Current sprinters on a cinder track?


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

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby batonless relay » Thu May 09, 2013 5:30 pm

gh, for the record: if you get a private email attacking posters on this board or even encouraging you to ban people, then the decent thing for you to have done would be to keep it private - between you and the anonymous emailer who LOVES to argue the merits of Hayes and Bolt. (Only "the anonymous emailers" cowardly arguments are not mindless because what? Because he argues over scotch? Because they have your email address? Because they know you?) By the emailers own "view" there would be no reason to argue about anything, ever, in the first place. You should be telling a gutless turd like that to join in and make a better, more compelling argument, not using their "rant" to threaten posters who are here. What has that coward contributed? I'm amazed that you can't see that?

You should have kept it private. What you did is incredibly classless, fwiw; but for some strange reason -and it's not the first time that you've done something like this- you seem to be proud of what you've done.

Think about this: if everyone was like your dedicated lurker associate, then you would have no reason to act like [the ... ] you are acting like right now because there would be no forum - which I admit would make your life a whole lot easier, but you might have one less person who you, as the editor of TFN, would get a chance to connect to. You should apologize for what you did. I don't think I've ever seen you apologize, and I'm not holding my breath that you will right now; mostly because I doubt you have it in you. But, you were wrong. It's a shame you can't see that.
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby Marlow » Thu May 09, 2013 6:22 pm

batonless relay wrote: . . . stuff . . .

Wow, first day back from a banning and off you go again?!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby lonewolf » Thu May 09, 2013 7:20 pm

Let's hear it for the lurker. Beat me to it.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8814
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby bambam » Fri May 10, 2013 12:25 am

I'm that gutless turd, batonless relay. I used to act like this sometimes, too - but then I graduated from the 3rd grade.
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby batonless relay » Fri May 10, 2013 4:05 am

bambam wrote:I'm that gutless turd, batonless relay. I used to act like this sometimes, too - but then I graduated from the 3rd grade.

by your response, I'm not that sure, but whatever. Anyway, the next time you feel that way, you might want to take a stroll over to the myth of the sub-2 marathon thread. It's instructional because you can find things like...well, things like this:

TN1965 wrote:
bambam wrote:
TN1965 wrote:So in other words, no one knows if they are good on track. Then how can anyone state as a fact that the talent is shifting from track to road? That's just speculation.

Isn't that the purpose of this board???


I'd rather see speculation stated as such, rather than presented as undisputable fact. But maybe that's just me.


Pot, meet Kettle
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby Marlow » Fri May 10, 2013 4:38 am

batonless relay wrote:cowardly arguments . . . gutless turd l . . . coward . . . incredibly classless, . . . you seem to be proud of what you've done. . . . You should apologize for what you did. . . . you were wrong. It's a shame you can't see that.


batonless relay wrote:Pot, meet Kettle





One can only assume gh has not read this yet.
Your inability to keep a civil tongue will never be appreciated here. Just sayin' . . .
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby batonless relay » Fri May 10, 2013 5:10 am

Marlow wrote:
batonless relay wrote:cowardly arguments . . . gutless turd l . . . coward . . . incredibly classless, . . . you seem to be proud of what you've done. . . . You should apologize for what you did. . . . you were wrong. It's a shame you can't see that.


batonless relay wrote:Pot, meet Kettle




One can only assume gh has not read this yet.
Your inability to keep a civil tongue will never be appreciated here. Just sayin' . . .


Neither will your self-appointed role as hall monitor, or whatever you think you're trying to do. I've addressed my piece to "gh" and "bambam"...maybe you should just leave this alone and let the thread get back on track or die. Your editorials are neither needed or wanted. Any follow-up posts by you not addressing the thread that YOU started will be an example of you CONTINUING to be "incivil" - not me. So, impress us, for once, and stay on topic.

matter of fact, I'll start it for you.

Assuming that every cinder track will be inferior to every synthetic track is like assuming that every wind-illegal time should be superior to every wind-legal time. But, one look at the women's all time list shows that a majority of the top-15 men and women of all time have superior legal times to their illegal times. Their are no constants, no guarantees - and you, or no one else can say definitively that lane 1 in Tokyo in 1964 put him at a disadvantage.
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby user4 » Fri May 10, 2013 5:21 am

gh wrote:a private e-mail from a lurker

<<Why do people get on these message boards and get into mindless rants with each other like user4 and batonlessrelay over Hayes and Bolt? I just don't see it. I like to argue the merits of the two, and I agree Bolt is now the GOAT, as much as I loved Hayes as a sprinter, but stuff like this is ridiculous. I see why you ban people.>>

a word to the wise.....


I honestly didnt think that my posts were mindless or even rants. The guy was calling Marlow and I geezers ... and the truth hurt :)
user4
 
Posts: 1435
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby Marlow » Fri May 10, 2013 5:48 am

user4 wrote:The guy was calling Marlow and I geezers ... and the truth hurt :)

Calling me a geezer is an insult to real old people. I aspire to geezerdom. But . . . if seeing Bob Hayes as anything other than one of the greatest heroes of T&F history is geezerly then I proudly accept the appellation! I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but through my 20 years in the Navy, I played on many different sports teams, from football, to soccer, to softball, volleyball (and wallyball!), tennis, etc., and I was ALWAYS number 22!!! :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby user4 » Fri May 10, 2013 5:51 am

Marlow wrote:
user4 wrote:The guy was calling Marlow and I geezers ... and the truth hurt :)

Calling me a geezer is an insult to real old people. I aspire to geezerdom. But . . . if seeing Bob Hayes as anything other than one of the greatest heroes of T&F history is geezerly then I proudly accept the appellation! I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but through my 20 years in the Navy, I played on many different sports teams, from football, to soccer, to softball, volleyball (and wallyball!), tennis, etc., and I was ALWAYS number 22!!! :D


You are a rare individual on many levels my friend with a self-effacing humor that serves as a balm. I can only say that an old HS friend told me "you look great for your age", I said, thanks I dont feel a day over 80.
user4
 
Posts: 1435
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby pavlik » Sun May 19, 2013 1:50 am

Hey guys..
I am a person who competed on both types of track- synthetic and cinder at tthe same time when I was 15. In 100m I ran 11.7ht on synthetic and 11.8ht on cinder. In 60m I ran 7.61 on synthetric and 7.54 on cinder!! In long jump my best on synthetic was 6.38m and on cinder 6.59m!!! As you can see the diferences are so small and sonmetimes in a favour of cinder. Of course at that time I trained on cinder so I was used to it.
pavlik
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 1:37 am

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby lonewolf » Sun May 19, 2013 8:37 am

Anecdotal example. Small sample. Small difference. Different races. Different conditions.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8814
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby batonless relay » Mon May 20, 2013 7:10 am

lonewolf wrote:Anecdotal example. Small sample. Small difference. Different races. Different conditions.

Yeah, but it still reminded me a lot of example below. The only difference is that he never used the word convinced.
lonewolf wrote:Personal example: Circa 1950, I was running 9.7y on cinders. When I entered Master's competition in 1971-72, I ran 10.2y on cinders and 11.0m on synthetic.
Officially hand timed and from memory..Maybe not scientific but convinced me synthetic is faster.
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby lonewolf » Mon May 20, 2013 12:22 pm

Yeah..that is what convinced me synthetic was faster. :)

The synthetic experience was repeated several times and, I believe, wins by age comparison.

I don't think the LJ comparison means much since both jumps, presumably, were from a fixed solid board. My youthful PB (7.77) was off a dirt path "runway" worn thru the grass alongside a football field. My Masters PB (7.02) was off a synthetic runway. I don't have the age-grade tables but I suspect the latter jump is better.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8814
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby user4 » Mon May 27, 2013 2:06 pm

lonewolf wrote:Yeah..that is what convinced me synthetic was faster. :)

The synthetic experience was repeated several times and, I believe, wins by age comparison.

I don't think the LJ comparison means much since both jumps, presumably, were from a fixed solid board. My youthful PB (7.77) was off a dirt path "runway" worn thru the grass alongside a football field. My Masters PB (7.02) was off a synthetic runway. I don't have the age-grade tables but I suspect the latter jump is better.


Someday a promoter should stage a series of track meets on cinder surfaces, doing everything they can to replicate the conditions of Antwerp, Paris, Amsterdam, Los Angeles, Berlin, London, Helsinki, Melbourne, Rome and Tokyo .. Can you imagine the Las Vegas spread on whether any WRs are broken :)
user4
 
Posts: 1435
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Current sprinters on a cinder track?

Postby Marlow » Mon May 27, 2013 4:04 pm

user4 wrote:Someday a promoter should stage a series of track meets on cinder surfaces, doing everything they can to replicate the conditions of Antwerp, Paris, Amsterdam, Los Angeles, Berlin, London, Helsinki, Melbourne, Rome and Tokyo .. Can you imagine the Las Vegas spread on whether any WRs are broken :)

That has come up before. Have a meet where there run in the old long spikes on grass or cinders/dirt wearing throwback uniforms. It's be grand.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests