Mike Larrabee 1933-2003


Forum devoted to track & field items of an historical nature.

Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Tue Apr 22, 2003 8:14 pm

Mike Larrabee, 1964 Double Olympic Champion dies of cancer at age 69.

http://foxsports.lycos.com/content/view ... Id=1103292
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 23, 2003 1:31 pm

I was sad to read about Mike's death. I recall that he had trouble at the 1964 AAU. Two races were run in one day there. A student "jokingly gave me a judo cut in the stomach that ruptured my pancreas" two months before his race according to the July 1964 T&FN . Could this injury have caused his cancer? Your name is familiar. I was statistician at T&FN 1965 - 1967. Were you a corespondent or one of our frequent wroter of letters to the editor then?
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 23, 2003 6:31 pm

I was not a subscriber to T&FN until 1967. I became involved in high level track in 1971 when I became the coach of the Ohio Track Club. I was the coach of Dick Bruggeman, 1972 Olympian in the 400 hurdles. I was one of the first persons to study the equivalent effects of wind and altitude on sprint performances.
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby oldvaulter » Wed Apr 23, 2003 10:37 pm

>I was one of the first persons to
>study the equivalent effects of wind and altitude
>on sprint performances.

Then what do you think of gh's preferences of 500m altitude limit and 5.0mps wind limit? I wrote (in the "South of the Border" thread) that this seems disproportionate -- a very restrictive altitude limit and a quite permissive wind limit. I'd like to know your opinion.
oldvaulter
 
Posts: 970
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: rural Northern California

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Thu Apr 24, 2003 5:43 am

I agree with you completely. gh, as Bert Nelson before him, apparently doesn't believe in physics.
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby gh » Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:56 am

>I agree with you completely. gh, as Bert Nelson
>before him, apparently doesn't believe in
>physics.>>

I believe in physics. What I don't believe in is physicists who come up with bad numbers, which is what I think most analysis of wind/altitude aid is. In their defense, it's not as if there's a set of immutable numbers that can be plugged into unquestioned formulae. I could be wrong, but as far as I know, it's all hypothetical.

And after 35 years of closely watching the sport's numbers, empirical evidence tells me there's more effect than the hypotheses have come up with, that's all.

gh

ps--about physics: Newton's First Law, OK, I buy that; The Second, nah, and the jury's still out on The Third :-)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Thu Apr 24, 2003 9:41 pm

We have trusted Tafnews for years in matters of things like massaging stats for what they're really worth. Does GH's take about physics vs. physicists hold any water?
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:07 pm

>>I agree with you completely. gh, as Bert
>Nelson
>before him, apparently doesn't believe
>in
>physics.>>

I believe in physics. What I
>don't believe in is physicists who come up with
>bad numbers, which is what I think most analysis
>of wind/altitude aid is. In their defense, it's
>not as if there's a set of immutable numbers that
>can be plugged into unquestioned formulae. I
>could be wrong, but as far as I know, it's all
>hypothetical.

And after 35 years of closely
>watching the sport's numbers, empirical evidence
>tells me there's more effect than the hypotheses
>have come up with, that's all.

gh

ps--about
>physics: Newton's First Law, OK, I buy that; The
>Second, nah, and the jury's still out on The
>Third :-)

Garry, do you ride in airplanes? If you do, then you ought to accept the physics that people like myself, Nick Linthorne, and Jonas Mureika use to explain the effects of wind and altitude. The fluid dynamics of a person running through the atmosphere is a lot simpler than that describing an airplane.

This thread has certainly moved a long way from discussing the passing of a great Olympic Champion.
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Sat Apr 26, 2003 9:58 pm

You people are so self absorbed and should be ashamed of
yourselves.Can't you respect the original Post.
Mike Larrabee.. the spirit of a champion. god speed rip.
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 30, 2003 7:14 pm

I'd be curious to know how fast Larrabee would have gone on one of today's hyper-fast tracks. Probably about 44.50. Add in superior current training methods and you probably are looking at a guy who would today be running around 44.20. I think the American public has come to believe that only African-Americans can sprint and that's why there's such a ridiculous dearth of decent non-African-American sprinters from the US. The 200 final in Paris should be a very awesome dual between Maurice Greene and Konstantinos Kenteris, with a PR differential of 0.01 at this point.
Guest
 

Re: Mike Larrabee 1933-2003

Postby JRM » Wed Apr 30, 2003 9:20 pm

Greene's 19.86 PR is 6 years old, while KK's is from 2002. Also, Greene hasn't broken 19.9s in a long time (or 20s for that matter). This doesn't make for a "heated" match-up at this stage. His Mt SAC 20.15 is a good start, but I think we should wait and see what happens. I would instead focus on Kederis versus Justin Gatlin, who's PR is also 19.86 (from last year).
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aaronk, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests

cron