Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 11 of 15 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 145
  1. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,116
    Quote Originally Posted by rhymans View Post
    Very difficult comparing athletes from different events and eras. Peter Matthews and I tried to do it for men and women 4 years ago, and came up with this top-10 for Women

    1. Fanny Blankers-Koen
    2. Irena Szewinska
    3. Iolanda Balas
    4. Jackie Joyner-Kersee
    5. Marita Koch
    6. Yelena Isinbayeva
    7. Tirunesh Dibaba
    8. Heike Drechsler
    9. Gail Devers
    10. Merlene Ottey

    FBK set WRs or world bests in the 100, 200, 80H, HJ, LJ and PEN. Not even Szewinska had that range. FBK had great success at OG level [4G in 1948] and competed in Berlin in '36 [too young] and Helsinki in '52 [injured in Hurdles final, she beat Strickland, Gold medallist, after the Games]. I think only Szewinska is in her class for range and durability. They are followed by the most dominant woman in any single event - Balas [the female equivalent of Ed Moses], and then by JJK - certainly, America's greatest.
    NO....
    And FBK competed against who? Not one of the ladies above JJK had her combo of speed, power, jumping ability. I do not see a contest here.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzcyclist View Post
    I won't quibble with King Gustav's definition of greatness but I do define dominance differently than some other folks do. Both David Rudisha and Joyner own 6 of the 10 best performances in the events? Are they equally dominant?
    Since an 800m runner can compete more often than a heptathlete, having six of top ten is more impressive for the latter.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by TN1965 View Post
    Since an 800m runner can compete more often than a heptathlete, having six of top ten is more impressive for the latter.
    I don't follow that logic. Having fewer performers and fewer performances in an event makes it easier to dominate a performance list not harder. I'll bet Stacy Dragila dominated the performance list when the pole vault was still in its infancy.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzcyclist View Post
    I don't follow that logic. Having fewer performers and fewer performances in an event makes it easier to dominate a performance list not harder. I'll bet Stacy Dragila dominated the performance list when the pole vault was still in its infancy.
    And a pole vaulter can compete even more often than an 800m runner.

    If you compete twice a year, you only have two chances to have your performances in the all time list. You need to make both of them count. If you compete eight times, you can afford to have bad races.

    An 800m runner who is dominant for three seasons have far more chances to get the top six marks in that span than a heptathlete who has to go six for six.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzcyclist View Post
    But is that an indicator of dominance or a relative lack of depth of performers and performances in multis compared to track events? How fast would Usain Bolt, Michael Johnson, David Rudisha or El G have had to run in order run 9% faster than the #100 performer all-time in their respective events? Does anyone really think it's realistic to expect someone run run 9.1, 40.5 or 1:34 anytime soon?
    We can compare Jackie to #2 performer and Rudisha to #100 and she's still way up ahead.

    Ashton Eaton's best score is 99.11% of Mayer's WR. #2 at 800 is 99.8% of Rudisha's record. Carolina Kluft is closest to Jackie and she's only 96.44%. This has nothing to do with lack of depth in the multi events, Jackie is just that much better than anyone else, and that kind of dominance doesn't exist in any other event in the sport.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Sleeping in Finland
    Posts
    4,349
    Quote Originally Posted by trackCanuck View Post
    Ashton Eaton's best score is 99.11% of Mayer's WR. #2 at 800 is 99.8% of Rudisha's record. Carolina Kluft is closest to Jackie and she's only 96.44%. This has nothing to do with lack of depth in the multi events, Jackie is just that much better than anyone else, and that kind of dominance doesn't exist in any other event in the sport.
    Włodarczyk has the 15 top performances of all time in the wHT. Železný has the top 4, 6 of the top 10, and 10 of the top 20. Both are further ahead of #2 percentage-wise than JJK is (though raw percentages aren't really comparable across different types of event anyway).
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by TN1965 View Post
    And a pole vaulter can compete even more often than an 800m runner.

    If you compete twice a year, you only have two chances to have your performances in the all time list. You need to make both of them count. If you compete eight times, you can afford to have bad races.

    An 800m runner who is dominant for three seasons have far more chances to get the top six marks in that span than a heptathlete who has to go six for six.
    I notice that you're conveniently ignoring the number of multi performers vs the number of 800 performers.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    So there are two schools of thought. One school believes that Joyner's 9% advantage over the #100 performer of all time is a fair indicator of her dominance compared to other T&F athletes and another says that this metric is an absurd way to compare athletes from different events because of the varied nature of events. I come from the latter school. Those in the former school believe Usain Bolt would had to run 9.1, Michael Johnson 40.5 and El G 3:07 to match Joyner's dominance.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzcyclist View Post
    I notice that you're conveniently ignoring the number of multi performers vs the number of 800 performers.
    I notice that you are conveniently ignoring my point.

    If "fewer performances per athlete" makes it easier to dominate the all time list, then marathoners should have advantage in that.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by TN1965 View Post
    I notice that you are conveniently ignoring my point.

    If "fewer performances per athlete" makes it easier to dominate the all time list, then marathoners should have advantage in that.
    I didn't ignore it I already rejected it. Where do you stand on the relative paucity of multi performers compared to track performers?
    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
  •