Regina is actually a former world indoor champion, and has plans to return to the 2003 World Indoors in Birmingham, England.
Some of this Regina-bashing really gets tired. With neither Teter nor Favor-Hamilton running this winter, no American woman can get within ten seconds of Regina in the 1500.
Oh yeah, now we are also counting road-whoring titles?
Let's start by breaking it down and counting track titles, shall we?
Indoor mile: Jennings - 1 ('92), Jacobs - 3 (95, 00, 02)
Indoor 3K: Jennings - 4 (86, 90, 93, 95), Jacobs - 2 (99, 01).
Total indoor titles: Jennings - 5, Jacobs - 5.
Outdoor titles:
1500m: Jennings - 0, Jacobs - 11 (87, 89, 92, 94-97, 99-02)
3000m, 5000m: Jennings - 3 (88, 90, 96), Jacobs - 3 (98-00)
10000m: Jennings - 6, Jacobs - 0
Total outdoor titles: Jennings - 9, Jacobs - 14.
Indoors - tie.
Outdoors - Jacobs by 5.
I won't argue that Jennings owned XC, but considering there was no short course until 4 years ago that's sort of irrelevant for comparing a miler to a 10k runner.
And unless they run 800 and mile national road champs, I don't think it's fair to include road titles all of which are skewed towards distance runners, as opposed to milers. How many road titles did Ryun or Holman win?
Any questions?
U.S. titles are U.S. titles. If Jacobs can run a 5000 record, then her range is good enough to win road and xc titles, too. Distance runners run xc, and you are trying to problaim RJ as "the Greatest American female distance runner EVER". All is fair, Jennings never made or asked for any excuses, and she won indoor mile titles, too, which, according to your "logic" is skewed towards middle distance track runners and unfair towards "distance runners". It only shows that Jennings had greater range, which is one criterion for determining "greatest American female distance runner", no? Better than running records over obscure distances and/or in obscure meets. And there's the little part about Olympic hardware: SCOREBOARD!
Boston dude wrote:
Oh yeah, now we are also counting road-whoring titles?
Let's start by breaking it down and counting track titles, shall we?
Indoor mile: Jennings - 1 ('92), Jacobs - 3 (95, 00, 02)
Indoor 3K: Jennings - 4 (86, 90, 93, 95), Jacobs - 2 (99, 01).
Total indoor titles: Jennings - 5, Jacobs - 5.
Outdoor titles:
1500m: Jennings - 0, Jacobs - 11 (87, 89, 92, 94-97, 99-02)
3000m, 5000m: Jennings - 3 (88, 90, 96), Jacobs - 3 (98-00)
10000m: Jennings - 6, Jacobs - 0
Total outdoor titles: Jennings - 9, Jacobs - 14.
Indoors - tie.
Outdoors - Jacobs by 5.
I won't argue that Jennings owned XC, but considering there was no short course until 4 years ago that's sort of irrelevant for comparing a miler to a 10k runner.
And unless they run 800 and mile national road champs, I don't think it's fair to include road titles all of which are skewed towards distance runners, as opposed to milers. How many road titles did Ryun or Holman win?
Any questions?
Nope, sorry, if we count titles the way it suits you, distance runners obviously have a HUGE advantage over milers if you allow to count XC and numerous road titles, for which there's simply no equivalent titles for milers.
In that sense Jennings or Drossin or any other distance runner has a dozen or so reasonable opportunities to "score a title" every year, while Jacobs or Favor-Hamilton or any other miler has only two (or three if she wants to double at track nationals). Do you want to compare numbers, or do you want to look more closely at the picture behind those "fuzzy math" numbers? Expecting a miler to race long XC races or road-whoring 10Ks, 15Ks etc. is stupid and shows no understanding of the sport.
I ask you again, how many 12K cross titles does ElG have?
How many road races did he run?
What about Aoita, Cram, Coe? Altogether, how many world-class milers won a single world cross title? hmm?
You are grabbing to this "national title is a national title is a national title" defense because a) it suits your argument b) you don't want to admit you are wrong. We are comparing apples and oranges (or rather milers and 10K specialists) here, so at least let's make sure we are using a fair scale, OK? Which is - use only common and most important parameter - national track titles.
Finally - how many world records did Jennings have and how close did she ever come to a WR?
One thing describes this "Drugina Jacobs".
world indoor two mile record.
world indoor 5000 record.
I love Regina, but come on! Anbody knows that come August or September when it counts, somehow a mysterious illness will pop up...Just like the great high school sprinter in Henry Neal. This kid would run 9.95fat in March and come July..injured...every year...makes you go hmmmmmmm!!!
It's not an opinion, it's the TRUTH. All major titles count equally. And you are still conveniently overlooking the fact that Regina is no more of a miler than Jennings was; Regina has set records and won titles in races longer than the mile, and Jennings has won titles in the mile and 3000. No one stopped Regina from trying to win road titles. Each runner makes his own opportunities. For all Regina's focus, where is her Olympic hardware? Regina has the range to run 5k & 10k road champs every year, as well as 4K cross the past 4 years and 8K cross any year. When Bob Kennedy won NCAA Cross as a frosh, he had not raced further than 5K prior to that season and he never raced further than 5K on the track prior to winning any of his US Cross titles; don't confuse unwillingness to run further races with inability to do so or any disadvantage in doing so. However, having greater range simply opens up more avenues of competition, and is a mark of greatness. Fact is, even when you take out all the road titles Jennings has, she's still ahead of Jacobs. And the truth is cross titles and medals are realistically a lot harder to come by than indoor titles or medals. The ElG point is nonsensical, just as trying to insist that he or Coe or Cram or some other mile specialist is a better distance runner than Geb or Tergat or Zatopek or Aouita is also nonsensical. If you knew what you were talking about, then you'd know that Jennings was much less of a "10K specialist" than Regina is a "mile specialist". If Regina truly is specialized, like you claim, and is so great, then where is tha Olympic bling-bling?
And if you're going to give holding records more weight then Slaney, who was also had range and was not a specialist, walks all over Jacobs.
Hmm, didn't Reggie also have plans to run in the Sydney Olympics? And what about those plans to train for and race the steeplechase, which interfered with her being on the team for world cross last year?
Shallow wrote:
Regina is actually a former world indoor champion, and has plans to return to the 2003 World Indoors in Birmingham, England.
Some of this Regina-bashing really gets tired. With neither Teter nor Favor-Hamilton running this winter, no American woman can get within ten seconds of Regina in the 1500.
Well, certainly no American woman can get with in 10-thousand cc's of Jacobs in the juice.
runslikethewind wrote:
world indoor two mile record.
world indoor 5000 record.
Again, there is NO indoor two mile world record.
Man, you guys are TOUGH on each other! That's okay to a point...but this'll go on and on because whatever way you try to decide the issue is subjective, including basing it on titles won. If you do it on titles, somebody I threw out will score big: Francie Larrieu (Smith).
Since the late 60's we've had Doris Brown, Francie L, Mary Slaney, Joan B, Lynn J and Regina J all put up formidable times and won some big stuff over an extended period. Trying to decide on a Greatest from among this group is like 'trying to herd cats'.
I hate to rain on your parade but yes there is a 2 mile world record for Regina.
Where?
Even Regina herself acknowledges that they are "World Bests" not "World Records". No governing body recognizes 2 or 3 mile indoor times.
\"The best way to measure the success of a great runner is by
their medal count and Regina has won more individual medals than any other female distance runner!\"--Vipam
I have to dispute this whole premise. For one thing, it pretty much rules out all women for whom the prime of their careers was pre-1983, since as far as I know there were no distance running medals available before then. During all of the 1980\'s, if my history is correct, the following major champs distance medals were available to women: 1500, 3000, 10000, and marathon at 1983 and 1987 Worlds and 1984 and 1988 Olympics. That\'s about 48 medals total. From 1990 to 2000, you had the \'92, \'96, and \'00 Olympic Games and 5 World Champs, making about 96 medals to fight over, thus many more opportunities for more recent stars to medal. 1970-1980: 0 medals. 1980-1990: 48 medals. 1990-2000: 96 medals. I may have some minor errors in there, but the point remains that someone who was a star in the 1970\'s to early 1980\'s would have been unlikely to accumulate many championship distance running medals due to their nonexistence. Since 1983, opportunities have gradually increased. So runners like Lynn Jennings and especially Mary Slaney and even more especially Francie Larrieu would have had few opportunities to match Regina Jacobs\' medal haul.
Measuring success by medals won is also discriminatory towards marathoners. Off the top of my head, I can\'t think of any marathoners who won more than 2 medals in Worlds/Olympics competitions, although there may be a few with 3. The nature of marathoning makes it harder to dominate for an extended period than middle or long distance track racing, but I don\'t think that should eliminate runners who focus on marathoning (ie Joan Samuelson) from consideration as the top overall distance runners. Also, in marathoning sometimes there are better competitions at the big city money races than in the championship races (countries not being limited to 3 runners each), so major titles such as New York and Boston should weigh heavily.
You do not seem to be giving any weight to XC titles, but as has been pointed out before, the world XC title is very tough to win, as it brings together runners from many different distances and strengths. So Lynn Jennings\' 3 XC World Titles should be held in very high regard.
You also, in my opinion, overemphasize the importance of some of the comparatively minor medals. The Goodwill Games was never that great of a competition. The Indoor Worlds, and indoor running in general, doesn\'t attract the same level of competition as outdoors, hence the medals are less prestigious. I think that victories in some of the Golden League meets could be considered as prestigious as Indoor World medals. And again, Indoor Worlds is a relatively recent phenomenon, so those medals were not available to women of the past.
Both of the world records you mention for Jacobs, while impressive, are not major world records, especially the one for 2 miles. There are a lot of somewhat obscure world records out there that are ripe for the picking by pretty much any major runner if that\'s what they choose to focus on. And while I\'m no expert on it, I\'m pretty sure Mary Slaney set more World and American records than Regina.
As I see it, what you\'re left with is 2 major medals for Regina Jacobs, both of them silver. She has had a long and impressive career, but as far as I can see she has done very little that nobody else has done. Joan Samuelson\'s Olympic gold and Mary (Decker) Slaney\'s 2 WC golds are, in my opinion, worth more than what Regina has won. (Of course, Regina still has opportunities to add to her totals.) Joan set a long lasting world\'s best at a much more contested distance. Regina has shown good range as far as distances in track, but her range is not unprecedented, and she has not really accomplished much in XC or road running. I believe these are very competitive disciplines and cannot just be dismissed as minor, unless you want to amend your statement to say that Regina is the best women\'s TRACK distance runner ever, and even that I would disagree with.
Everyone has their own opinion and the right of it. The women being mention in these post have all earned our praise and recognition; however, in my opinion I truly feel
Regina Jacob, Mary Slaney, and Joan Benoit have seperated themselves as the three best women distance runners ever. In my subjective view I happen to think Jacob's career was the most versatile and decorative (without belittling the other women accomplishments)!
Vipam
But I thought that she is a MILER?!!?!!
Replace the word "greatest" with the word "dirtiest" in the subject line and we'll all probably agree with that.
No thanks, I will post what I feel as you have! In my opinion Regina Jacobs, Mary Slaney, Suzy Favor, Joan Benoit,
and Lynn Jennings were/are clean and our country BEST female
middle/distance runners. It is evident by the numerous negative post against Regina that many have bad feeling towards her, fine I don't!
In 2003 I hope Regina, Suzy, and Sarah Schwald all accomplish their goals (it would be good for the U.S.)!
Vipam wrote:
No thanks, I will post what I feel as you have! In my opinion Regina Jacobs, Mary Slaney, Suzy Favor, Joan Benoit,
and Lynn Jennings were/are clean and our country BEST female
middle/distance runners. It is evident by the numerous negative post against Regina that many have bad feeling towards her, fine I don't!
In 2003 I hope Regina, Suzy, and Sarah Schwald all accomplish their goals (it would be good for the U.S.)!
Look pal your mind can say whatever it wants about Slaney but the facts are she was found to be dirty.
Joan Benoit.
No question about it.
Regina Jacobs is not even a distance runner.
She might of been. Or could of been. But she isn't.
GOLD QUOTE from dunnes runner:
"Joan Benoit.No question about it.Regina Jacobs is not even a distance runner.She might of been. Or could of been. But she isn't."
G, you're right. Regina can't even finish a 30km treadmill. !@#$%^&*()_+!!!!!!
karangasem.