Netters
Jeff Degraw wrote:
> I think a lot of you are missing perhaps the "toughest distance runner" the
> USA has ever had...George Young. Look at his career and he will stack up
> against anyone...and there wasn't anyone tough. His first marathon ever...he
> won the trials.
Jeff beat me to this
Mike wrote:
>Jeff beat me to this. George Young is indeed the most overlooked runner
>in the U.S. And he is one of the runners that I point too as support for
>my theory that the golden age of american distance running was 1964
>to about 1976 and that it was after the "runn
Netters
Conway wrote:
Question: With respect to the "running boom" did it perhaps make running too "recreational" in this country ??? And in so doing change the mindset of distance running/runners ??
That is exactly what I think. The "recreational mindset" permeates distance running. Even when
Actually, the facts don't quite paint the same picture. From 1976-1985 more
Americans ranked in the world scene at distances than ever before.
http://digilander.iol.it/rzocca/
malmo
>
> Jeff beat me to this. George Young is indeed the most overlooked runner
> in the U.S. And he is one of the
Malmo wrote:
>Actually, the facts don't quite paint the same picture. From 1976-1985 more
>Americans ranked in the world scene at distances than ever before.
>
But those athletes would have already been in the "system" so to speak ... They were trianing and involved in the sport pri
I do not believe the downfall of U.S. distance running began with the first
running boom that started in the mid 1970's and peaked in the very early
1980's. As others have pointed out, the U.S. had plenty of world caliber
runners during that time, even though the Africans were already beginning t
For those on the list who believe that the "Running Boom" has caused some
dilution in focus and a lowering of standards for the serious distance
runner, please find a copy of Heinonen's "Road Racing" and read it. The
title is something different than that, and I apologize, but can't remember
it.
At 01:51 AM 3/29/2001 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote..
>Jeff beat me to this. George Young is indeed the most overlooked runner
>in the U.S. And he is one of the runners that I point too as support for
>my theory that the golden age of american distance running was 1964
>to about 1976 and that it wa
Mcewen, Brian T wrote:
> Now, in 2001, if you are a non-African you are 20 seconds back in a 5k.
> That is not a result of the running boom though ... The other sports
> that require a HUGE amount of practice and training have experienced a
> similar downturn in the US (swimming, tennis, cycling
In a message dated Thu, 29 Mar 2001 2:22:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, Richard McCann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<< At 01:51 AM 3/29/2001 -0800, t-and-f-digest wrote..
>Jeff beat me to this. George Young is indeed the most overlooked runner
>in the U.S. And he is one of the runners that I poin
;African's" ??
What would it be ??? Or am I totally off base ??? Have others made the same observation or am I just seeing things ???
Conway
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: t-and-f: Distance Runners
>D
Conway wrote:
<<< We've become totally intimidated by the opposition as presented by the
"African's" ?? >>>
We have? I thought it was just too hard to beat a 2:07 marathoner when you
are a 2:12 marathoner .. and too hard to hang with 62 second laps when you
cover 5000m at 64 a lap ...
Sugge
Brian wrote:
>Conway wrote:
><<< We've become totally intimidated by the opposition as presented by the
>"African's" ?? >>>
>
>We have? I thought it was just too hard to beat a 2:07 marathoner when you
>are a 2:12 marathoner .. and too hard to hang with 62 second laps when you
>cover 5000m
> Stop saying the "Running Boom" did it or I will pull out THE BIG GUNS and
go
> to work on proving THAT THE RUNNING BOOM WAS NOT TO BLAME ... with a lot
of
> boring running history and anecdotes.
The second running boom is one factor among many in the decline, and like it
or not, attitude is mat
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Conway HillSent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 5:20
PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: t-and-f: Distance
Runners
Th the risk of being jumped on by the distance crowd here on the list I am
going to make an observation
<>>
Ac
In a message dated 3/29/01 5:28:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Even guys we've had with great talent -Scott or even Holman - have seemed
to
> be ok with letting people just run off from them without mustering a
> challenge ... Is this because:
You can't be talking a
Netters
After reading Brian's post and this statement:
> The US was very competitive through the 1983 World Champs and Salazar
>had some great 10ks in there. But the wheels came off in 84 at the Olympics,
>and we've never recovered.
Ok I can see the points being made here. It maybe that th
just seeing things ???
Conway
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: t-and-f: Distance Runners
>Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:31:09 EST
>
>In a message dated Thu, 29 Mar 2001 2:22:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, Richard McCann &
>Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:19:51 -0800
>From: "Conway Hill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: t-and-f: Distance Runners
>
>Th the risk of being jumped on by the distance crowd here on the list I am
>going to make an observation ... The one thing that all of
20 matches
Mail list logo
