Flojo's 10.49

Lol! She would have run like 11 seconds without the wind. That guys comments are great. "Ah, that cannot be! Noone can run that fast!" lol wtf

Here is another video of flo jo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q9_N8YzZ6U

some comments...

"what is everyones problem. who cares? all drugs do is MAXIMIZE the human bodies potential, in the same way strict dieting, training and other legal supplements do. if she was prepared to make the sacrifice, so be it! she still achieved those times and looked good doing it."

"because someone who doesn't compete draws an arbritrary line and says these drugs are legal and these drugs are illegal. f*** it! you do what you have to to be the best you can be. And she was the best by miles. See you at the finish line..."

"Flo Jo never tested positive for any performance enhancing drugs.

She's a legend of Track & field. "

"yall hatas need to stop hatin for once in a while there is no proof that she did oids anyway so shutup all yall are bein ignorant."

I am not suggesting (nor do I believe--not for a minute) the turtle/worm fungus crew was clean. Still, for the purpose of comprehensive analysis the Chinese women did register one notable international splash before notching their jaw-dropping string of WR performances in Beijing.

1993 IAAF women's Outdoor Track & field Championships, Stuttgart, Germany

Women's 10000 meter event:

1. Wang Junxia

China 30:49.30

2. Zhong Huandi

China 31:12.55

3. Sally Barsosio

Kenya 31:15.38

Intergalactic wrote:

Her form and power are on a completely different level from the rest of the world class athletes in the race. Incredible.

It bears repeating that this was a quarterfinal heat. The other athletes in the field were treating it as such while FloJo was running for time.

If Devers was running with that same tailwind at full bore, she'd probably have been a step or two behind.

They also ran the 3000m WC running the last 600 in a rediculous time (1:30, last lap of 59) crushing Paula Radcliffe and Sonia O'Sullivan in 8:28. The world record was 8:22 at the time. Later several chinese women would run under that time, one of them running 8:06 (!).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNcW0RGnJjs

they were good, no doubt about that. Take the best female athletes of a population greater then 1 billion, give them the best PEDs and run them into the ground with 150+ miles a week and you are bound to get results like this.

here's a short article about them. Surprisingly he doesn't think they are on anything

http://www.serpentine.org.uk/pages/advice_frank18.html

man or woman?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0812/si.best.pictures.of.the.year/content.19.html

wejo wrote:

I'm sure this has been discussed before but I wanted to open it up again. I'm working on the homepage and read how the Indianapolis track is getting destroyed and its where Flojo ran her 10.49 world record. I always knew people viewed the record as suspect (wind). But then I saw it was in the quarterfinals of the Olympic Trials.

Then I saw an actual video of it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usYdMLIXoPc

I bet most of our viewers have never seen the race. She sure doesn't react like she thinks she just smashed the world record. Can some of the old timers explain how this record is still on the books? Or maybe one of the stat geeks.

They even show the wind gauge going off the charts immediately after her run.

I think it's pretty clear the wind gauge was defective. You almost never get 0.00 readings (no positive OR negative wind). In addition, I believe there was a positive wind reading in the adjacent long jump pit.

meh.. Just watch the video. IMMEDIATELY after the run. No wind, then it gusts.

She also blew away a 10.8 runner.

It's good.

(leave it to a bunch of distance runners to poop on a great American's grave.

itseverywhere wrote:

man or woman?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0812/si.best.pictures.of.the.year/content.19.html

Go one better. Man or ... He-man.

Putting drugs aside, there is no doubt that she was fast, I mean really fast. I was there that day, and I did not buy the 10.49 either... no doubt it was wind aided. But even so.. she was very, very swift. And when she ran 10. 61 ( I think that was it ) legally the next day, I even wrote in my program. " Now there is a LEGAL WR. "

Was her 10.54 at Seoul Finals wind-aided?

Also, Why is she in Lane 3?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0eXOXO5fjM

3.0 tailwind

why wouldn't she be in lane three?

When you look at the video, there is a guy holding the white flag and you see it's blowing in the wind. Then, when they show the close up of the girl to her right, you can see her jersey flapping between her shoulder blades, her hair in the front of her head is blowing around, and her number is blowing. What a joke. I'm not even going to start on the PEDs.

he-she wrote:

itseverywhere wrote:

man or woman?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0812/si.best.pictures.of.the.year/content.19.html

Go one better. Man or ... He-man.

http://www.nicolebass.com

I would bang both of them in a THREE WAY

flo-jo got back wrote:

meh.. Just watch the video. IMMEDIATELY after the run. No wind, then it gusts.

She also blew away a 10.8 runner.

It's good.

(leave it to a bunch of distance runners to poop on a great American's grave.

She didn't blow away a 10.8 runner. She blew away a runner who ran 10.8 in that wind-aided race.

why wouldn't she be in lane three?

Um, there are eight finalists and I assume she won all her heats in times way faster than lane 4 and 5?

Why wouldn't she be in lane 4 or 5?

Top four qualifiers take the middle four lanes, drawn randomly.

Still a better situation than the old-old rules, which assigned all lanes in finals randomly (e.g. Bob Hayes winning in Tokyo in lane one).

Matt MCanISayHay? wrote:

Was her 10.54 at Seoul Finals wind-aided?

Also, Why is she in Lane 3?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0eXOXO5fjM

i always think the best part of that race is the woman in next lane to left of flo-jo. she's stay with flo-jo for about 50-60 meters, but as flo-jo starts to move away her hamstring just blows up.

lol yea here legs just implodes...I think Flo-jo could have been good without PEDs-probably about 10.9/21.8