Bruce Jenner


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

Bruce Jenner

Postby mrbowie » Sat May 12, 2012 6:01 pm

While walking on the treadmill at the gym this morning, I glaned up at the TV screen and saw somebody that looked familiar, but in a vague way. I was trying to place the face of this woman, when it dawned on me that it was Bruce Jenner. I was and remained stunned.
mrbowie
 
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Lexington, Kentucky

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby lonewolf » Sat May 12, 2012 8:43 pm

Maybe he is becoming a true Kardashian. :)
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8816
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby jeremyp » Thu May 17, 2012 8:27 am

Hey the decathlon can do that to you!
jeremyp
 
Posts: 4543
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Florida

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Marlow » Thu May 17, 2012 9:06 am

Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Dave » Thu May 17, 2012 2:17 pm

jeremyp wrote:Hey the decathlon can do that to you!


Heck, 36 years since Montreal might also do that to someone.
Dave
 
Posts: 2125
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby 4:24-miler » Mon May 21, 2012 3:09 pm

I've always wondered had the open professional system been in place n 1976 would Jenner have continued his track career?
4:24-miler
 
Posts: 526
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: San Jose, CA

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby einnod23 » Wed Aug 08, 2012 1:41 pm

4:24-miler wrote:I've always wondered had the open professional system been in place n 1976 would Jenner have continued his track career?
I'd bet Ashton Eaton is making waaaay less money as a pro decathlete than Jenner has/is with Wheaties, infomercials and reality shows!

My answer is NO!
einnod23
 
Posts: 1125
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Bronx, NY

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby gh » Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:04 pm

I saw in the grocery line at the supermarket yesterday that a $175M divorce is in the works. So sayeth the National Inquirer.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Marlow » Mon Feb 11, 2013 5:46 pm

gh wrote:I saw in the grocery line at the supermarket yesterday that a $175M divorce is in the works. So sayeth the National Inquirer.

Dang! That's almost worth putting up with the Kardashians! :shock:
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Brian » Tue Feb 12, 2013 11:26 pm

gh wrote:I saw in the grocery line at the supermarket yesterday that a $175M divorce is in the works. So sayeth the National Inquirer.


Cough, cough! Yeah, right.

Like the editor of the World's Greatest Magazine shops for his own groceries. Celebrities just don't do that stuff.
:]
Brian
 
Posts: 2370
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Jackaloupe » Sun Feb 17, 2013 8:55 am

gh was keeping up a local tradition: I'd run into Bert Nelson in a Los Altos market in the 60s. He even recognized my name, even though I'd only made it into the Mag once: 3rd (to Bill Toomey and Kansan LJ'er Kent Floerke (sp?)) in 1960 AAU Pentathlon, not an Olympic event since Jim Thorpe's time, and not one that tempted the likes of Rafer Johnson, who would've revelled in the LJ, Javelin and Discus, blazed a low 21 200, then jogged a 5-ish 1500 for a likely WR.
Jackaloupe
 
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 8:33 am

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby mrbowie » Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:41 pm

Wonder where Bruce is gonna come up with the $175 million.
mrbowie
 
Posts: 1474
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Lexington, Kentucky

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby gh » Wed Oct 23, 2013 3:34 pm

gh wrote:I saw in the grocery line at the supermarket yesterday that a $175M divorce is in the works. So sayeth the National Inquirer.


I think we mentioned somewhere on another thread that the divorce came to pass, but today's trip through the line only had me shaking my head and saying "Bruce-Bruce-Bruce; as ye sow, so shall ye reap."

He wanted celebrity, and boy did he get it.

On the cover of Star today, with a face so twisted he was barely recognizable, and with the scandalous headline that his ex claims (or so they would have you believe) that the reason for the divorce is that "Bruce wants to be a woman" :roll:
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 23, 2013 5:56 pm

gh wrote:"Bruce wants to be a woman" :roll:

No worse than this lady.
http://www.dailycognition.com/content/i ... horror.jpg
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby user4 » Thu Oct 24, 2013 5:15 am

Jackaloupe wrote:gh was keeping up a local tradition: I'd run into Bert Nelson in a Los Altos market in the 60s. He even recognized my name, even though I'd only made it into the Mag once: 3rd (to Bill Toomey and Kansan LJ'er Kent Floerke (sp?)) in 1960 AAU Pentathlon, not an Olympic event since Jim Thorpe's time, and not one that tempted the likes of Rafer Johnson, who would've revelled in the LJ, Javelin and Discus, blazed a low 21 200, then jogged a 5-ish 1500 for a likely WR.


jackaloupe shares the the best memories, you enrich this place !
user4
 
Posts: 1438
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby gh » Thu Oct 24, 2013 10:23 am

gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Marlow » Thu Oct 24, 2013 12:15 pm

gh wrote:"Jenner wants to be a woman"

Well, he's not doing a great job there either!
When he won the 76 Dec, my wife declared him the best-looking guy on the planet (I think I was tied for 37,945,516th). Now she even thinks I (!) am better looking. :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby user4 » Thu Oct 24, 2013 1:19 pm

Marlow wrote:
gh wrote:"Jenner wants to be a woman"

Well, he's not doing a great job there either!
When he won the 76 Dec, my wife declared him the best-looking guy on the planet (I think I was tied for 37,945,516th). Now she even thinks I (!) am better looking. :D


My hat goes off to you, lean horse for a long race !! :D

Jenner was simply amazing in 1976. Since then he has soared like a frozen turkey. A veritable death spiral. We can only hope that he can rise like a Phoenix out of the present ashes.
user4
 
Posts: 1438
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby bambam » Thu Oct 24, 2013 1:24 pm

Marlow wrote:When he won the 76 Dec, my wife declared him the best-looking guy on the planet (I think I was tied for 37,945,516th). Now she even thinks I (!) am better looking. :D


My sister ( who is 4 years older) also thought he was the hottest guy on the planet in 1976. I have not heard her discuss Marlow's standing in this category.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby Marlow » Thu Oct 24, 2013 1:59 pm

bambam wrote:I have not heard her discuss Marlow's standing in this category.

I bet I'm ahead of Jenner!! :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby eiluke » Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:41 am

Bruce Jenner impressed me the most with the pressure he built up. The whole (interested) USA expected him to win before the olympics 1976 and he himself put the pressure even higher by claiming openly that he'll win and that he'll retire afterwards - and he delivered.

Rafer Johnson in 1960 or Dan OBrien in 1996 both were head and shoulders above the level their top rivals could reach and therefore knew, that something like their ~5th best in every single event will make them a sure fire overall winner. Bruce Jenner in difference to them had to attack his PB in almost every single event - and delivered.
Very strong nerves!!!

BTW, does anybody know his exact PB in the long jump (different sources say 7.22 / 7.32 or 7.35) and in the pole vault (4.80 / 4.88)
eiluke
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:07 pm

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby bambam » Thu Nov 07, 2013 12:39 pm

eiluke wrote:Rafer Johnson in 1960 or Dan OBrien in 1996 both were head and shoulders above the level their top rivals could reach and therefore knew, that something like their ~5th best in every single event will make them a sure fire overall winner.


I don't think that was true of Rafer in 1960. CK Yang was a pretty close competitor and the competition was actually pretty close. I think Johnson was only a slight favorite over Yang. Yang had a chance to win the whole thing in the 1,500 but couldn't drop Rafer. Yang bested Rafer in 7 of the 10 events, with Rafer winning the 3 throws.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Bruce Jenner

Postby eiluke » Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:18 pm

1960 in Rom, Rafer Johnson just won by just 60 pts (8394 to 8334)
On his way to gold Rafer Johnson lost 700 pts (table 1985, since I do not know where to find the old one) to his personal records.

But bambam, you are right, I haven't been aware that Yang himself had lost almost as many points on his PBs as well.
According to Decathlon2000, Johnson's combined PB's were 8626 pts (1985 table I have to give) and 7926pts (1985 table).
http://www.decathlon2000.com/eng/viewer ... ohnson.pdf
Yang had combined PBs of 8527 (which is indeed pretty close) and made 7839 (table 1985)
http://www.decathlon2000.com/eng/viewer ... n/Yang.pdf
eiluke
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:07 pm


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bambam and 10 guests