SFabode.com www.MarinHouseHunting.com - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In a message dated Tue, 2 Oct 2001 9:10:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is > > downright EMBARASSING!!>> > > Hey, Michelle Rohl is No. 6 among American men in the 20W. > > gh > >
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Clarification: "We need more runners running around 150 miles a week with flirtations with the 200 mile mark" Read: Runners averaging 130-160 with a couple one time shots at much higher mileages (170, 180, dare I say 200?) Proof of Success: Japanese, numerous American runners of the 70s/80s, numerous African runners. Never said we need more people running 200mpw. Just more people "flirting" with that number. Flirting with 200 and running 200 are two entirely different concepts. Running 20 miles a day used to be the norm for marathoners in this country, now it is not. Alan >From: "Michael Rohl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: "Michael Rohl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], >[EMAIL PROTECTED], "alan tobin" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! >Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 18:41:34 -0400 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBD84E01B00864004388B80DF8E0DFA950; Wed, 03 Oct 2001 15:46:05 -0700 >Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) >id f93MjEx09169for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 15:45:14 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from wheat.mnsfld.edu (wheat.mnsfld.edu [157.62.50.149])by >darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f93MjDA09131for ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 15:45:13 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from mrohl [157.62.145.199] by wheat.mnsfld.edu with ESMTP >(SMTPD32-7.03) id A5843B00072; Wed, 03 Oct 2001 18:47:32 -0400 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed, 03 Oct 2001 15:47:23 -0700 >Message-ID: <3BBB5BDE.19805.B19CC0D@localhost> >In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c) >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Precedence: bulk > > > > If we had 100 runners running an average of > > 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we >have? > > Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took >10 > > years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. > >I think we would have a lot of dead runners. I keep hearing this again and >again but 200 mile weeks are not the answer because I don't believe there >are >any runners really running 200mpw. Some say so but > >Michael Rohl >Head Coach X-C, T&F >Mansfield University > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
t-and-f: Coaching Position
Netters If anyone is interested or knows of anyone who might be interested: I have an opening coming up for a coaching position for the throws and one other event group, either sprints/hurdles or Jumps not including vault. Contact me here. Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, T&F Mansfield University
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
> If we had 100 runners running an average of > 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? > Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 > years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. I think we would have a lot of dead runners. I keep hearing this again and again but 200 mile weeks are not the answer because I don't believe there are any runners really running 200mpw. Some say so but Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, T&F Mansfield University
RE: t-and-f: Women's AOY
Netters > > I wonder how a 1:26:52.3 20k track walk measures up against a 8:23.26 3000m or > > a 2-19 marathon (for example) on little red book tables.>> > > Nobody has any idea, and won't for several years. Indeed, we still have no idea how >good the Dragila vault marks are, really. Assigning any kind of "legendary" value to >a WR in an event in its first couple of years is pointless. if I vote for Dragila as >AOY it'll be because of her dominance against her peers, relatively speaking, not because of any WRs she has set. This might help some. Ivanova's record is close to her road time. WIthin seconds. Which is the same with the men's walks. When I did an initial comparison of records based on the standard differences between men and women I predicted about 3 years ago that the World Best for the walk either road or track would fall to the 1:26 range. Right now the women's walk record is at 90% of the men's best and Stacy is at about 77%. Because of the technique limitations I think the women's walks records will get to about 8% difference. Now interestingly enough. The woman's marathon record, which as an event has much more money and much more development has just now reached 90%. It isn't the best way to do a comparison but at least it makes some sense of it. Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, T&F Mansfield University
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Netters > > The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is > > downright EMBARASSING!!>> > > Hey, Michelle Rohl is No. 6 among American men in the 20W. True. And she has been in the top 10 not once but twice now. She was, after all less than 10 seconds behind me at the Olympic Trials. Just something to deal with. Michael Rohl Head Coach X-C, T&F Mansfield University
t-and-f: NJ AG CC champs in college
Netters:
New Jersey's most recent all-groupo CC champs are off to a pretty
fair start this fall.
On the women's side, Cate Guiney ('98 winner) had a great 6K race at
the Iona Invitational last weekend at VCP, while Erin Donohue (1999-2000
winner) ran 3rd for UNC in the Carolina Challenge last weekend in 17:34.
For the boys, Steve Slattery (1997 champ) is a valued member of the
top-rated Colorado squad, Brian Kerwin (1999 winner) is running 4th for the
4th-rated Notre Dame team and Rich Myers (2000 champ) is threatening to
crack the staring lineup for the 5th-rated Providence squad. (Nate Miller
(1998 winner) has transferred from Stanford to Villanova and is yet to make
his debut there; meanwhile, the Wildcats were led in their first two meets
by Jon Fasulo, who finished just behind Miller in the AG race).
Ed Grant
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Alan wrote: >I wonder where 2:19:46 would have been 15-20 years ago? 100th?...maybe? Try 200th. >Oh how the mighty have fallen. If we had 100 runners running an average of >140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Can't answer that one - when I was running 140-150 miles a week, I could barely summon up the energy to flirt once or twice a week. >Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 >years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. Did you see those sponsorship numbers? What is the trickle down from Takahashi to, say, a 2:26 or 2:28 woman marathoner in Japan? If there was that kind of money available here (along with corporate training jobs that presumably cover medical insurance) I'll bet we'd have a lot more 22 year olds running 150 mpw plus. It's possible to revel in Takahashi's sub-2:20 for what it is - a great breakthrough - without comparing her milage and dietary habits to American Men. We can tell how mediocre the American marathoning scene is without comparisons to a top woman - the top men performers in the world are doing plenty to point out our inadequacies. Phil
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
In 1983 Tom Ratcliff ran 2:19:51 at Boston, the year Greg Meyer won in 2:09, and placed 83 with only 4 non USA in the top fifty. - Original Message - From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 1:11 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! > I wonder where 2:19:46 would have been 15-20 years ago? 100th?...maybe? Oh > how the mighty have fallen. If we had 100 runners running an average of > 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? > Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 > years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. > > Alan > > > >From: "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Track Canada" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >CC: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Track & Field List" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bruce and Rosemary Deacon" > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! > >Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:46:47 -0700 > >Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id > >MHotMailBD83ADBE00804004310A80DF8E0DF17F0; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:58:53 -0700 > >Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) > >id f930sV918454for t-and-f-outgoing; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:31 -0700 (PDT) > >Received: from cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com > >[207.46.181.87])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id > >f930sUA18448for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:30 > >-0700 (PDT) > >Received: from c1721414b ([24.254.11.149]) by cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com > >with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:53:45 -0700 > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:59:46 -0700 > >Message-ID: <000f01c14ba4$e1ecd940$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >References: <015101c14b9f$974131c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >X-Priority: 3 > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 > >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 > >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2001 00:53:45.0406 (UTC) > >FILETIME=[DAB4E5E0:01C14BA5] > >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Precedence: bulk > > > >The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is > >downright EMBARASSING!! > > > >Mike Fanelli > >"your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource" > >Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. > >(415) 447 - 6254 > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >www.SFabode.com > >www.MarinHouseHunting.com > > > > > > > > > > > " Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:54:40 -0400 > > > From: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia > > > > > > Trivia answer: 11th place > > > > > > Trivia question: Where would Naoko Takahashi stand on this year's U.S. > > > marathon list ... for men. > > > > > > 2:12:41 - Rod DeHaven > > > 2:16:17 - Josh Cox > > > 2:16:48 - Eddy Hellebuyck > > > 2:17:24 - Eric Polonski > > > 2:17:47 - Kevin Collins > > > 2:18:13 - Mike Dudley > > > 2:18:34 - Matt Capelouto > > > 2:18:57 - Danny Gough > > > 2:18:58 - Mark Coogan > > > 2:19:42 - Dennis Simonaitis > > > (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi)" > > > > > > And in Canada-2nd just barely: > > > 2:18:54, Bruce Deacon > > > (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp >
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
I wonder where 2:19:46 would have been 15-20 years ago? 100th?...maybe? Oh how the mighty have fallen. If we had 100 runners running an average of 140-50 a week with flirtations with 200 how many sub 2:20s would we have? Apparently the Japanese already have this answer. I also doubt they took 10 years to build up to near 200 mpw levels. Alan >From: "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Track Canada" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >CC: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Track & Field List" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bruce and Rosemary Deacon" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! >Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:46:47 -0700 >Received: from [128.223.142.13] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >MHotMailBD83ADBE00804004310A80DF8E0DF17F0; Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:58:53 -0700 >Received: (from majordom@localhost)by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) >id f930sV918454for t-and-f-outgoing; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:31 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com (cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com >[207.46.181.87])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id >f930sUA18448for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:54:30 >-0700 (PDT) >Received: from c1721414b ([24.254.11.149]) by cpimssmtpu12.email.msn.com >with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Tue, 2 Oct 2001 17:53:45 -0700 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:59:46 -0700 >Message-ID: <000f01c14ba4$e1ecd940$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >References: <015101c14b9f$974131c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >X-Priority: 3 >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2001 00:53:45.0406 (UTC) >FILETIME=[DAB4E5E0:01C14BA5] >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Precedence: bulk > >The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is >downright EMBARASSING!! > >Mike Fanelli >"your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource" >Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. >(415) 447 - 6254 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >www.SFabode.com >www.MarinHouseHunting.com > > > > > > " Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:54:40 -0400 > > From: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia > > > > Trivia answer: 11th place > > > > Trivia question: Where would Naoko Takahashi stand on this year's U.S. > > marathon list ... for men. > > > > 2:12:41 - Rod DeHaven > > 2:16:17 - Josh Cox > > 2:16:48 - Eddy Hellebuyck > > 2:17:24 - Eric Polonski > > 2:17:47 - Kevin Collins > > 2:18:13 - Mike Dudley > > 2:18:34 - Matt Capelouto > > 2:18:57 - Danny Gough > > 2:18:58 - Mark Coogan > > 2:19:42 - Dennis Simonaitis > > (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi)" > > > > And in Canada-2nd just barely: > > 2:18:54, Bruce Deacon > > (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: t-and-f: Women's AOY
In a message dated Tue, 2 Oct 2001 7:57:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "THOMAS,Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I wonder how a 1:26:52.3 20k track walk measures up against a 8:23.26 3000m or > a 2-19 marathon (for example) on little red book tables.>> Nobody has any idea, and won't for several years. Indeed, we still have no idea how good the Dragila vault marks are, really. Assigning any kind of "legendary" value to a WR in an event in its first couple of years is pointless. if I vote for Dragila as AOY it'll be because of her dominance against her peers, relatively speaking, not becuase of any WRs she has set. gh
Re: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
In a message dated Tue, 2 Oct 2001 9:10:55 PM Eastern Daylight Time, "Mike Fanelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is > downright EMBARASSING!!>> Hey, Michelle Rohl is No. 6 among American men in the 20W. gh
t-and-f: RE: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!!
Keep in mind that with a few top American men running Chicago Marathon this weekend and a lot more doing New York City (USATF champs) on November 4, there will certainly be more than 10 men quicker than Takahashi before the end of the year. For a point of reference a 2:19:46 would have been good for 25th place on the year-end 2000 US men's list. -Original Message- From: Mike Fanelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 8:47 PM To: Martin J. Dixon; Track Canada Cc: Post, Marty; Track & Field List; Bruce and Rosemary Deacon Subject: Takahashi trivia EMBARASSING!! The fact that 2:19:46 would be number 11 amongst American men this year is downright EMBARASSING!! Mike Fanelli "your San Francisco Bay Area real estate resource" Pacific Union Real Estate Group Ltd. (415) 447 - 6254 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.SFabode.com www.MarinHouseHunting.com > " Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:54:40 -0400 > From: "Post, Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: t-and-f: Takahashi trivia > > Trivia answer: 11th place > > Trivia question: Where would Naoko Takahashi stand on this year's U.S. > marathon list ... for men. > > 2:12:41 - Rod DeHaven > 2:16:17 - Josh Cox > 2:16:48 - Eddy Hellebuyck > 2:17:24 - Eric Polonski > 2:17:47 - Kevin Collins > 2:18:13 - Mike Dudley > 2:18:34 - Matt Capelouto > 2:18:57 - Danny Gough > 2:18:58 - Mark Coogan > 2:19:42 - Dennis Simonaitis > (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi)" > > And in Canada-2nd just barely: > 2:18:54, Bruce Deacon > (2:19:46 - Naoko Takahashi) > > Regards, > > > Martin > > > > >
