Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Red Sox as a team last year. Never say "i quit."

[/ QUOTE ]

The team with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball winning the WS doesn't qualify as the most impressive feat in sports recently.

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I say Liverpool scoring 3 against Ac Milan on 6 mintues.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this wins easily for team sports played with a ball (thus cancelling out Lance).

Overall, how can it possibly not be Lance?

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]

this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, not so much. You get to come into the second 100 at speed, and that makes up for quite a bit. (EDIT: Reading the rest of the thread, I see this was discussed fairly extensively. His crushing of the old 200m record was pretty amazing in and of itself, relationship to 100m or no.)

Still, I agree with you and Clark. I remember getting home from a cross-country practice that summer just in time for the finals of that event, and seeing Michael Johnson crush that final was easily the coolest thing I've ever seen at the Olympics.

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


http://www.sapere.it/mm/sport/objects/076.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

me and clark agree on something? [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the 200m record has almost always been less than 2x the 100 record, due mostly to the fact that it takes about 20-30 yards for a world class runner to get to top speed, and he can sustain it for about 150-200 yards, usually. This is also why 400m relays are MUCH faster than 4x the 100 record, as each runner gets a running start.

Great record any way it goes though.

- for a long time, the record was 19.73 seconds in the 200m, while the 100m record was 9.95

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
yeah yeah, i know. i'm sort of joking. it just seems interesting to me that these records have been around for over 100 years, and they essentially get broken every year as well.

enough out of me, i've had too much to drink and i'm going to sleep.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true in track. Both the 100m and 200m records have been broken (legally)pretty sporadically since the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City, where the thin air contributed to a slew of records, including Bob beamon's 29'2.5" Long jump( he never before or after had even jumped 28 feet before that)

I believe the progression from mexico city to current was about,(I don't care to look it up);
100m
9.95, 9.92, 9.89, 9.86, 9.83, 9.79, 9.78

200m
19.83, 19.75, 19.73, 19.59(???), 19.32

Edit: Interesting thing i DID find poking around;
100m - 9.95s
Jim Hines - stood for 15 years
200m - 19.83s
Tommie Smith - 11 years
400m - 43.86s
Lee Evans - 29 years
400m hurdles - 48.12s
David Hemery - 4 years
4x100m - 38.19s
USA - 9 years
4x400m - 2:56.16
USA - 24 years
Long jump - 8.90m
Bob Beamon- 23 years
Triple jump - 17.39m
Viktor Sanyeyev - 3 years

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[/ QUOTE ]
No.

9.77 * 2 = 19.54

[/ QUOTE ]

While you found a nice reference there, it doesn't BEGIN to bolster your argument. The initial quoted poster is absolutely right.

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


this is even more impressive when you take into consideration that Johnson's 200 record is less than double the 100 record, and by a fair amount at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The feat was remarkable, but this statement isn't why. Of course it's going to be less than double the 100 time because he is at full speed when he starts the second 100 of the race.

[/ QUOTE ]

figure out how many people in the sport of track and field can run a 200 faster than double their 100 time, then get back to me.

edit to add: I'll make this easy on you, only 2 people in history have ever run a 200 in a time faster than double the 100 meter world record at the time. The other guy was the former world record holder and his 200 time was faster than double the 100 meter record at the time he ran it by about a tenth of a second. When Johnson did it his time was faster than double by almost 4 tenths.

[/ QUOTE ]


This whole statement is almost completely worng, and I will debunk it using the cool wkipedia entries addended elsewhere in this thread by listing the 100m record, followed by any and all 200m record/times under 2x that.

9.95 Jim Hines USA Mexico City, Mexico October 14, 1968

19.83 Tommie Smith USA 16 October 1968 Mexico City
19.72 Pietro Mennea ITA 12 September 1979 Mexico City
19.75 Carl Lewis USA 19 June 1983 Indianapolis

9.93 Calvin Smith USA Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA July 3, 1983
9.92 Carl Lewis USA Seoul, South Korea September 24, 1988

19.75 Joe DeLoach USA 28 September 1988 Seoul

9.90 Leroy Burrell USA New York, New York, USA June 14, 1991
9.85 Leroy Burrell USA Lausanne, Switzerland July 6, 1994
9.84 Donovan Bailey CAN Atlanta, Georgia, USA July 29, 1996

19.32 Michael Johnson USA 1 August 1996 Atlanta
19.68 Frank Fredericks NAM 1 August 1996 Atlanta


So there are SIX seperate instances since electronic timing came into being that the 200m was run at less than 2x the 100m record, and that is only including the record performances! I am positive Carl Lewis has SEVERAL runs under 19.90 seconds when the record was 9.95-9.92, but I can't find a listing.

If you're going to take such a strong stance, it helps to know wtf you are talking about.

Stick to Duke Basketball...

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

This was Golden Gate Sport & Social Club Competitive division (there's rec/intermed/compet) semifinals, short field, small goal soccer. The other team ties the game 1-1. Kick-off is passed to me. I notice their keeper has lazily come way off his mark. I pop a high-arcing shot right from mid-field all the way over his head. He just sort of turns and looks as it goes over him and POW straight into the back of the mini-goal.

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Red Sox as a team last year. Never say "i quit."

[/ QUOTE ]

The team with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball winning the WS doesn't qualify as the most impressive feat in sports recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I forget, how high was the Yankees payroll that year? was it the biggest in the majors? by over 50%? or was it #17 or something?

if you honestly want to use payroll as a barometer for what "should" happen, then that makes the comback even MORE impressive, not less.

Re: The most impressive feat in sports recently?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Red Sox as a team last year. Never say "i quit."

[/ QUOTE ]

The team with the 2nd highest payroll in baseball winning the WS doesn't qualify as the most impressive feat in sports recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I forget, how high was the Yankees payroll that year? was it the biggest in the majors? by over 50%? or was it #17 or something?

if you honestly want to use payroll as a barometer for what "should" happen, then that makes the comback even MORE impressive, not less.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you say so.