Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    Ceteris paribus, he still needs at least a 19.38 to reach the summit. Similarly, he needs at least a 19.70 to move up another notch.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Tuariki View Post
    The great disappointment is that Bolt never bothered to really try and do an all out 400, circa 2009/2010. If he had gone all out back then, there would not be any argument about the 1-2-4 GOAT.
    Nothing disappointing about Usain Bolt. He was just the greatest sprinter of all time. If you need a 1-2-4 guy there is always Herb McKenley. Neither Tommie Smith or Michael Johnson came close to medalling or setting WR in the 100, the prime distance in valuing sprinters. Were they ever even ranked in the top 10 in the 100?
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    from an IP that never sent jazz that PM, never !
    Posts
    7,034
    Quote Originally Posted by gh View Post
    You're right.... if he had done it, the answer would still be Tommie Smith :-)
    Hear hear, these 124 lists almost criminal in their bias against earlier generations. That Smith isnt on it is almost laughable.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    For the record, "Jet Gear" is 31st:

    3544 Tommie Smith 10.1 (1092) 19.83 (1247) 44.5 (1205)

    Who knows how fast he could have run?
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    16,062
    Quote Originally Posted by The Flying Pigdog View Post
    MJ didn't really run the 100m. Do you believe MJ was a 10.09 sprinter? In 1996, I think he was low 9.9x, possibly high 9.8x
    And he wasn't really a 19.32 sprinter, either.
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Sleeping in Finland
    Posts
    4,350
    Quote Originally Posted by ATK View Post
    If I did my math correct a 19.60 and 9.84 gets him equal to Bolt, which is more realistic.
    Just looking at the short view - this year - I think he's more likely to run 19.38 than 19.60 and 9.84. He's been very good at peaking for big meets so far, and the London track is fast, so the WCs will be an excellent opportunity for him to drop a super-fast 200 time.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Powell View Post
    And he wasn't really a 19.32 sprinter, either.
    Trying to picture Gwen Torrence's second best 200 being a 22.06. No. There's just a big gap between 19.32 and 19.66.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    from an IP that never sent jazz that PM, never !
    Posts
    7,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidokun View Post
    For the record, "Jet Gear" is 31st:

    3544 Tommie Smith 10.1 (1092) 19.83 (1247) 44.5 (1205)

    Who knows how fast he could have run?
    Yeah, the tracks have gotten so much faster and the training methods more advanced, put all 30 that are ahead of him and take them back to start in the mid 60s and theyd be behind number 31.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #29
    Quote Originally Posted by user4 View Post
    Yeah, the tracks have gotten so much faster and the training methods more advanced, put all 30 that are ahead of him and take them back to start in the mid 60s and theyd be behind number 31.
    Maybe — seriously — but one big thing both Smith and Bolt had was extreme competitiveness, not just in terms of who was on the track at the time; give me that time machine! But of course this is all historical fantasy that belongs in the other forum. Really, like any good 68-year-old, I'm looking to the future, and it's pretty clear who that is.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Right next to a Gator filled pond
    Posts
    4,823
    Quote Originally Posted by gh View Post
    you know somebody as reached the super-elite when he gets referred to by his first name (note that I say "he"; unfortunately too many people assign first-name status to those of the XX variety no matter what their age/fame).

    oh, ok, rant off
    Part of the reason I used his first name is the unusual spelling such that I don't think anyone would have any doubt who I was speaking of. The other is Wayde is a lot easier to type :-)

    At the Brooks meet (or was it NBN or both)?, having the first names on the runners bibs I found completely useless for both genders.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •