Past AOY


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

Past AOY

Postby Mighty Favog » Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:11 pm

Interesting to see the compilation of past women's AOYs (link on front page under "The Day's Best Reading").

Didn't Women's T&F World (or whatever it was called) pick its own AOYs before TFN did? If so, were the format and/or criteria similar enough that TFN could co-opt those, or at least add to the compilation with a disclaimer (as was done with pre-TFN women's world rankings)?

Also, I seem to remember that one of the Nelson brothers selected pre-TFN era men's AOYs. November '69 seems to stick in my head but I can't believe I'd be right just from memory.
Mighty Favog
 
Posts: 1789
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Past AOY

Postby gh » Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:50 pm

Cordner (I believe December issue of '66 or '67 off the top of my head), gave his early-year choices, but those were very rudimentary, and included ties.

One day, in the hopefully not too distant future, you'll see some hang-your-hat-on reconstructions in this area.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Past AOY

Postby Marlow » Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:08 pm

gh wrote:One day, in the hopefully not too distant future, you'll see some hang-your-hat-on reconstructions in this area.

What a fun game that would be!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Past AOY

Postby gh » Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:59 pm

the problem with reconstructions of any kind, no matter how well thought out and pursued by highly qualified people is that there's always the "knowing what we know now" factor, and it leads, I'm sure, to different results than one would have gotten at the time.

case in point: how one would judge '68 now that the full impact of altitude is appreciated and understood.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Past AOY

Postby Tuariki » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:48 pm

gh wrote:the problem with reconstructions of any kind, no matter how well thought out and pursued by highly qualified people is that there's always the "knowing what we know now" factor, and it leads, I'm sure, to different results than one would have gotten at the time.

case in point: how one would judge '68 now that the full impact of altitude is appreciated and understood.

IMO Beamon's jump still the most amazing single performance in Games history.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: Past AOY

Postby noone » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:10 pm

Tuariki wrote:
gh wrote:the problem with reconstructions of any kind, no matter how well thought out and pursued by highly qualified people is that there's always the "knowing what we know now" factor, and it leads, I'm sure, to different results than one would have gotten at the time.

case in point: how one would judge '68 now that the full impact of altitude is appreciated and understood.

IMO Beamon's jump still the most amazing single performance in Games history.


This observation is unlikely to help you gain admission to the Track and Field experts hall of fame.
noone
 
Posts: 445
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Calgary, Alta.

Re: Past AOY

Postby Tuariki » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:53 pm

noone wrote:
Tuariki wrote:
gh wrote:the problem with reconstructions of any kind, no matter how well thought out and pursued by highly qualified people is that there's always the "knowing what we know now" factor, and it leads, I'm sure, to different results than one would have gotten at the time.

case in point: how one would judge '68 now that the full impact of altitude is appreciated and understood.

IMO Beamon's jump still the most amazing single performance in Games history.


This observation is unlikely to help you gain admission to the Track and Field experts hall of fame.

Given it is my personal opinion that is not a particularly relevant observation.

However, the following are indisputable facts of Beamon's jump:
1. He increased the world record by 6.6 percent from 8.35 to 8.90
2. He increased the Olympic record by 9.6 percent from 8.12 to 8.90
3. His Olympic record still stands after 44 years
4. Sports illustrated rated his jump one of the 5 greatest moments of sport in the 20th century
5. TnF News named him as 1968 Athlete Of The Year
6. Inducted into the US Olympic Hall of Fame in 1983 in the first batch of inductees

So while I may not make it into the Track and Field Experts Hall of Fame, I think I am still in pretty good company in regards to my opinion on Beamon's jump.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: Past AOY

Postby Tuariki » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:57 pm

To Noone

And so, in your Track and Field Expert Hall of Fame opinion just what is or what are the greatest TnF Olympic performances that out-rate Beamon's 8.90m performance.

Love to know what they are and the reasons why.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: Past AOY

Postby gh » Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:02 pm

Beamon is monstrously altitude-aided (for certain), and massively wind-aided (by all competent observers who were there)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Past AOY

Postby Tuariki » Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:45 am

gh wrote:Beamon is monstrously altitude-aided (for certain), and massively wind-aided (by all competent observers who were there)

I don't doubt any of that GH.

However, it doesn't change the fact that he was officially credited as world record holder and Olympic record holder. And his margin of victory being 8.7 percent longer than Klaus Beer's jump was one of the greatest, if not the greatest, margins of victory by any gold medallist in the history of the Olympics.

It also doesn't change the fact that TnF News named Beamon as AOY for 1968 presumably for his 8.90m jump at Mexico City, altitude or no altitude, wind or no wind.

In regards to wind, the official reading was 2.0. It may well have been stronger than that but the reality is that no one has actual verifiable evidence that it was stronger than 2.0. A well founded suspicion perhaps, but a well founded suspicion has never been accepted as evidence. And unless these competent observers were actually standing alongside the runway during Beamon's jump then I would not give any credibility to the accuracy of their long distant observations.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests