Slaney--1984 3000 meters

Yes. Because she was a druggie.

In 1982 Decker had an outstanding season, which saw her set new world marks for the mile, 5,000m and 10,000m.

Then in 10 August 1983 as she stepped up to the start line of the 3,000m final to find herself surrounded by a veritable Soviet Bloc, marshalled by double Olympic champion Tatyana Kazankina. Her first world gold was followed by another in the 1,500m four days later, as the indefatigable Decker out-kicked three Soviets.

She had only run the 3000 meters once and had run an American record of 8:38 prior to the Olympic Games (1983).

She was clearly "the favorite" going in having won both 1500 and 3k at the world the year before, and most think she would have fun if she hadn't been so careless.

Decker would probably have won, but of course there was never a gurantee.

Interesting to remember that fastet three women of 1984 weren't at the Games.

1. Tatyana Kazankina URS(RUS) 8:22.62

2. Svetlana Guskova URS(MDA 8:29.59

3. Tatyana Pozdnyakova URS(UKR) 8:32.0

While the Olympics ended up as

1. Maricica PUICA (ROM) 8:35.96

2. Wendy SLY (GBR) 8:39.47

3. Lynn WILLIAMS (CAN) 8:42.14

4. Cindy BREMSER (USA) 8:42.78

5. Cornelia BURKI (SWI) 8:45.20

6. Aurora CUNHA (POR) 8:46.37

7. Zola BUDD (GBR) 8:48.80

8. Joan HANSEN (USA) 8:51.53

Wow, there were three americans in the finals?

Well it's debateable is my point, i mean everyone makes it out to be so "tragic" what happened to her, and i agree she had some bad luck overall, perhaps she should have hedged her bets and entered into the 1500 as well as the 3000 though....

She had an incredible season the next year (1985), going undefeated in Europe over all distances and running 8:22 for 3,000 meters.

Exactly but that was 1985, again my point is news stories/recaps always seem to say it was inevitable she would have won, also i think ZOla Budd set the world record in 1985 and 1986 for 3000 meters, so one could argue that perhaps if the accident didnt occur and Budd lost her nerve in the booing she would have won....

I have seen that Bud Greespan Olympic movie, and I found it interesting that two Americans went down in that '84 race. Joan Hansen got knocked down by Aurora Cunha a lap earlier, had the wind knocked out of her but picked herself up and finished the race, while Mary went down and cried like a baby.

well the big question obv is why didnt she just get up? i remember see ing footage of that(i think i have it on tape? but i havent watched it in a long time) - did she supposedly get hurt? I suppose it is possible to get hurt falling down in a race but it seems highly highly unlikely- also in the Olympic final it seems like your leg would practiaclly have to be hanging off to not get up??

What does that mean? Dominant. Inevitable. Should have won. Races are run. Whatever has happened the day before the race does not determine what happens the day of the race. Liz McColgan "was supposed to win" at the Olympics in '92, World Cross in '92. Sonia O'Sullivan "was supposed" to win in '96. Slaney was not supposed to win. She was a contender. As was Puica, Williams, Budd et. al. Slaney never learned how to run in a crowd and so she caused an accident, fell down, blamed her competitor and all these years later has never wiped the pout off her face.

I'm old enough to be a lifetime fan of Mary Decker-Tabb-Slaney-etc. Because she was so talented, she was a front runner in most of her races. It was fairly obvious that she was not particularly comfortable on the track whenever she got in a race with enough talent to put her in a pack situation. Prior to '84 she did not do any training or racing to significantly improve her tactics or pack running skills. This was a known weakness in her racing skills and she didn't deal with it as part of her Olympic preparation. She left herself vulnerable to that exact kind of problem and it game back to bite her in one of the biggest races of her career.

I agree, Mary did not have great tactics in a crowd, and she clearly runs into Zola, and almost appears to be in some other world while racing.

Mary did not attempt to double in the 1500, if I recall, she tried that at the trials and was beaten by Wysocki...

and I don't know if any remember, but Joan Hansen the 3rd American, fell in the race also, not simultanously, but did fall and got back up and finished in 8:51

Slaney's fall was a bit more traumatic. She went airborne and landed on her chest/neck, and if that didn't knock the wind out of you - nothing would. I don't think finishing was a big thing for such an athlete - Mary's style was all or nothing.

She truly is the champion that never was. (Olympics)

When Slaney fell she tore or strained her hip flexor.

I'm not a Slaney basher like many here, but I think it was pretty clear Puica was going to win that 3000 final in '84 no matter what. And I think it's pretty clear that Slaney could have avoided any collision with Budd if that had been her priority.

Strange so many people make deductions based on what they have read or heard about. The crowd at those olympics was so clueless it was mind boggling. We were there for a week and sat someplace else every session. Listening in to the conversations was truly insulting to a track junkie. Many didn't know the 800 is 2 laps. Seriously. So to say the crowd reaction doomed Budd is like saying they knew their ass from a gin whistle in the first place. Most of those yayhoos gave more of a shit over the opening and closing ceremonies than any real racing. I'd wager a bet to say for everyone who knew what was happening there were 10 that didn't. I keep reading about Decker the druggie. She may have been but don't kid yourselves all those Euro mangirls could piss a hole in cup. Wasn't Budd 16 or 17 at the time. I've been in a few pileups in races where I may have been the guilty party and I'd bet since Budd had a poster of Decker on her bedroom wall she might have felt guilty?

To say that Miracica Puica (pardon my spelling)and Paula Ivan weren't on steroids is being pretty ignorant.

I've always assumed that all the top Romanian women of that era - Puica, Paula Ivan, Doina Melinte, and Fita Lovin - were on 'roids.

well i dont think Slaney was on drugs back then. Am i wrong?? I mean as someone mentioned on another thread she was obv a prodigous talent(duh) and she was still quite young at that time in my opinion she prob didnt use them then but who knows obv. Just like many older stars who are trying to stay on top when she had her comeback etc then you obv become suspicious.

don't leave out the Soviets or E. Germans. If the Americans were taking anything, it wasn't at the sophistication level of the Europeans.

I doubt that Puica had the wheels to outkick a vertical Mary Slaney.