Darrell,
How can you eliminate Linford from the top five saying he didn't dominate
his event,
and then in the same post call Frankie dominant. That's ludicrous, Frankie
only won
one championship and it wasn't even a 100m. Mitchell never placed higher
than third
in a major championships individual event and he is a big time performer.
Linford
dominated the 100m from 1992-1994 (1994 he was robbed for AOY) and placing
2nd in Seoul, and 4th in Tokyo (due to a Mitchell false start) hardly makes
him a
spectator any more than Frankie or Mitchell were. And saying Ben minus the
drug
bust was just a good sprinter! Without a drug suspension he was the fastest
and
most dominant who ever lived. He would have destroyed Maurice.
Carl is obviously the greatest, but the rest of your post makes no sense at
all.
Glenn Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: t-and-f: Mo Greene
> Such an arbitrary discussion. I think we can pretty much agree that carl
is
> the greatest to date. Time will be the only definition for Mo.
> As for Ben, he is no where near the top 5, and it has nothing to do with
his
> drug bust. He was good sprinter, but that is all. I do not think Libford
is
> near the top 5 either. He won 2 majors (commendable), but other than that
he
> was a participant in some of the greatest races ever run. He never truly
> dominanted his event at any point.
> The most dominant sprinters we have seen in our time are Carl, Mo, and
> Frankie. Big time performers have been Carl, Mo, Valery, Donovan (ugh),
and
> Dennis Mitchell. That�s right I said Dennis. Check the records and you
will
> find him everywhere. Check American records and you cannot see a
> championship without his name in it somewhere.
>
> Darrell Jr.
