A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (Locked down several times a year during the major championships)
Ok, this has been bugging me every time I've seen his Subway commercial the last couple of weeks. During the commercial they show his various performance "stats", including his 110H PR.
guru wrote:Ok, this has been bugging me every time I've seen his Subway commercial the last couple of weeks. During the commercial they show his various performance "stats", including his 110H PR.
When did he run 13.20?
I have heard somewhere during football telecasts a 49+ 400h. Let me join guru in wondering, if it is true.
Wikipedia claims the following: In track, he broke state records for the 110-meter and 300-meter hurdles. He ran the 110-meter hurdles in 13.55 seconds, and the 300-meter hurdles in 35.33 seconds. The 300-hurdles time was one-hundredth of a second short of breaking the national high school record. He was also a gold medalist in the 110 and 400-meter hurdles on the AAU track and field circuit. In 2007, as a junior, he was rated the No. 1 high school 400-meter immediate hurdler in the country, and was tied at No. 1 for the 110-meter sprint hurdler in the nation. His personal best in the 110-meter hurdles, 13.46 sec, ranked fifth in the world among junior athletes, while his personal best in the 400-meter hurdles, 49.56 sec, was World Junior Leading in 2007. Also as a junior, he received the Gatorade Texas Boys Track and Field Athlete of the Year award, and was named to USA Today′s 2007 All-USA Track and Field team.
RG3's times may not scare anyone who won a medal over the last week but they're EXTREMELY good for a high school boy. Both his 110 and 300 times would have made him any college coaches top track recruit. He definitely COULD fall into the category of one the sport lost
preston wrote:RG3's times may not scare anyone who won a medal over the last week but they're EXTREMELY good for a high school boy. Both his 110 and 300 times would have made him any college coaches top track recruit. He definitely COULD fall into the category of one the sport lost
American men's track & field definitely loses a lot of talent to the NFL, but no such situation exists with American women's track & field. There's no reason that Jamaica should have nearly as much sprint depth as the U.S. when you consider the disparity in our populations. I can't explain it. Is it a cultural thing?
preston wrote:RG3's times may not scare anyone who won a medal over the last week but they're EXTREMELY good for a high school boy. Both his 110 and 300 times would have made him any college coaches top track recruit. He definitely COULD fall into the category of one the sport lost
American men's track & field definitely loses a lot of talent to the NFL, but no such situation exists with American women's track & field. There's no reason that Jamaica should have nearly as much sprint depth as the U.S. when you consider the disparity in our populations. I can't explain it. Is it a cultural thing?
Define "cultural"? I'm not sure I get what you mean.
Not that I can find, and marlow quoted his HS(39") best as 13.55
I never thought is was a technical description of the time that he actually ran. Follow me:
-HS kid runs 13.2h. His coach and the other HS knowledgable people say that he ran 13-two. 13-two becomes 13.20 for the purposes of Subway. I wouldn't be surprised if the 13-two is a hand time.
preston wrote:RG3's times may not scare anyone who won a medal over the last week but they're EXTREMELY good for a high school boy. Both his 110 and 300 times would have made him any college coaches top track recruit. He definitely COULD fall into the category of one the sport lost
American men's track & field definitely loses a lot of talent to the NFL, but no such situation exists with American women's track & field. There's no reason that Jamaica should have nearly as much sprint depth as the U.S. when you consider the disparity in our populations. I can't explain it. Is it a cultural thing?
Define "cultural"? I'm not sure I get what you mean.
What I'm asking is why are American women underperforming in the sprints relative to the Jamaican women? On the men's side, we know that the football is a huge factor, so that excuse can't be used for the women. When I use the word "cultural", I'm talking about motivation of young Jamican girls versus young American girls.
preston wrote:RG3's times may not scare anyone who won a medal over the last week but they're EXTREMELY good for a high school boy. Both his 110 and 300 times would have made him any college coaches top track recruit. He definitely COULD fall into the category of one the sport lost
American men's track & field definitely loses a lot of talent to the NFL, but no such situation exists with American women's track & field. There's no reason that Jamaica should have nearly as much sprint depth as the U.S. when you consider the disparity in our populations. I can't explain it. Is it a cultural thing?
Define "cultural"? I'm not sure I get what you mean.
What I'm asking is why are American women underperforming in the sprints relative to the Jamaican women? On the men's side, we know that the football is a huge factor, so that excuse can't be used for the women. When I use the word "cultural", I'm talking about motivation of young Jamican girls versus young American girls.
I think culture has something to do with it but since SAFP in 2008 JAM has not added a single other Jamaican to the sub-11 club (possibly Brooks this year but I'm feeling too lazy to check). If we say multiple sub-11 then Brooks can be eliminated entirely. I think most of the women are uncoachable do to attitudes, from what alot of the coaches talk about, and body/self image to be top sprinters.
jazzcyclist wrote:What I'm asking is why are American women underperforming in the sprints relative to the Jamaican women? On the men's side, we know that the football is a huge factor, so that excuse can't be used for the women. When I use the word "cultural", I'm talking about motivation of young Jamican girls versus young American girls.
Basketball, soccer, softball; all of those play a relatively major role on the youth level, and many potentially good sprinters choose those team sports instead. Sure, the effect is much smaller than with football on the men's side, but then I wouldn't call a huge new WR in the w4x100 "underperforming".
jazzcyclist wrote:What I'm asking is why are American women underperforming in the sprints relative to the Jamaican women? On the men's side, we know that the football is a huge factor, so that excuse can't be used for the women. When I use the word "cultural", I'm talking about motivation of young Jamican girls versus young American girls.
Basketball, soccer, softball; all of those play a relatively major role on the youth level, and many potentially good sprinters choose those team sports instead. Sure, the effect is much smaller than with football on the men's side, but then I wouldn't call a huge new WR in the w4x100 "underperforming".
I don't know if it's a nation-wide phenomenon, but where I live in California (and I experienced the same when I was coaching in Washington) club-volleyball and club-soccer are pushing 1-sport specialization big-time, and since those sports tend to be more "fun" at a young age, and have more a team element, girls are choosing them over track by the masses.
j-a-m wrote:Basketball, soccer, softball; all of those play a relatively major role on the youth level, and many potentially good sprinters choose those team sports instead. Sure, the effect is much smaller than with football on the men's side, but then I wouldn't call a huge new WR in the w4x100 "underperforming".
But unlike, football for young boys, there's no monetary incentive for girls to choose basketball, soccer or softball over track, since there is no pro women's softball or soccer league, and the top women's basketball players can't touch the money of the top female track and field athletes.
As for the new WR, it has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about. I'm talking about depth. Based on shear numbers, the U.S. should be many times deeper in the sprints than Jamaica but it isn't. As a matter of fact, Jamaica's female sprinters have had greater depth than the U.S. at some recent global championships.
jazzcyclist wrote:... top women's basketball players can't touch the money of the top female track and field athletes.
Surely that's misinterpreting the decision to chase pro status. You may well be right at the very, very top end (i.e. top 3-4 female basketballers vs top 3-4 female sprinters) - the top end salaries are surprisingly low in the WNBA (Lauren Jackson made $138k in 2011, including bonuses for MVP etc http://sports.yahoo.com/wnba/news?slug=ycn-8612605), but there are bigger bucks in China and else (Liz Cambage earned $400k for 4 months http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/baske ... 6406443234)
If I am the 60th best basketballer I can make a living.
If I am the 60th best sprinter/hurdler/jumper I probably can't.
jazzcyclist wrote:What I'm asking is why are American women underperforming in the sprints relative to the Jamaican women? On the men's side, we know that the football is a huge factor, so that excuse can't be used for the women. When I use the word "cultural", I'm talking about motivation of young Jamaican girls versus young American girls.
going from memory: 100 S [G B] 200 G S [S] 400 G [] 100h S B [] 400h S [] 4x100 G WR [S NR] 4x400 G [B] and G in the speed oriented LJ (+S) and PV [vs . AND .]
jazzcyclist wrote:What I'm asking is why are American women underperforming in the sprints relative to the Jamaican women? On the men's side, we know that the football is a huge factor, so that excuse can't be used for the women. When I use the word "cultural", I'm talking about motivation of young Jamaican girls versus young American girls.
going from memory: 100 S [G B] 200 G S [S] 400 G [] 100h S B [] 400h S [] 4x100 G WR [S NR] 4x400 G [B] and G in the speed oriented LJ (+S) and PV [vs . AND .]
6 G 5 S, 3 B vs 1 G, 2 S , 2 B vs
So I am not understanding you comment
I'm not saying that the women's team we sent to London underperformed. I'm saying that the U.S. is underperforming when it comes to producing feamle sprint talent when you consider the fact that we don't have a $10 billion industry like the NFL taking away the lion's share of the prospects, yet Jamaica still matches us depthwise.
jazzcyclist wrote:yet Jamaica still matches us depthwise
I don't think they do. A B-team, say, Gardner-Tarmoh-Duncan-Anderson (Williams) would be way above of Jamaica's B, actually, this B-team could compete with anybody.
The vast majority of athletic talent at the youth level in the US does NOT run track. Basketball, soccer, volleyball, and to some extent softball pull more "athletic talent" than track and field in the US. For Jamaican females, track is pretty much the only game in town.
Barto wrote:The vast majority of athletic talent at the youth level in the US does NOT run track. Basketball, soccer, volleyball, and to some extent softball pull more "athletic talent" than track and field in the US. For Jamaican females, track is pretty much the only game in town.
Yes. Many people, when considering this arguement, are only thinking of the high-end high school athlete who is choosing between track and another sport for college. What's missed is the probability that the majority of athletes we loose are lost at a much younger age when they are choosing what sport to even try or commit themselves to. Many kids are choosing soccer, volleyball, football, baseball, basketball, etc. over track at age when potential earning are not even a blip on their radar. They're attracted to the fun and fellowship of team sports, as well as the popularity/prestige/coolness factor that those sports have. Let's face it, T&F (at least the way it's done in the USA these days) is not nearly as "fun" of a sport for young kids as team sports are.
Barto wrote:The vast majority of athletic talent at the youth level in the US does NOT run track. Basketball, soccer, volleyball, and to some extent softball pull more "athletic talent" than track and field in the US. For Jamaican females, track is pretty much the only game in town.
Yes. Many people, when considering this arguement, are only thinking of the high-end high school athlete who is choosing between track and another sport for college. What's missed is the probability that the majority of athletes we loose are lost at a much younger age when they are choosing what sport to even try or commit themselves to. Many kids are choosing soccer, volleyball, football, baseball, basketball, etc. over track at age when potential earning are not even a blip on their radar. They're attracted to the fun and fellowship of team sports, as well as the popularity/prestige/coolness factor that those sports have. Let's face it, T&F (at least the way it's done in the USA these days) is not nearly as "fun" of a sport for young kids as team sports are.
...and add to that, once kids are in those sports they (and their parents) are being sold ($$$) on the idea that they MUST specialize and commit themselves fully and soley to that ONE sport if they hope to have any success in high school, college, and beyond.
Barto wrote:The vast majority of athletic talent at the youth level in the US does NOT run track. Basketball, soccer, volleyball, and to some extent softball pull more "athletic talent" than track and field in the US. For Jamaican females, track is pretty much the only game in town.
Yes. Many people, when considering this arguement, are only thinking of the high-end high school athlete who is choosing between track and another sport for college. What's missed is the probability that the majority of athletes we loose are lost at a much younger age when they are choosing what sport to even try or commit themselves to. Many kids are choosing soccer, volleyball, football, baseball, basketball, etc. over track at age when potential earning are not even a blip on their radar. They're attracted to the fun and fellowship of team sports, as well as the popularity/prestige/coolness factor that those sports have. Let's face it, T&F (at least the way it's done in the USA these days) is not nearly as "fun" of a sport for young kids as team sports are.
...and add to that, once kids are in those sports they (and their parents) are being sold ($$$) on the idea that they MUST specialize and commit themselves fully and soley to that ONE sport if they hope to have any success in high school, college, and beyond.
So true. I played soccer, tennis, and ran track growing up and one of the reasons I backburnered soccer when at the elite level was because I was encouraged to give up the other two sports. Being that track was my first love, that wasn't going to happen
Grasshopper wrote:...and add to that, once kids are in those sports they (and their parents) are being sold ($$$) on the idea that they MUST specialize and commit themselves fully and soley to that ONE sport if they hope to have any success in high school, college, and beyond.
So true. I played soccer, tennis, and ran track growing up and one of the reasons I backburnered soccer when at the elite level was because I was encouraged to give up the other two sports. Being that track was my first love, that wasn't going to happen
Both of you make some good points. However, the money-boosters-agents-sychophants factor only comes into play when it comes to football and boys basketball. That's why the NCAA uses different rules to govern those two sports. I don't think there are boosters walking around offering hundreds of thousands of dollars to sign girl volleyball and soccer players to their alma maters, a la Cam Newton.
Furthermore, if you don't think that adolescent boys who are involved in sports are dreaming about fame, fortune and living large these days, you're being naive.
Sooner or later, Marquise Goodwin is going to have to decide on a pro football career or become a pro track athlete. Money will play a significant factor.
Also, didn't Destinee Hooker choose volleyball after failing to make the Olympic team in Track and Field in 2008?
Grasshopper wrote:...and add to that, once kids are in those sports they (and their parents) are being sold ($$$) on the idea that they MUST specialize and commit themselves fully and soley to that ONE sport if they hope to have any success in high school, college, and beyond.
So true. I played soccer, tennis, and ran track growing up and one of the reasons I backburnered soccer when at the elite level was because I was encouraged to give up the other two sports. Being that track was my first love, that wasn't going to happen
Both of you make some good points. However, the money-boosters-agents-sychophants factor only comes into play when it comes to football and boys basketball. That's why the NCAA uses different rules to govern those two sports. I don't think there are boosters walking around offering hundreds of thousands of dollars to sign girl volleyball and soccer players to their alma maters, a la Cam Newton.
Furthermore, if you don't think that adolescent boys who are involved in sports are dreaming about fame, fortune and living large these days, you're being naive.
It's not strictly money. Girls soccer and basketball at the youth (AAU) level is encouraged as a complete committ and parents see scholarships with these sports as well as a sport such as Volleyball. At least that's the way it's sold.
Grasshopper wrote:...and add to that, once kids are in those sports they (and their parents) are being sold ($$$) on the idea that they MUST specialize and commit themselves fully and soley to that ONE sport if they hope to have any success in high school, college, and beyond.
So true. I played soccer, tennis, and ran track growing up and one of the reasons I backburnered soccer when at the elite level was because I was encouraged to give up the other two sports. Being that track was my first love, that wasn't going to happen
Both of you make some good points. However, the money-boosters-agents-sychophants factor only comes into play when it comes to football and boys basketball. That's why the NCAA uses different rules to govern those two sports. I don't think there are boosters walking around offering hundreds of thousands of dollars to sign girl volleyball and soccer players to their alma maters, a la Cam Newton.
Furthermore, if you don't think that adolescent boys who are involved in sports are dreaming about fame, fortune and living large these days, you're being naive.
The point is that the most athletically gifted young girls are "recruited" into team sports at a very young age in the US. This happens in track as well, but not nearly to the same extent as with basketball, soccer, and volleyball. Track is mostly left with the kids who don't have the resources to play AAU basketball or be on a select traveling soccer/volleyball team (i.e. the scraps).
Griffin graduated hs in Dec of senior year for early admission (spring football) at Baylor. So the times run at Baylor were those of typical hs senior.
Bruce Kritzler wrote:Griffin graduated hs in Dec of senior year for early admission (spring football) at Baylor. So the times run at Baylor were those of typical hs senior.
Watching him run during his Jr. year I felt pretty certain the HS 300h record was going to be toast!
Dutra5 wrote:It's not strictly money. Girls soccer and basketball at the youth (AAU) level is encouraged as a complete committ and parents see scholarships with these sports as well as a sport such as Volleyball. At least that's the way it's sold.
Good point. In the Caribbeans, there are no other sports competing for young girls like there is on the U.S.
jazzcyclist wrote:yet Jamaica still matches us depthwise
I don't think they do. A B-team, say, Gardner (11.10)-Tarmoh (11.07)-Duncan (10.96)-Anderson [11.12] (Williams [11.15]) would be way above of Jamaica's B, actually, this B-team could compete with anybody.
I don't think you could describe it as way above, there's a good argument that Jamaica's "B" would outright win over USA "B" . Off the top of my head Aleen Bailey (11.04), Sherry Ann Brooks (11.05), Schillonie Calvert (11.05, Samantha Henry (11.11). And, that's just 2012. If you take a look at PB's for other Jamaicans you get...Facey (10.95;'08); Russell (11.05-'11), Levy (11.10-'11).
There is a very strong argument that Jamaica's "B" Team of 2012 beats USA's "B" Team of 2012. And, if we compared Jamaica's "A" of 2008 (same athletes as 2012) versus USA's "A" of 2012 we would see that "on paper", where no races are run, JAM was faster (10.78[CJ-10.78], 10.80[TM-10.85], 10.87[AF-10.89], 10.87[BK-11.13]).
Dutra5 wrote:It's not strictly money. Girls soccer and basketball at the youth (AAU) level is encouraged as a complete committ and parents see scholarships with these sports as well as a sport such as Volleyball. At least that's the way it's sold.
Good point. In the Caribbeans, there are no other sports competing for young girls like there is on the U.S.
Don't forget to add swimming into this mix too. I am also beginning to wonder if we'll start to see more Caribbean nations competing in the pool over the next 5 - 10 years?
Dutra5 wrote:It's not strictly money. Girls soccer and basketball at the youth (AAU) level is encouraged as a complete committ and parents see scholarships with these sports as well as a sport such as Volleyball. At least that's the way it's sold.
Good point. In the Caribbeans, there are no other sports competing for young girls like there is on the U.S.
Don't forget to add swimming into this mix too. I am also beginning to wonder if we'll start to see more Caribbean nations competing in the pool over the next 5 - 10 years?
Not only swimming, but what about Walcott being an inspriration to Caribbean kids wanting to take field events more seriously.
Dutra5 wrote:It's not strictly money. Girls soccer and basketball at the youth (AAU) level is encouraged as a complete committ and parents see scholarships with these sports as well as a sport such as Volleyball. At least that's the way it's sold.
Good point. In the Caribbeans, there are no other sports competing for young girls like there is on the U.S.
Don't forget to add swimming into this mix too. I am also beginning to wonder if we'll start to see more Caribbean nations competing in the pool over the next 5 - 10 years?
Not only swimming, but what about Walcott being an inspriration to Caribbean kids wanting to take field events more seriously.
