This reasoning is not holding up. (Then why does the USA have to keep importing foreign athletes into the school sports systems?) Borzow was probably doped, but so were the vast majority of the US sprinters of the day. Remeber that the USSR and the GDR imported their doping science from the USA.
An one Olympic Games cycle? Let's check Borzow in 1972. Born on Oct. 20, 1949, he was still shy of 23 years. Equal in age to his American counterparts, or even younger in some cases. So much for that advantage...
Some information about Borzow's background in 1972. He emerged at the scene in 1969. Then he first won the USSR Champs and then a hair thin European Champs title, still a teenager. (His ECh win was won 0.01 in front of French sprinter Alain Sarteur. The time was 10.4e into a -2.7 wind). But he also sensatioanlly equalled the European Record with a hand timed 10.0. In 1970 he had injury problems, but won the USSR-USA match in Leningrad. (The USA was represented by Ben Vaughan (yes, a white sprinter) and Ivory Crockett, with John Carlos out because of injury).
In 1971, Borzow was ranked World No. 1 by TFN after winning the ECh in Helsinki (an impressive 10.26 into -1.3, with the silver winner Gerhard Wucherer of FRG at 10.48. Borzow also won the 200 with 20.30 (0.0), 0.41 in front of FRG:s Franz-Peter Hofmeister.) Borzow that summer again ran a hand timed 10.0 (Eur Rec equalled). He once met the top US sprinters. That happened at the USA-USSR (+ guests) match in Berkeley. Borzow won into a head wind with 10.5, with Jim Green second (10.5 - a strange time, since all photos show that Borzow is around 4 ft in front), Lennox Miller (10.6) third, Don Quarrie (10.7) fourth, Del Meriwether (10.7) fifth and Aleksandr Korneljuk (10.8) sixth.
And then it was 1972... Double Olympic Golds and so on. But I admit, I would have loved to see a 100 final with Ed Hart and Rey Robinson in it. Especially Hart was good, proven by his last leg in the relay.
My opinion is that Valeriy Borzow is one of the great sprinters of all time. Also the rest of his career proved that, with more European Champs golds, six 60 titles indoors, a new Olympic medal etc. It might be true that it's harder to find top class sprinters among white Europeans. Actually the Eastern bloc proved that. If it was only a question of doping and some secret training, then why didn't they mass-produce the likes of Borzow? No, because in the end you also need that extra talent - Borzow, to strike gold. He was a product of an efficient system, but also a great talent who would have succeeded in any system.
And finally - don't get tempted to see the world through those old good-bad, west-east, US-commie, type of glasses. You should know that we Swedes have had our fair share of doping problems. And we got almost all our impulses from the USA...
Merry Christmas
Mats Åkerlind
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 12/21/00 7:49:38 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Actually Hines ran an auto timed 10.03 in his Sacramento race in 68 .. And
Hayes auto time in Tokyo was 10.05 .. Nonetheless Borzov's 10.07 placed
him right at the mark with the best of his time .. And even today, there are
only a hand full of sprinters that can say they can step on the track with
confidence and run faster .. 10.07 made this year's American sprint squad
for the games !!! And 10.07 would have placed 4th and just out of the money
at this year's games .. A quarter century later ..OK stop running down this endless road of who could do what, when and where.
There is no definitive answer. And the facts are being misconstrued.
Borzov's 10.07 is no where near the times run in Sacramento. And we can
never discount the variable of "level of competition."
Every champion was a champion of that time and era, very few transcend the
time gap, but not all. And Borzov was not one of them. What if in the 60's
and 70's the American sprinters could train beyond one Olympic Games, or had
the sports regime of the eastern Bloc? We would not know Valery Borzov.DGS
The G.O.A.T.
