Are any men's field event records soft?


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Tuariki » Sat Jul 06, 2013 3:15 pm

Flumpy wrote:I think Tamgho can get the TJ WR and relatively soon.

I agree that he is the most likely field eventer to beat the WR
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby tandfman » Sun Jul 07, 2013 11:37 am

I thought that until a few days ago. After the high jump in Lausanne, one has to think again.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Per Andersen » Sun Jul 07, 2013 9:46 pm

tandfman wrote:I thought that until a few days ago. After the high jump in Lausanne, one has to think again.

No, I'll go with the TJ. The video from Bondarenko's 2.46 WR attempts are on YouTube. He was not close at all.
Per Andersen
 
Posts: 3737
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby tandfman » Mon Jul 08, 2013 6:13 am

Yes, but that was the first time he'd ever looked at that height.

On balance, I think you're right--the TJ is more likely to go sooner. But as I said, the Lausanne HJ could generate some reasonable doubts.

I must say, though, that if I had to bet one way or another, I'd guess that neither of those records will fall this year.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Per Andersen » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:59 pm

tandfman wrote:Yes, but that was the first time he'd ever looked at that height.


True, and I suppose the picture has changed since they have jumped 2.40 and 2.41. But I think they need a "way station", say 2.43. Those 5cm from 2.41 to 2.46 are not your "normal" cm :)
Per Andersen
 
Posts: 3737
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby dj » Tue Jul 09, 2013 8:26 am

Per mentioned a "way station," which leads me to think Bondarenko needs a sherpa, someone who will compete with him at that way station.

Barshim is the obvious candidate, although perhaps Bondarenko will merely become Barshim's sherpa. Kynard, Drouin and Dmitrik are only one bar setting away from joining these two in the high altitude of 2.40.

This could be an amazing competition in Moscow!
dj
 
Posts: 6200
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby marknhj » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:45 pm

tandfman wrote:I thought that until a few days ago. After the high jump in Lausanne, one has to think again.


I think some perspective is needed here. That 2.41m was the highest jump in 19 years and if you take out Soto, the highest for 26 years behind Sjoberg's 2.42m. It's now been an incredible 28 years since Paklin jumped 2.41m.

Bondarenko is not a newbie. He's been around for quite a few years, coming third in the world junior's in 2006, yet still managed a mind-boggling 10cms improvement this season from his 2012 pr of 2.31m. Does anyone truly believe he has another 5cms in him this year or even next? (marlow and gh - that's 2"). I think Per classified those extra cms perfectly - they are not normal cms.

It's been 33 years since the WR has improved more than 1cm a year and the last record set in 1980 was by an East German. Before that, it's over 50 years since Brumel raised it more than 1cm in 1962 and Thomas before him in 1960. The high jump record does not improve in chunks of cms, it improves 1cm at a time.

However, it's very positive that there are two over 2.40m already this season with a few others potentially capable of making it. I believe that if two, three or four of them remain healthy we could enter another great era with jumps over 2.40m necessary simply to win. Then I hope that they learn from Vlasic and don't start automatically taking shots at 2.46m, the almost certain outcome of which is repeated failure. And, I hope they take all their attempts at the huge heights and stop the (usually) silly and unnecessary passing game. It's probably likely that clearances of 2.42m, 2.43m and 2.44m are necessary before we see a new record, in my opinion. How to put this politely? 2.46m is ridiculously bloody high.
marknhj
 
Posts: 5070
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Pego » Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:50 pm

Thank you Mark for a voice of reason.
Pego
 
Posts: 10203
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby kuha » Tue Jul 09, 2013 2:44 pm

Pego wrote:Thank you Mark for a voice of reason.


Yes, indeed.
kuha
 
Posts: 9034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Daisy » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:19 pm

Pego wrote:Thank you Mark for a voice of reason.

I think you're just worried hat you'll lose that bet to Marlow 8-)
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Pego » Tue Jul 09, 2013 3:39 pm

Daisy wrote:
Pego wrote:Thank you Mark for a voice of reason.

I think you're just worried hat you'll lose that bet to Marlow 8-)


Worried? Start rolling on the floor laughing with me. That bet is not even 245, but 250. This is what Marlow prophesied.

By December 31, 2019, 2 of those 3 things will have happened:

245' - DT (Crouser!!)
8'2 - HJ (WtFK - some hotshot like D Thomas, fresh off dunking on a 12' rim )
80' - SP (Jacko)
Pego
 
Posts: 10203
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Marlow » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:07 pm

Pego wrote:This is what Marlow prophesied.
By December 31, 2019, 2 of those 3 things will have happened:
245' - DT (Crouser!!)
8'2 - HJ (WtFK - some hotshot like D Thomas, fresh off dunking on a 12' rim )
80' - SP (Jacko)

Piece'o'cake!
I'm right on track! :twisted:
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby kuha » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:42 pm

Marlow wrote:I'm right on track! :twisted:


To a nice new straight jacket!
kuha
 
Posts: 9034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby tandfman » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:49 pm

kuha wrote:
Pego wrote:Thank you Mark for a voice of reason.

Yes, indeed.

I think you've missed my point. I agree that it is unlikely that Bondarenko or anyone else is going to break the WR. My comment was not about what is likely to happen; it was about what is imaginable. Given the current state of the various events, I thought imaginable that Tamgho could break the TJ record, and I now think it's imaginable that Bondarenko could break the HJ record.

Mark is right. It's probably not going to happen. But it seems at least possible.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby unclezadok » Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:59 pm

Some possibilities. No soft records.
unclezadok
 
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:54 pm

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Marlow » Tue Jul 09, 2013 5:07 pm

kuha wrote:
Marlow wrote:I'm right on track! :twisted:

To a nice new straight jacket!

Oh yeah, they said that about Howard Hughes too . . oh wait, bad example . . .
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby kuha » Tue Jul 09, 2013 5:11 pm

tandfman wrote:
kuha wrote:
Pego wrote:Thank you Mark for a voice of reason.

Yes, indeed.

I think you've missed my point.


We're just pummeling Marlow; all the rest is unavoidable collateral damage.
kuha
 
Posts: 9034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Dave » Tue Jul 09, 2013 5:26 pm

An amazingthingto me is that the LJ has improved only 5cm since 1968. Even the HJ has progressed more.Ter-ovaneysen's 8.34 from 1967 would be 2nd in the world right now
Dave
 
Posts: 2125
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby tandfman » Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:30 pm

kuha wrote:We're just pummeling Marlow; all the rest is unavoidable collateral damage.

Oh, OK. Carry on. :)
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby gh » Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:35 pm

Dave wrote:An amazingthingto me is that the LJ has improved only 5cm since 1968. Even the HJ has progressed more.Ter-ovaneysen's 8.34 from 1967 would be 2nd in the world right now


That's only if you place any credence in Beamon's altitude/wind-aided mark. Take that out of the equation, and the WR is 8.35 at that point and has gone up 60cm.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Marlow » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:04 pm

tandfman wrote:
kuha wrote:We're just pummeling Marlow; all the rest is unavoidable collateral damage.

Oh, OK. Carry on. :)

Yikes, tough crowd!
Y'all be whistling a difrunt tune when the genetically engineered mutants start competing in 2017!!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Daisy » Tue Jul 09, 2013 7:07 pm

So is a genetically engineered organism actually a mutant?
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Dave » Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:52 am

gh wrote:
Dave wrote:An amazingthingto me is that the LJ has improved only 5cm since 1968. Even the HJ has progressed more.Ter-ovaneysen's 8.34 from 1967 would be 2nd in the world right now


That's only if you place any credence in Beamon's altitude/wind-aided mark. Take that out of the equation, and the WR is 8.35 at that point and has gone up 60cm.


What was the second place mark at the 68 games? If it was less than 8.65 or so, I'll put credence in the mark. Beamon did have favorable conditions but he also had a perfect jump.
Dave
 
Posts: 2125
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Marlow » Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:11 am

Daisy wrote:So is a genetically engineered organism actually a mutant?

You misperceive . . . by 2017, the mutants (aka the X-Men) will be out and about, and THEY will be engineered to be "faster, stronger" . . . :wink:
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Daisy » Wed Jul 10, 2013 5:41 am

Marlow wrote:the mutants (aka the X-Men) will be out and about, and THEY will be engineered to be "faster, stronger" . . . :wink:

CGI in the Olympics :) That will be interesting. Could this explain Bob Beamon's leap in Mexico? After all, they were able to fake the moon landing only a year later.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Marlow » Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:25 am

Daisy wrote:CGI in the Olympics :) That will be interesting. Could this explain Bob Beamon's leap in Mexico? After all, they were able to fake the moon landing only a year later.

Indeed - many great performances have been CGI or 'green-screen' effects. MJ's 19.32, Merritt's 12.80, Soto's 8'. Interesting to note that last year's Olympics were the first ones that were 100% CGI.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby KDFINE » Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:32 am

Dave. Second place behind Beamon was Beer's 8.19 (26'-10 1/8"). I believe it came after the rains started, and Beamon's leap had a discouraging effect on the others. I suppose they could have said to themselves, wow, if he can do it so can I, but it didn't work out that way. Altitude aided and wind suspect, it was still MASSIVE.
KDFINE
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Pego » Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:01 am

Marlow wrote:
Daisy wrote:So is a genetically engineered organism actually a mutant?

You misperceive . . . by 2017, the mutants (aka the X-Men) will be out and about, and THEY will be engineered to be "faster, stronger" . . . :wink:


But, of course. It took me a while to understand. Not too bright, I guess :oops: .

So, the X-men compete in X-games and the results are recorded in X-files. Do I have it right finally 8-) ?
Pego
 
Posts: 10203
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby marknhj » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:14 am

tandfman wrote:I thought imaginable that Tamgho could break the TJ record


I saw Tamgho's big foul a couple of days ago for the first time and if the lines superimposed on the TV shot are anywhere near accurate, it's absolutely imaginable that he could break the TJ WR. In fact, I'll be surprised if he doesn't in the next few years.

For old times sake it's worth a look at the Tamgho thread on letsrun, for a laugh. Our friend eldrick proves, without any doubt, and you're a numskull if you disagree, that the foul was worth at least 20+cms more than Edward's 18.29m :D
marknhj
 
Posts: 5070
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Marlow » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:20 am

Pego wrote:Do I have it right finally 8-) ?

As markn would say - there's hope for you yet!! :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Dave » Sun Mar 02, 2014 8:55 pm

gh wrote:
Dave wrote:An amazingthingto me is that the LJ has improved only 5cm since 1968. Even the HJ has progressed more.Ter-ovaneysen's 8.34 from 1967 would be 2nd in the world right now


That's only if you place any credence in Beamon's altitude/wind-aided mark. Take that out of the equation, and the WR is 8.35 at that point and has gone up 60cm.


The discussion on another board brings up this question.. Let's say there was an illegal wind, how much did it impact mr. Beamon's performance? F it was 2.5, 3.0, or 4.0? How much does a wind impact a LJ performance?
Dave
 
Posts: 2125
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Dave » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:00 pm

Dave wrote:The newest one is from 1996 so I suspect none are at risk. Lavillenie could potentially challenge 6.15. Otherwise they all look safe for the foreseeable future.


My, was I prescient.....
Dave
 
Posts: 2125
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby lonewolf » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:02 pm

There is no such thing as a "soft" WR in any event.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8816
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby Dave » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:08 pm

lonewolf wrote:There is no such thing as a "soft" WR in any event.


At risk would have been a better term.
Dave
 
Posts: 2125
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: Are any men's field event records soft?

Postby 26mi235 » Sun Mar 02, 2014 9:10 pm

Dave wrote:
gh wrote:
Dave wrote:An amazingthingto me is that the LJ has improved only 5cm since 1968. Even the HJ has progressed more.Ter-ovaneysen's 8.34 from 1967 would be 2nd in the world right now


That's only if you place any credence in Beamon's altitude/wind-aided mark. Take that out of the equation, and the WR is 8.35 at that point and has gone up 60cm.


The discussion on another board brings up this question.. Let's say there was an illegal wind, how much did it impact mr. Beamon's performance? F it was 2.5, 3.0, or 4.0? How much does a wind impact a LJ performance?


Given the nature of the 'error' the wind was between 2.0 and 2.9x, so 2.5 is a reasonable. The answer is that it affects it by 8.90m or the difference between 8.90 and the prior record of 8.35 or whatever the record was because it was not properly a record.

As for a guess of the effects of wind and altitude, with wind dialed back down to 1.0mps, and at sea level, my pure, quick guess is 8.55 to 8.60; he likely would have reached 28 feet.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Flumpy, rsb2 and 18 guests