shorter was the best.
shorter was the best.
actually namecalling is quite necc. in this case, you're obviously willfully stupid or a provocateur if you don't acknowledge that Shorter is the rightful gold medalist. If the IOC wasn't such a joke, they'd acknowledge this
A positive test is not necessary for getting DQ'd or receiving a ban.
In the 1980 Olympics, Cierpinski ran his last 200m in 30. Nobody was close to him. He just was able to do it after 42km.
Some would say this was becuase he was a superior athlete (other races to back this up?)
Most observers opinied that he had help. I would tend to agree with this view.
Is anybody realistically trying to suggest that at the apogee of East European performances there was *not* rampant performance enhancing drug use?? Do you think even the most concientious of athletes would have been allowed to opt out of the magic pills and injections? If they had, one can only imagine the consequences. Its not like they end up working at Blockbuster for 6 months trying to get it back together - their lives (and those of their family) would end.
Wow. Just calm down, OK? There's no need to call names here. Just take some deep breaths...
Finding records that say that someone was in a program is a far cry from a "positive test," which seems to be what it takes to be "disqualified."
This is why Shorter was, is, and always be the SILVER medalist in that race.
Again,
An arbitration panel found that Collins, 34, used banned substances provided by BALCO, the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative. She never tested positive, but the panel concluded she used the drugs for several years.
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, simpleton.
tuna wrote:
Cierpinski was on the juice.
Even though the man never tested positive americans consider him guilty. They use the argument that there was drug use surrounding the program that he was involved with. People close to the situation feel like Cierpinski was guilty.
While defending Alberto Salazar americans will often say "HE NEVER TESTED POSITIVE" Even though there was drug use surrounding the program that he was involved with. People close to the situation feel like Salazar was guilty.
Cierpinski is exactly as guilty (or innocent) as Alberto Salazar.
They are both guilty as hell.
Any coach, agent, or athlete (combination of all 3) that has been in the sport for 30 or more years dealing with top americans knows that both Al and Waldemer were using. This is believed by 100% of this fraternity. If you know anyone that falls into this category, ask them.
Like him or not, Shorter was the greatest American distance runner ever and one of the top five marathoners all-time. In my book he ranks with Bekila. Maybe because I was in 8th grade in 1972.
I tend to agree with you. Shorter is a prick so he is easy to hate, but the man was great and clean. Something that can't be said for Cierpinski (or Salazar).
jungleroy59 wrote:
Like him or not, Shorter was the greatest American distance runner ever and one of the top five marathoners all-time. In my book he ranks with Bekila. Maybe because I was in 8th grade in 1972.
Yeah, but any of the current crop of top East Africans would destroy him in a heartbeat.
But of course Frank has even insinuated they (top East Africans of today) are all on drugs too. (why stop with Cierpinkski? I DO believe Cierpinski was on drugs, but Frank apparently can't stop there). And I see others on this board support his view ("EPO-opians". )
It is one thing to legitamately questions others who have major sigs of guilt around them (like when Carl Lewis was questioning Ben Johnson, and Carl was slammed for that until Ben got busted), and it is another to start accusing every runner who ever lived who was better than you, or better than one of your heroes. That quickly turns into sour grapes.
please sir, can I have some wrote:
[quote]jungleroy59 wrote:
Like him or not, Shorter was the greatest American distance runner ever and one of the top five marathoners all-time. In my book he ranks with Bekila. Maybe because I was in 8th grade in 1972.
Yeah, but any of the current crop of top East Africans would destroy him in a heartbeat.
*******
The current top runners could beat him? So what. I guess Nurmi and Zatopek were no good because their times have been eclipsed.
Idiot.
jungleroy59 wrote:
destroy him in a heartbeat.
*******
The current top runners could beat him? So what. I guess Nurmi and Zatopek were no good because their times have been eclipsed.
Idiot.
Thank you. I've been wondering if anyone here other than me will make that point. The question to ask is whether the current crop of East Africans, thrown back in time and born when Shorter, Zatopek, or Nurmi, were born, would be producing the times they are now and of course they wouldn't. Times are a product of an era.
This is slightly off-topic, but damn, the ol' U.S. of A was rockin' the marathon during the 70s Olympics.
Gold, 4th, and 9th in '72 (Shorter, Moore, Bacheler) and then, if you throw out Cierpinski in '76 we collected a Gold and Bronze (Shorter and KARDONG!...Rodgers had an extremely rare poor marathon---I think he was injured with some sort of foot problem, too, leading up to that race).
And Don Kardong was only beaten by 3.5 seconds, getting passed in the 25th mile or so...now THAT'S something that it would be hard not to be bitter about.
And Rodgers had a broken foot in Montreal. He came back to win NYC that fall and dominated the next 3 years.
If I recall (interview btw. John Parker & Shorter), Shorter had a stress fxd foot.
I'm curious if you have spent any amount of time around Shorter? I have. I always found Frank to be a pretty good guy. Is he as outgoing and friendly as say Bill Rodgers? No. But I've worked with Frank in a professional setting and dealt with him as a journalist. I think Frank gets a bad wrap because he's by and large a private person. I don't think it's fair to criticize him unless you've spent time with him... not some quick encounter at some road race.
I guess that is the problem involved with the anonymity of the board. Yes I know Frank fairly well. He was at my wedding in 1983. I have worked as a panelist with him at about a dozen different events. I never trained with him as we tended to travel in different circles. My best friend trained with Frank for many years. If I called Frank up he would no who I am. I have witnessed him working the room looking for the youngest female with the biggest chest. This was while he was still married. I have also heard every excuse in the book for any race that he ever lost. The 76 games being no exception. I have listened to his rants on several occasions about how he is "this close" to a major announcement in the war on performance enhancing drugs. The guy is brilliant and eloquent and a prick.
gustave flaubert wrote:
So Marion Jones and Barry Bonds are fine upstanding individuals in your book.
I don't recall saying even reomotely implying that Jones, Bonds or Cierpinski were "fine upstanding individuals."
I said that Cierpinkski had never tested positive (which someone finally admitted) and thus never sanctioned. It's not an ethical opinion; it's a simple fact.
winner of the event + no sanction from governing body = winner of the event, according to governing body
If you read again, mayve more slowly this time, you'l find that I'm not saying that this result is just. However, as things stands it is clearly the official result. No second gold for Shorter here. You can call him "Double Gold Medallist in the Eyes of 62% of Letsrunners" if that makes you happy.
dmb wrote:actually namecalling is quite necc.
I'm sorry, but I don't have a clue what that even means.
I think that your namecalling ("dickwipe" -- not even very clever, but neither are you) is just a sign that you have no argument, are a subliterate 19 year-old, or both.
HRE wrote:
The question to ask is whether the current crop of East Africans, thrown back in time and born when Shorter, Zatopek, or Nurmi, were born, would be producing the times they are now and of course they wouldn't. Times are a product of an era.
Of course they wouldn't? How on earth do you jump to that conclusion?
East African participation in running in the days of Zapotek and Nurmi, and even Shorter, was much less than it is today, virutally nil if you go back more than 40 years. If East Africa had been in the race back then, Zapotek and Nurmi would not have been nearly so dominant. How many East Africans do you think prepared for the 1924 Olympics?