ventolin^3 wrote:
clearly US jumpers not too familiar with conditions
Do they not have wind in the US or something?
It might have been the food though - something stuck in the throat caused them to *cough cough* choke a little bit.
I've got no problem with the US jumpers, you don't seem to want to give Rutherford any credit at all for his incredible achievements. (wonder why?)
ventolin^3 wrote:
greg got lucky the 2 americans fouled their best jump by trivial amounts
dendy looked to have launched a 8.60 in qualifying which he protested was legit :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNBp3uEoaI4here is jump :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdxHfNpXC2Ythey robbed him of shot in the final, where if he'd matched 8.60 in any of his 6 jumps he wouda blown away greg
Bullshit.
Its always better to be lucky than good. However he is good.
I guess you're saying he's lucky the Americans didn't set a world record when they jumped, and then he would have lost.
This is why they call it a final. And not all athletes can produce like he can. I always thougth Myricks should have jumped further than Lewis. And how come Powell, who wasn't as fast or talented as Lewis, is the WR holder?
If you can't make the final, you can't win it. And there is no such thing as a trivial foul, no more than being a little bit pregnant.
JJRR wrote:If you spoke proper English you would understand what that poster is trying to tell you
if you had a functioning neurone, you woud understand the argument
What you wrote above makes no sense
clueless
learn to think
If is IS a foul that's because it IS a foul
are you incapable of comprehending a comment in a vid ???
dendy says that the fractional mark on plasticine was not same shape as his shoe & that his claim was that the plasticine was insufficiently smoothed over for his jump & carried an indentation from a previous jumper
Clear so far?
eh ??
it is you who have no clue
the above shoud explain the situation which you clearly didn't comprehend from vid
If it's a suspected foul, it MAY BE (OR NOT) a foul
dendy claimed it wasn't
But having a calm, unbiased, polite conversation is beyond you...
when you have no clue about the situation you shoudn't be posting
trollism wrote:Do they not have wind in the US or something?
clearly you have comprehension issues
what part of "it took the great taylor 4 or 5 jumps to nail 18.21 with 11cm shy on board, with virtually 0 wind, quite clearly best intrinsic jump in history & by a long way" you not understand ??
it took taylor qualifying jumps & 4 or 5 jumps in final to land a monster
clearly not wind-issue as he was obviously in same form thruout meet
dendy's problem was a simple miscalculation thinking he needed to jump big to qualify when he didn't
what part of your neurone can't comprehend "if he missed the board entirely with his monster jump he wouda still easily qualified for final" ??
it was a tactical error not wind
It might have been the food though
drivel
something stuck in the throat caused them to *cough cough* choke a little bit
utter drivel
a debateable foul at ~ 8.60m is not choking
I've got no problem with the US jumpers, you don't seem to want to give Rutherford any credit at all for his incredible achievements. (wonder why?)
clueless
i have been watching lj since '76 when myricks got robbed of gold by injury & saw lutz's 1st ever 28' at sea-level live on tv in '80
greg is worst quality global champ since '76 & i cannot believe how poor the opposition have jumped thru miscalculation/bad-luck/inexperience/injury/etc apart from moscow-'13 where he got hammered
he has a 8.51pb in a completely anonymous meet which his compatriot & previous big domestic rival tomlinson complained was a foul but it was accepted by gb athletics
realistically, greg has 8.41 as best jump in a serious meet which is crap for a global champ going back all the way to '76
mlcollll wrote:Its always better to be lucky than good
utter nonsense
lucky can get you golds
it won't get you 8.70/8.80/8.90
for that you need to be "good"
I guess you're saying he's lucky the Americans didn't set a world record when they jumped, and then he would have lost
nonsense
what part of your brain thinks ~ 8.60m is the wr ???
i said if dendy had won his appeal & jumped in final, a similar 8.60m effort wouda 100% won the gold
nothing about needing 8.96 to beat greg
This is why they call it a final
thanks for explaining it
And not all athletes can produce like he can
eh ??
8.41 for a win is dire
I always thougth Myricks should have jumped further than Lewis
nonsense
not only did Lewis get robbed off a 30' jump in '82 where he didn't make a mark on plasticine & which he vehemently asked to be measured but an ignorant judge refused - a senior judge who was his supervisor at other meets has said that was a mistake, one of his toe-sand jumps in '88 final was 8.90
larry was definitely worth close to 8.80 but not bigger jumper than Carl
And how come Powell, who wasn't as fast or talented as Lewis, is the WR holder?
you clearly don't know anything about the event
Carl was ancient by '91 & well past his peak for lj & sprints as well, despite 100wr
in '84 in trials he ran 10.06 into a 2.2 !!!
with same wind as tokyo, that wouda been also 9.86 & he was easing down in his '84 race, probably couda got close to 9.80 if run hard to line !!!
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/06/18/sports/lewis-in-olympics-after-winning-100.htmlThe crowd of 20,552, the most ever for an Olympic trials, was hushed as the eight sprinters settled into the starting blocks. Lewis got a good start and led clearly after 40 meters. With 8 meters to go, he broke out in his now-famous grin and raised his arms in victory.
He won by almost 5 feet from Sam Graddy, the national and national collegiate champion from Tennessee. Ron Brown, who had put off a lucrative professional football contract to try for the Olympic team, finished third, less than a foot behind Graddy. When Lewis trotted back from the finish, he received a standing ovation.
Lewis was timed in 10.06 seconds, an Olympic trials record and exceptionally fast considering that he ran into a wind of almost 5 miles an hour
tokyo was an illegally hard track where none of the sprints/horizontal jumps shouda counted :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/athletics/world_athletics_2003/3086309.stmThen the Tokyo track was shown to be harder than IAAF rules allowed, giving the sprinters another illegal advantage.
No matter. The times - and the records - stood
imo, powell's jump on a legal runway wouda been more like a 8.70 - 8.80 jump
If you can't make the final, you can't win it
wow !
And there is no such thing as a trivial foul, no more than being a little bit pregnant
no
a foul which you contest & have hopes of a reversal of judgement by jury is a trivial one
http://www.iaaf.org/news/news/dunaways-athenian-column-day-sevenMaybe jumpers should take a course in debating as part of their training. At least that's the way it looks after a couple of jumpers disputed officials' foul calls and got the rulings reversed, without need for the jury of appeals.
In Wednesday night's women's long jump qualifying, when Germany's Bianca Keppler's third jump was red-flagged (with the toe of her shoe apparently past the foul line), she came up to the officials at the take-off board and insisted that they show her where she had marked the plasticine just past the foul line. The officials pointed to a spike mark on the board, but she kept pointing to the plasticine, where there was no mark.
After a huddle, the officials reversed their call and announced her mark 6.69, good enough to put her in the final.
Same thing happened tonight in the men's long jump final. After his first jump was called a foul, Bogdan Tarus of Romania went through the same routine. It was a different group of officials, but I suspect they had seen what happened the night before, because the discussion was a lot shorter tonight. And Bogdan got the jump, his best of the evening at 8.21m. It gives you a pretty good idea of the quality of the field when you realize that he finished eighth!
what shouda happened in dendy's case was that the jump shouda been measured, the plasticine strip removed from board, placed carefully in large plastic bag only holding strp by edges, placed in a large box & sent immediately to the jury to examine
none of this happened which shows what a travesty this sport still is - completely amateur at the judging/appeals level
Talking to yourself again? lol
ventolin^3 wrote:
when you have no clue about the situation you shoudn't be posting
That? Coming from you? hahahaha
I think we should organise an LRC petition to the IAAF to:
1.) Award world championship medals to athletes Ventolin thinks should have won
2.) Award world records to the rightful owners - if only they woulda coulda shoulda performed as Ventolin's calculator says they can. 1:37 for 800, 3:24 for 1500 here we come!
If we can have a 20 000 post thread on Mike Rossi, we can have a 100 000 post thread to force the IAAF to acknowledge Ventolin's awards!!!! Power to the calculator! Viva!
ventolin^3 wrote:
And how come Powell, who wasn't as fast or talented as Lewis, is the WR holder?you clearly don't know anything about the event
Carl was ancient by '91 & well past his peak for lj & sprints as well, despite 100wr
in '84 in trials he ran 10.06 into a 2.2 !!!
with same wind as tokyo, that wouda been also 9.86 & he was easing down in his '84 race, probably couda got close to 9.80 if run hard to line !!!
Well then, why didn't Lewis set a WR >8.95 when he was in his prime?
Woulda, coulda, shoulda...
i suggest you watch his
8.72 -0.2 Carl Lewis USA 01.07.61 1 Seoul 26.09.1988
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGuH_jjauHg
& a comment which is generally correct apart from being best jump of his life :
"He barely even stepped on the board with his feet, there was so much ample space left. This could have been 8.90 meters, or, had he had 2.0 meters per second tailwind instead of the slight headwind of 0.2 meters per second, even a new world record. This could well have been the greatest jump of his entire life"
toe-sand that was an 8.90m into a wind !!!
that is the figure mentioned in iaaf wr book
beamon's jump had 2.0m/s wind & powell's on illegal track a +0.3
if he'd nailed the board & got any semi-decent wind, that was 9+ & on a legal runway
ventolin^3 wrote:in '84 in trials he ran 10.06 into a 2.2 !!!
from history of trials :
http://www.usatf.org/statistics/champions/OlympicTrials/HistoryOfTheOlympicTrials.pdfgo look up page 193 :
it is said he looked over 4 times, lifted his arms 10m from line costing 0.5m
in a booklet later produced by "swiss timing", they considered his time in 0 wind wouda been 9.84
i doubt they took off the 0.5m lost thru celebrating, just adjusting for wind, so that was more like a 9.79 with 0 wind if run hard to the line according to those experts
ventolin^3 wrote:
i suggest you watch his
8.72 -0.2 Carl Lewis USA 01.07.61 1 Seoul 26.09.1988
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGuH_jjauHg& a comment which is generally correct apart from being best jump of his life :
"He barely even stepped on the board with his feet, there was so much ample space left. This could have been 8.90 meters, or, had he had 2.0 meters per second tailwind instead of the slight headwind of 0.2 meters per second, even a new world record. This could well have been the greatest jump of his entire life"
toe-sand that was an 8.90m into a wind !!!
that is the figure mentioned in iaaf wr book
beamon's jump had 2.0m/s wind & powell's on illegal track a +0.3
if he'd nailed the board & got any semi-decent wind, that was 9+ & on a legal runway
Thanks for that reference.
Two points:
I would argue that a head wind of 0.2 m/s is not much.
Also, unfortunately, jumps are not measured from toe to sand, but the board to sand, which I suppose is a form of measuring technical ability (or luck) of the athlete. Maybe with today's technology it is possible to measure toe to sand, but costs would probably relegate such a variance to WC and Olympics only.
Still very much a case of "if".
[quote]ventolin^3 wrote:
greg got lucky the 2 americans fouled their best jump by trivial amounts'
There is no luck in it. The long jump is a technical event and if not fouling is a big part of it
Absolutely. Imagine if we gave high jumpers the credit for mis-placing their take-off foot. Or sprinters got measured on the speed from actually setting off to crossing the line, rather than from the gun.
The rule is, you don't foul the board. You could be a 10m long jumper, but if you foul, you haven't completed a successful jump. Having the mental capabilities aligned to peaking your physical capabilities on both qualification days and finals days is part of the the skill of a good / great long jumper. Greg has consistently shown this to be a great strength of his, and he has reaped the rewards from it.
He doesn't seem to have a monster jump in him. But then, others don't seem to have the technical and mental abilities to beat him on the biggest stages. That makes them losers, and him the winner. They need to deal with that.
Green leaves wrote:Thanks for that reference.
Two points:
I would argue that a head wind of 0.2 m/s is not much
it is something when 8.95wr had 0.3
that makes 0.5m/s difference to Carl's which at exalted ~ 8.90 level is worth ~ 5cm from my estimate calculations
( 2m/s wind worth ~ 20cm )
powell's wind was worth ~ 5cm advantage over Carl's
ventolin^3 wrote:
i suggest you watch his
8.72 -0.2 Carl Lewis USA 01.07.61 1 Seoul 26.09.1988
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGuH_jjauHg& a comment which is generally correct apart from being best jump of his life :
"He barely even stepped on the board with his feet, there was so much ample space left. This could have been 8.90 meters, or, had he had 2.0 meters per second tailwind instead of the slight headwind of 0.2 meters per second, even a new world record. This could well have been the greatest jump of his entire life"
toe-sand that was an 8.90m into a wind !!!
that is the figure mentioned in iaaf wr book
beamon's jump had 2.0m/s wind & powell's on illegal track a +0.3
if he'd nailed the board & got any semi-decent wind, that was 9+ & on a legal runway
further to this, Carl had just about worst possible circumstances for this final
- he had entered the 200 which meant that morning he had to run a 1st round run in 20.73
so already, he didn't come into the lj final with fresh legs
that run alone musta been worth a few cms for his best jump compared to fresh legs
he also had to run the 2nd round of the 200 in evening session but i think it was after the lj final as i can't believe he wouda run a 2nd 200 before the lj final !!!
he ran that in 20.57
- then in lj final he got screwed in the final by the officials :
he led after 3 rounds with 8.56 in 2nd round & just jumped 8.52 in 3rd round ( & coudn't rely on 8.56 as winning jump ), then expected some rest as usually only top 8 get 3 more jumps with leader always jumping last
however, this did not happen :
http://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/summer/1988/ATH/mens-long-jump.htmlBut getting ready for the fourth round, a new official told Lewis he now had to jump first, not last. He argued that he should be given extra time to recover from his third-round jump, but was rebuffed. A long jump clock malfunction gave him some extra time and he responded with 8.72 (28-7½), winning the event easily with a dominant series
he wouda normally expected 10 - 15 minutes rest between 3rd & 4th jump for leader, but even with a clock malfunction, i doubt he got anywhere close to this much rest with sudden turnaround demanded by the official
you have to figure that his monster 8.72 was done on even more tired legs than barely conceivable, maybe just a handful of minutes turnaround
without the 200 earlier in day & sudden turnaround for the 4th round, it has to be said he jumped that 8.90 intrinsic with seriously tired legs, easily 10+ cm more if he'd come in without a 200 in morning & had a proper 10 - 15 minute gap between 3rd & 4th rounds
Medal ceremony & WRs wrote:
I think we should organise an LRC petition to the IAAF to:
1.) Award world championship medals to athletes Ventolin thinks should have won
Absolutely. Let's set up the Intrinsic World Championships.
Or even the Intrinsic Olympics.
Motto: Wouda, Couda, Shouda.
ventolin^3 wrote:without the 200 earlier in day & sudden turnaround for the 4th round, it has to be said he jumped that 8.90 intrinsic with seriously tired legs, easily 10+ cm more if he'd come in without a 200 in morning & had a proper 10 - 15 minute gap between 3rd & 4th rounds
has to be added, neither powell or beamon had run 4 rounds of 100m prior to lj, each culminating in wr of 9.92 in '88 or 9.86 in '91, so Carl never came in with fresh legs to lj anyways at major despite anymore wrecking his legs took before the lj final in '88
I bet you and Carl swapped pictures of your crystal collection.
I also bet you're a pom coach. You have all the characteristics.