That women's 100h was HOT!


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

That women's 100h was HOT!

Postby Guest » Sat May 24, 2003 6:20 pm

After today's non-Gail 4-under-12.7 day, we have a few revisions on that U.S. list! We are truly in a golden age of US women's 100 hurdling, ladies and gents, with today's super 4, a still studly Gail and scads of other young women's hurdlers between 12.65-13.00.

100 HURDLES
12.33 ................. Gail Devers (NikI) 00
12.42 ........... Anjanette Kirkland (Nik) 01
12.51 ............... Miesha McKelvy (Nik) 03
12.53 ............ Melissa Morrison (Reeb) 98
12.61 .......... Jackie Joyner-Kersee (WC) 88
12.63 .................. Angie Vaughn (Tx) 98
....................... Jenny Adams (Nik) 01
12.65 ..................Donica Merriman 03
12.67 ................. Lynda Goode (NikI) 93
..................... Joanna Hayes (unat) 00
12.68 ................. Sharon Couch (adi) 00
....... Danielle Carruthers (In) 02
Guest
 

Re: That women's 100h was HOT!

Postby Guest » Sat May 24, 2003 6:24 pm

by the way, is Felician an American? I notice a tick by her name in one place and not another. You've got her, Denby, McIntosh, Carruthers, Jones and others in the collegiate ranks, plus ... are Hayes and Vaughn still active?
Guest
 

Re: That women's 100h was HOT!

Postby blacklily » Sat May 24, 2003 6:40 pm

Perdita Felicien is Canadian.

Today's race was on fire! World-leading mark, new personal best, & new Jamaican record for Bridgette Foster. Miesha McKelvy & Donica Merriman with new PBs. Jenny Adams just .05 or .06 off her PB. Paris should excite.
blacklily
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: That women's 100h was HOT!

Postby Guest » Sun May 25, 2003 7:54 pm

Am still trying to figure out why the women's "high" hurdles remains stuck in 1969, the year it replaced the 80 meter event (which, by the way, is not challenging for many 12 year olds. In 1969, women were still waiting for the 1500 to become an Olympic event, the multi-event was a pentathlon, there had been no Olympic 4x400, the 400 hurdles, pole vault and triple jump were years away. So why isn't the hurdles a truly challenging 110-metre event, spaced like the men's race, with 36" hurdles? High school males run that race starting at 15 or 16. How many guys that age can pole vault 4.81, long jump 7.52, run a 2:15 marathon or sprint 21.34? It's time the women's hurdles moved forward, like the rest of the women's events have done.
Guest
 

Re: That women's 100h was HOT!

Postby Guest » Mon May 26, 2003 12:07 am

Ever after 30 years have passed, guys are still taller than girls, in case you haven't noticed. 3-ft hurdles are a good idea (in fact, I believe the idea is to introduce the higher hurdles in a couple of years); spacing the hurdles in the same way as for the men isn't. You'd end up with an event where only 6-ft tall women have a realistic chance.
It's a good thing you didn't suggest raising the hurdles to 42"...
Guest
 

Re: That women's 100h was HOT!

Postby Guest » Wed Jun 18, 2003 3:26 pm

Gee, thanks for the compliment. You're right, it is a good thing I didn't suggest raising the height to 42", that would really make me a total moron, wouldn't it, lol! How kind of you to point that out, and how germane to the discussion. As if I was considering such a stupid idea in the first place. In case you hadn't noticed, the reason Gail Devers hit the final hurdle in Barcelona was because she was too fast to control her speed in between barriers which for her were too closely spaced.

By the way, a few decades ago the IAAF was considering adding the 400 hurdles to the women's program. A bunch of men (with attitudes like your own) went to watch a women's 400 hurdles race in Britain. The race was a pitiful representation of what women were capable of doing, the men said "told you so", and women waited a while longer before the IAAF realized the error in their thinking. As far as your reasoning that women could not handle a 110 metres raced with 36" barriers spaced like the men's race, when and where have you tested the concept? And frankly I would rather give women the chance to try a more challenging event like the one I have proposed, and see what happens, before deciding for them that only 6 ft women could handle it. Do you think maybe the average male high hurdler is a bit taller than the average male sprinter?
Guest
 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], JumboElliott, lonewolf, sjm1368, TimRoy and 13 guests