RE: t-and-f: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
Wanna have a vote on it? -Original Message- From: Geoff Pietsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:29 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials I do not believe you. If you had trained really hard for years and run really fast and then, on Trials day, the conditions made it impossible for you to qualify, your response would have been "too bad"? Bullshit. >From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: "Geoff Pietsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: t-and-f: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials >Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:55:31 EST > >I would have said then exactly what I say now "Too bad". > >I'm not impressed. You think you are the only one who has had a job and >trained >-- trained really hard? Get in the back of the line, it's a long one. > >malmo, > > >would say that if you were still running at that level and were on > >the >cusp > > >- with a realistic shot at running fast enough in good conditions but > >not >in > > >hot ones. And what if you'd already run 2:12 but it came up hot and > >you >ran > > >2:15 and were 2nd to a guy lacking the A standard who ran 2:14? In > >good conditions you would have both gone under the A. Now, because > >this course > > >and date were chosen, you get to stay home. Would you like that? > >Geoff
Re: t-and-f: Lydiard's prophecy on marathon record
Not many people now would wed themselves to an absolute prediction but Lydiard did. About the 2:05:42, I think he would say, "Wow, I was wrong." That's one of the reason's he is a legend. Those who qualify their statements will never become legends. Lydiard was my unofficial coach when I was in high school near Boston. My official track coach was the football coach who knew nothing about training for track. But I had a pen pal in New Zealand who ran and sent me his workouts which I did. The workouts came down a few steps from Lydiard. I matched the workouts of my pen pal and ran the same times as he did, then I did more and ran a faster time than he did, but return mail always showed that while the mails crossed he had gone faster yet. The only trouble I had was doing the 20 mile run on Sundays through paddocks and hills. I had no idea what a paddocks was. Tom D. > > "During a recent office visit, (legendary New Zealand coach Arthur) Lydiard > > opined that 2:06 is the absolute limit for the marathon as it is > > physiologically impossible to run faster." > > > > Wonder what Lydiard (or Bert) thinks of the impossible (2:05:42) Mr. > > Khannouchi. > > >> > > No, Lydiard would probably say "...give or take 18 seconds..." > > JT
Re: t-and-f: Lydiard's prophecy on marathon record
In a message dated 12/6/2001 6:34:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << He would probably assume it's pharmacutically enhanced. On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Y ask: > > While going through some old issues of T&FN, I came across a Bert Nelson "Of > People and Things" column from July 1978. > > Brother Bert writes: > > "During a recent office visit, (legendary New Zealand coach Arthur) Lydiard > opined that 2:06 is the absolute limit for the marathon as it is > physiologically impossible to run faster." > > Wonder what Lydiard (or Bert) thinks of the impossible (2:05:42) Mr. > Khannouchi. > >> No, Lydiard would probably say "...give or take 18 seconds..." JT
RE: t-and-f: St. Louis - marathon trials - IAAF A standards
I was talking more about Birmingham, which is in the Deep South. Missouri is a Border State, and shares many of Birmingham's weather characteristics. RMc At 02:32 PM 12/6/2001 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Many folks consider St.Louis to be in the Midwest rather than the Southeast. > >Original Message: >- >From: Richard McCann [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 09:41:03 -0800 >To: (T&FMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: t-and-f: St. Louis - marathon trials - IAAF "A" standards > > >At 06:56 PM 12/3/2001 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote.. > >Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:01:42 -0800 > >From: "USATFRRIC/honikman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: t-and-f: St. Louis - marathon trials - IAAF "A" standards > > > >Remember the race will be run in the morning, not at the hottest time of the > >day. The race organizers will be prepared to move the start to 7am if a warm > >day is predicted. > >As I am reminded everytime I travel east and run, temperatures do not vary >as much during the day in the Southeast US as they do in the rest of the >nation. In addition, our bodies adjust to the temperature during the >day. 60 in the morning can feel like 80 in the late afternoon during a run. > > >Richard McCann > > >mail2web - Check your email from the web at >http://mail2web.com/ .
Re: t-and-f: Lydiard's prophecy on marathon record
He would probably assume it's pharmacutically enhanced. On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Y ask: > > While going through some old issues of T&FN, I came across a Bert Nelson "Of > People and Things" column from July 1978. > > Brother Bert writes: > > "During a recent office visit, (legendary New Zealand coach Arthur) Lydiard > opined that 2:06 is the absolute limit for the marathon as it is > physiologically impossible to run faster." > > Wonder what Lydiard (or Bert) thinks of the impossible (2:05:42) Mr. > Khannouchi. > > Ken Stone > http://www.masterstrack.com > *** Paul Talbot Department of Geography/ Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado, Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0260 (303) 492-3248 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: t-and-f: American men marathon times at 28 year low
It would be interesting to see a parallel list of men under 2:30. Would the numbers follow the same curve? Would the world curves of the two times also follow? A graph with all four lines might provoke further understanding and discussion. I have the numbers for Boston but not the rest of the country or the world. Tom Derderian - Original Message - From: "Kurt Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 9:14 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: American men marathon times at 28 year low > There is an interesting tidbit in these numbers. Note that the Olympic year > in which the US performed the absolute best it ever has in the OG marathon > (1972--> 1st, 4th, and 9th), it had the fewest number of fast guys to work > with. > > Now I realize there are several factors affecting these stats, such as the > the first running boom coming after 1972. And I'm certainly not suggesting > that somehow our chances are actually better with fewer fast guys, but I > think these numbers do demonstrate that it is possible to achieve > world-class respectability, and perhaps even dominance, with a small, > talented, motivated, highly-focused group of elite athletes. > > Kurt Bray > > >1972 = 12 > >1973 = 12 > >1974 = 22 > >1975 = 40 > >1976 = 35 > >1977 = 46 > >1978 = 95 > >1979 = 165 > >1980 = 187 > >1981 = 218* > >1982 = 191 > >1983 = 267 > >1984 = 165 > >1985 = 99 > >1986 = 115 > >1987 = 96 > >1988 = 65 > >1989 = 63 > >1990 = 75 > >1991 = 93 > >1992 = 64 > >1993 = 58 > >1994 = 54 > >1995 = 59 > >1996 = 40 > >1997 = 27 > >1998 = 36 > >1999 = 47 > >2000 = 27 > >2001 = 20 > > > > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp >
Re: t-and-f: Lydiard's prophecy on marathon record
>Y ask: >While going through some old issues of T&FN, I came across a Bert Nelson "Of >People and Things" column from July 1978. >Brother Bert writes: >"During a recent office visit, (legendary New Zealand coach Arthur) Lydiard >opined that 2:06 is the absolute limit for the marathon as it is >physiologically impossible to run faster." >Wonder what Lydiard (or Bert) thinks of the impossible (2:05:42) Mr. >Khannouchi. My first thought is whether Lydiard's original projection considered the different forms of hematocrit enhancement which may be practicable in the future while training at sea level (and not just EPO, but even legal means like hypobaric chambers). My second thought is that being critical over an 18 second differential (0.2 %) is kinda catty. Phil
t-and-f: Fast times in Zatopek 10000m
The last significant outdoor track races of the year produced some interesting performances last night at Melbourne's Annual Zatopek meet. Susie Power, bronze mdeallist from this year's Goodwill Games (and sister of Arkansas Alumni Michael) produced the second fastest Australian time ever in atrociously wet conditions. Time was also 4th fastest in world for 2001: Women 1 Metre 1 Power, Susie, Victoria, 31:26.34. 2 McCann, Kerryn, NSW, 33:06.28. 3 Harvey, Natalie, Victoria, 33:23.56. 4 Christie, Sarah, NZL, 33:39.75. In the men's race 21 year old miler Craig Mottram stepped up and made an impressive 10k debut. He has run 3.35.40, 3.53.06, 7.41.35 and 13.23.94 this year, and raced in GP Final 1500m: 1 Mottram, Craig, Victoria, 28:19.26. 2 Martin, Blair, NZL, 28:27.23. 3 Bezabeh, Sisay, ACT, 28:38.78. 4 Cartwright, Brett, SA, 28:42.10. 5, Gillard, Kim, NSW, 28:48.53. 6 Thompson, Mark, Victoria, 28:48.57. More reporting at http://www.theage.com.au/sport/2001/12/07/FFXF4IAFWUC.html Andre Sammartino A cog in the wheel of the Bayside machine 1999-2000, 2000-1 State League (Men's) Champions "Are you hip to our funky groove?" http://surf.to/bayside
Re: t-and-f: American men marathon times at 28 year low
There is an interesting tidbit in these numbers. Note that the Olympic year in which the US performed the absolute best it ever has in the OG marathon (1972--> 1st, 4th, and 9th), it had the fewest number of fast guys to work with. Now I realize there are several factors affecting these stats, such as the the first running boom coming after 1972. And I'm certainly not suggesting that somehow our chances are actually better with fewer fast guys, but I think these numbers do demonstrate that it is possible to achieve world-class respectability, and perhaps even dominance, with a small, talented, motivated, highly-focused group of elite athletes. Kurt Bray >1972 = 12 >1973 = 12 >1974 = 22 >1975 = 40 >1976 = 35 >1977 = 46 >1978 = 95 >1979 = 165 >1980 = 187 >1981 = 218* >1982 = 191 >1983 = 267 >1984 = 165 >1985 = 99 >1986 = 115 >1987 = 96 >1988 = 65 >1989 = 63 >1990 = 75 >1991 = 93 >1992 = 64 >1993 = 58 >1994 = 54 >1995 = 59 >1996 = 40 >1997 = 27 >1998 = 36 >1999 = 47 >2000 = 27 >2001 = 20 _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
t-and-f: Lydiard's prophecy on marathon record
Y ask: While going through some old issues of T&FN, I came across a Bert Nelson "Of People and Things" column from July 1978. Brother Bert writes: "During a recent office visit, (legendary New Zealand coach Arthur) Lydiard opined that 2:06 is the absolute limit for the marathon as it is physiologically impossible to run faster." Wonder what Lydiard (or Bert) thinks of the impossible (2:05:42) Mr. Khannouchi. Ken Stone http://www.masterstrack.com
Re: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
<< I don't understand this discussion. And I also don't understand the logic behind USATFs decision making process. Why aren't the standards for the marathon the same for track? Top 3 go... assuming they have the A standard. >> Because the marathon is different from (most of) the track race in two very important ways. One is the number of times in which you can run the race in the qualifying period. While a marathoner might be limited to 3-4 A-standard races in a two-year period, a 100m guy, in theory, could go out and run a couple a day literally every day. The other difference is that in no other event do the course and the weather mean so much. Running a hot-weather OT marathon is akin to running all the OT track 10Ks at high altitude, say like Colorado Springs. No American would be likely ever to get an A standard there either. gh> Also the OT marathon is often the only time theses guys ever compete against each other. Sending someone based on time rather than head to head particularly with the way the weather factors into the event has never made any sense to me. Let's look at the last OT for men. Can anyone say that Morris or Lemay deserved to go over DeHaven? Steve S
Re: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
Netters Gary wrote: > The other difference is that in no other event do the course and the weather > mean so much. Running a hot-weather OT marathon is akin to running all the OT > track 10Ks at high altitude, say like Colorado Springs. No American would be > likely ever to get an A standard there either. The walks face similar problems in relationship to weather and course. However with out the shoe contracts, running USA centers, or potential prize money that the marathoners have, there were 4 A standard athletes in the 50k walk. And now in case any of you haven't heard on this list a World Championships Bronze Medalist as well. Curt Clausen is moved to third after the 1st place finisher was DQ for drugs. Just an open slam here but it was the IAAF that took 2 years to decide that case. WHere is loud mouth Arne and his defenders explaining that? Michael Rohl
Re: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
In a message dated 12/06/01 07:02:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << I don't understand this discussion. And I also don't understand the logic behind USATFs decision making process. Why aren't the standards for the marathon the same for track? Top 3 go... assuming they have the A standard. >> Because the marathon is different from (most of) the track race in two very important ways. One is the number of times in which you can run the race in the qualifying period. While a marathoner might be limited to 3-4 A-standard races in a two-year period, a 100m guy, in theory, could go out and run a couple a day literally every day. The other difference is that in no other event do the course and the weather mean so much. Running a hot-weather OT marathon is akin to running all the OT track 10Ks at high altitude, say like Colorado Springs. No American would be likely ever to get an A standard there either. gh
Re: t-and-f: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
In a message dated 12/04/01 17:44:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Now I'm curious - what is the derivation of the word fershlugginer? >> OK, this took some searching, but here's an URL (w/ the correct spelling) that some should appreciate http://sknaster.best.vwh.net/stuff/MAD/furshlugginer.html
Re: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
> The Olympic Games serve two purposes... to represent your country and to give athletes the opportunity to see if >they are one of the top marathoners in the world. It is not a charity ball where you get to go if you have worked the >hardest. If anything it is a reward for the people who have demostrated that they can do ALL of the following... >each one, in my opinion, is of equal importance: > a) run as fast as the best people in the world, > b) beat the best people in this country on the day it matters > c) CAN RUN WELL UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE OLYMPIC MARATHON By these criteria, we should send nobody. That is what many countries do. But assuming we are going to send somebody, the marathon trials policy accomplishes this BETTER than the track trials do. In the track trials, you could have a guy win a tactical 1500m in 3:39. 2nd 3rd and 4th place might have run 3:35 earlier in the year to get "A" standards. They'll be the ones going to the Olympics yet they will have accomplished none of your three criteria above. At least the winner will have accomplished standard #2, so by your definition, he is the one we should send. If we had two or three legitimate contenders for men and women (sub 2:08 and sub 2:25), then I might see your point. I'll note that in a hot and humid marathon I would not put any money on KK. But with our current crop of marathoners, doing the marathon trials like the track trials would be more likely to result in sending runners who meet none of your criteria. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: USATF News & Notes: December 5, 2001
In a message dated 12/5/01 9:03:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << "Selig," for heaven's sake! It's clear that Dave is neither a cricket nor a baseball afficionado.. >> Au contraire!(sp?)..Dave goofed big-time on Selig's name, but he knows more about baseball than most people on this list know about track and field (and that's meant as a compliment to Dave, not a knock on anyone reading this). Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: Re: Hosting 2004 Olympic Marathon Trials
I don't understand this discussion. And I also don't understand the logic behind USATFs decision making process. Why aren't the standards for the marathon the same for track? Top 3 go... assuming they have the A standard. If they do not, then the next highest finished with the standard goes. They have a certain amount of time to get it. End of story. If it means we send no one... so be it... no one goes. The Olympic Games serve two purposes... to represent your country and to give athletes the opportunity to see if they are one of the top marathoners in the world. It is not a charity ball where you get to go if you have worked the hardest. If anything it is a reward for the people who have demostrated that they can do ALL of the following... each one, in my opinion, is of equal importance: a) run as fast as the best people in the world, b) beat the best people in this country on the day it matters c) CAN RUN WELL UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS AS THE OLYMPIC MARATHON In my opinion, it is necessary to meet all the conditions. Take David Morris for example. A self professed runner who can't deal with the heat. Hey, I have an idea... lets make the marathon in Alaska so he can win and get the "A" standard... only to bomb and dnf when he gets to Athens. Real smart. Mike _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
t-and-f: January 13 - Open Meet
UNIVERSITY of DELAWARE OPEN TRACK & FIELD MEET JANUARY 13, 2002 $5.00/individual event - $10.00/relay No pre-registration. Doors open at 10:30am. Information, contact - Jim Fischer - 302-831-8846 FIELD EVENTS Noon Long Jump 4 Jumps Open Pit Triple Jump 4 Jumps Open Pit (Follows Long Jump) Noon Weight Throw Open Circle Shot Put Open Circle (Follows Weight Throw) Noon High Jump Women, then Men Noon Pole Vault Women, then Men RUNNING EVENTS Women, then Men 12:30pm 60m High Hurdles 60m Dash 1 Mile Run 400m Dash 1 Mile Racewalk 800m Run 200m Dash 3000m Run 4 x 400m Relay
Re: t-and-f: USATF News & Notes: December 5, 2001
At 8:50 PM -0800 05.12.2001, William H. Allen wrote: >"Selig," for heaven's sake! It's clear that Dave is neither a cricket nor a >baseball afficionado.. > Bill Allen Thanks to all my friends for being kind in chiding me about me stupidity. Thanks to everyone else for saying nothing at all. It is undoubtedly time for me to crawl back under my rock as I've publicly shown myself to be unworthy of living on this list. Bezball not been bery, bery good to me! Dave Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
