jacobs will run in the olympics


This Forum was created to divert traffic from Current Events at the height of the BALCO scandal. It comes and goes as "needed"; it's back to being locked.

jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:33 am

i have a feeling that somehow, someway she will end up running the trials and olympics. sad but true. i no longer have faith in t&f athletes.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Powell » Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:38 am

I hope to be wrong, but I also fear that we'll never learn the names of all those US athletes who tested positive for THG, as USATF will find a way to keep it secret (e.g. hiding behind privacy laws). Been there, done that before...
Powell
 
Posts: 9065
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby dl » Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:41 am

No way! I understand your pessimism, but let's be realistic. She ain't gonna be in Athens. Let's not get too cynical. I know all this stuff is depressing, but let's just see the small silver lining in the fact that testing is actually catching some cheats!
dl
 
Posts: 1805
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:30 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:42 am

USATF has nothing to do with drug testing anymore. It's done by USADA. USATF couldn't cover this up if they wanted to.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:50 am

Dude! Hasn't the past taught you anything? Regina will win the OT (need I say by outkicking Suzie in the straight?) but then will withdraw from the OG at last minute!
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:06 am

USADA PLEASE RETEST SAMPLES FROM 1996 AND 2000 GAMES....PLEASE...PLEASE....PLEASE....
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:07 am

Enough with the capslock. Learn to type.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:13 am

BELIEVE ME I KNOW HOW TO TYPE MY FRIEND..IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH MY POST THAN DON'T READ THEM...LEARN TO MIND YOUR BUSINESS!!!!!
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:23 am

Cool it, asshole. NOBODY likes to read messages in all caps. It's rude to send messages like that, and if you want to breach Internet etiquette, do it in private messages with your equally offensive friends.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:31 am

Pego ... if you're reading this please accept my apologies regarding our debate over Jacobs vs. SFH a month or so ago. Jacobs was one one of my favorite US athletes and I was shocked to read about her positive test this morning. I'm far from naive as I competed internationally in the 70's and 80's but it never crossed my mind she was a fraud.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Jon » Thu Oct 23, 2003 11:07 am

> but it never crossed my mind she
>was a fraud.



So the fact that she broke her PB (and set a WR in the process) at age 40 didn't start the alarm bells ringing? (Coupled with the fact that she doesn't have an ounce of fat on her - all muscle and sinew). She's had great longevity (been round since 1988) but for someone with that sort of longevity, you'd expect them to set their PBs in their late 20's and early 30's.

Setting a WR at age 40, questions start having to be asked....
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 11:13 am

>>Setting a WR at age 40, questions start
>having to be asked>>

When they came for the 40-year-olds I said nothing, because I was not 40; when they came for the 35-year-olds I said nothing, becuase I was not 35; when they....
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 11:17 am

>Setting a WR at age 40, questions start
having to be asked>

I don't doubt she's dirty, but any time you start using small sample of numbers to posit something as far-reaching as a drug positive I think you're on a slippery slope.

1. The Boston track, according to most who have been there, is clearly the fastest indoor--and maybe faster than any outdoor--track in the world. Banking has you running "downhill" the whole way.

2. Most of the world's great women 1500 runners have never come anywhere near an indoor mile (or 1500, even). The record is soft-soft-soft.

It's also interesting that when an Andres Espinoza sets a masters WR in the marathon at Berlin, or Eddie Helleybuck does American Masters that everybody goes "wow, those old guys are great!" but Jacobs somehow gets demonized. In retrospect, they have apparently been right, but why did she get trashed when other great aged-ones achieve god status?
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Powell » Thu Oct 23, 2003 11:26 am

None of those marathon guys set a PB as masters - they are all running extremely well for their age, but not quite as fast as when they were younger.

Yes, the world 1500 indoor record is very soft compared to the outdoor record, but in recent years a sub-4:00 time has been far from an everyday thing, even outdoors. Thus when a woman does it indoors, it is a pretty big deal. Let alone a 40-year old one...

I'd like to comment on the 'downhill all the way' statement as well, but it's so absurd that I'm at a loss for words...
Powell
 
Posts: 9065
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Vanuatu

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Jon » Thu Oct 23, 2003 12:45 pm

>Banking has you running
>"downhill" the whole way.


She was running on a track, not a helter-skelter!!




>The
>record is soft-soft-soft.


The world-record may be soft, but the fact that it was a PB is still valid. In her whole international career (from 1988 when she was just 25 yrs old, up to 2003), she had never broken 4 mins either outdoors or indoors. Then, at 39 years of age, she sets a life-time best and a WR.




It's also
>interesting that when an Andres Espinoza sets a
>masters WR in the marathon at Berlin, or Eddie
>Helleybuck does American Masters that everybody
>goes "wow, those old guys are great!" but
>Jacobs somehow gets demonized. In retrospect,
>they have apparently been right, but why did she
>get trashed when other great aged-ones achieve
>god status?



There's a difference between masters WRs and all-time WRs. Espinoza may have set masters WRs at ages 35+ and 40+, but they weren't a life-time best for him, and neither was it an all-time WR. As Powell said, their times are great, but they don't represent their lifetime peak. Reaching an athletic peak at 39 yrs old....?? Pah!!
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby abinferno » Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:24 pm

I don't know how questions can't be raised about all these older athletes (and the younger ones) who were affiliated with BALCO. It doesn't look good for all the sports BALCO was involved with. Unfortunately football is extremely lax with drug testing, and baseball certainly won't test any of their stars (e.g. bonds).
abinferno
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:27 pm

<<Reaching an
>athletic peak at 39 yrs old....?? Pah!!>>

Tell that to Al Oerter the next time you see him. And be sure to mention YOU think he's dirty.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Jon » Fri Oct 24, 2003 6:03 am

><<Reaching an
>athletic peak at 39 yrs old....??
>Pah!!>>

Tell that to Al Oerter the next time
>you see him. And be sure to mention YOU think
>he's dirty.



A few points.... Where did I say that I thought Oerter was unclean? What I was suggesting is that it's extremlely rare for athletes to reach their peak (yet alone set WRs) at such an age. Oerter set his last WR when he was 28 yrs old. When he set his PB (at age 44), the event had vastly progressed. In no way was I implying that Oerter was unclean!! You were putting words in to my mouth, there.

Say what you like in defence of Regina, but it's been proven that she's a cheat and it's about bloody time!
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 8:28 am

1. The Boston track, according to most
>who have been there, is clearly the fastest
>indoor--and maybe faster than any outdoor--track
>in the world. Banking has you running
>"downhill" the whole way.

gh can, if he wishes, confirm that I emailed him exactly that point. Actually, I predicted that RJ would not go under 4:00 outdoors.

When I was running in college, and coaching for a short time afterwards, that track totally blew my mind. Unfortunately, I didn't run on it but watched others run on it, and produce times they couldn't begin to produce outdoors and never did produce (to my knowledge). On an outdoor track, a good one, I suspect RJ's indoor WR would have been more like 4:03 to 4:06. That track is THAT much faster. And that bugs me because it seems just as unfair as doping.

Did doping help her do it? That's another question that I've had, and time will tell. I suspect that unless there is a test sample lurking somewhere, on or before her WR, that the performance will stand.

My advice to anyone trying to beat her record.....stay clean and go to Boston.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby MJD » Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:09 am

that track
>totally blew my mind.

What specifically is different about the track?
Is it the degree of banking or is it some kind of springiness? Did Eamonn go sub 3:50 and then sub 4 as at Millrose? What could he have done there
I wonder?
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby tandfman » Fri Oct 24, 2003 11:55 am

>Did Eamonn go sub 3:50 and then sub 4 as at Millrose?<

No, he went sub 3:50 at the Meadowlands in NY and he did his Masters sub-4 at Harvard (not the same track as the Reggie Lewis track).
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

boston tracks

Postby BillCarr » Fri Oct 24, 2003 12:50 pm

Reggie Lewis isn't even the fastest track in the city, let alone the world. BU (both the old armory boards and the new amazing field house) is a faster facility. Also, the slingshot downhill effect is in response to going uphill on the turns . . . you have to be on one of the outside lanes to get this, and Regina ran the 3:59 in Lane 1 the whole way.
BillCarr
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 12:53 pm

>>Did Eamonn go sub 3:50 and then sub 4 as at
>Millrose?<

No, he went sub 3:50 at the
>Meadowlands in NY and he did his Masters sub-4 at
>Harvard (not the same track as the Reggie Lewis
>track).


Clarification: 'The Meadowlands' is actually the Continental Airlines Arena located next to Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, NJ.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby tandfman » Fri Oct 24, 2003 1:34 pm

>Clarification: 'The Meadowlands' is actually the Continental Airlines Arena located next to Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, NJ.<

Yes, but when Coghlan ran in it, it was called the Brendan Byrne Arena. But the arena hasn't moved and yes, it is in NJ, not NY, notwithstanding the fact that they still call the team that plays in the adjacent stadium the NY Giants.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 2:16 pm

Yo, people! This is a DRUG thread....... don't you realize that if you persist in contaminating this forum with real track talk you'll run the risk of being banned?
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Guest » Wed Oct 29, 2003 6:32 am

>Yo, people! This is a DRUG thread....... don't
>you realize that if you persist in contaminating
>this forum with real track talk you'll run the
>risk of being banned?

To comment on an earlier query about what makes this track so fast. The answer is in the "bounce" provided by the boards. It has nothing to do with running "downhill" because on an enclosed track where the start and finish are on the same level, you can't run downhill without also running uphill. If someone starts on the top of the bank and finishes on the level, then that runner would indeed have an advantage.

There is no question that a running surface with a tuned "reflex" or rebound response would help propel a runner. It would mainly work for runners of a certain mass and rate of downward impulse into the running surface. The surface deflects....and if it doesn't bounce back before the runner has left the surface, then it absorbs the force, slows the runner down, and decreases running efficiency. To wit, dry sand. Of course, if you've ever run on a beach, you know the way to make it better is to run on the wet sand next to the water.

Going the other direction, if the surface rebounds in such a speed and time that it coincides with the runner's muscle contractions, then that surface will provide a boost. It stores some of the downward impulse and then returns it back to the runner's foot before the stance phase is over. Such a running surface would have an optimal range of impulses where it would help. Runners outside that range would not see much benefit, because they would either have already left the surface (e.g., sprinters) or the bounce back would come too soon and not coincide with their own pushoff (e.g., ultramarathoners).

Since outdoor tracks are all either 1) hard, or 2) hard with a soft rubbery surface, none of them have this rebound phenomenon. Or if they do, the optimal range is likely limited to 60-100 m (because the resonance frequency of such a surface is higher than boards).

That's why it is possible to have an indoor track that is faster than an outdoor track, despite the tighter turns. In the middle distances, the indoor turns aren't so tight that they are a hindrance, and the board surface (if it's just right) can help the runner.

So.....back to the statement:
>Yo, people! This is a DRUG thread....... don't
>you realize that if you persist in contaminating
>this forum with real track talk you'll run the
>risk of being banned?

IMHO, such a track is better than drugs. It's like the difference between bamboo / aluminum poles vs glass vs carbon. The effect size is big. And in a sport where *times* are compared from one venue to another, I don't think it's right. But it's there, and nobody is talking about not ratifying marks set on such tracks, so my advice to runners in races above 800m: do yourself a favor and go run there, it's cheating made legal.
Guest
 

Re: jacobs will run in the olympics

Postby Jon » Wed Oct 29, 2003 7:07 am

>IMHO, such a track is better than
>drugs.



Regina was lucky enough to have both!
Jon
 
Posts: 9231
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest