If Frank Shorter was in his 1972 form and running tomoro, where would he finish?

"Things changed in 1998, when a German scientist, Dr. Werner Franke, managed to get into the archives of Stasi, East Germany's secret police force. By the time the GDR collapsed, Stasi's spooks had managed to destroy most of its incriminating paperwork, but not a file on State Plan 14:25, which Dr. Franke uncovered at the Stasi headquarters in Leipzig. State Plan 14:25 contained details of East Germany's drug program for its Olympic athletes. The file implicated many gold medalists, five of them winners in track and field in Montreal. Cierpinski's name was at the top of Page 105. He was No. 62."

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=joyce/080822

Scott56 wrote:

Speaking of vindictive. Did Shorter beat you in a race at some time. You certainly seem to be making these comments in a vindictive manner. As for evidence that Cierpinski doped, wasn't his name on doping records that came out of East Germany?

No, I'm just pointing out the obvious, not vindictive at all.

Shorter is the one who brought forth the "evidence", according to him.

A man to respect.

If anyone felt cheated, though, you'd assume it would be Don Kardong. If Cierpinski's win were voided, Kardong would move up from fourth place to the bronze medal. Back in 1998, though, Kardong sounded philosophical about it.

"In the purest sense, the judgment of the IOC is irrelevant," Kardong wrote in Runner's World magazine 10 years ago. "It is the athlete's own measure of self that matters. In my moment of truth, I lost the bronze medal to Karel Lismont. I reached down and found … a well of fatigue. I can't change that, but at least I can claim my race -- what I did and didn't do -- as my own."

american whiners wrote:

No, I'm just pointing out the obvious, not vindictive at all.

Shorter is the one who brought forth the "evidence", according to him.

Cierpinskcheat was drugged to the fuggin gills. Anyone who denies that is a moron. Although judging by your earlier posts, I'n not really surprised.

Dead last

Derderian wrote:

Frank would win because he would totally intimidate the competition.

Tom

This is what I was thinking. If '72 Frank were out there tomorrow, nobody would beat him because nobody would believe they can beat him.

I watch the '76 Marathon Trial. Shorter and Rodgers jogged -- literally jogged -- the final 400m at Hayward Field. The race was for third between Kardong and Tony Sandoval.

I'd say Shorter would finish top-3, and maybe take the whole thing.

If we're going to consider Ritz a contender to make the team, we have to think about Shorter with a similar PR and really solid racing skills.

And he did have wheels.

Let's not forget on the track Shorter ran an AR 27:51 and finished fifth in the Munich 10,000 final before the marathon. He was ranked fifth in the world at 10,000 for '72 as well.

I think you guys are a little overly optimistic. Shorter was great, one of America's greatest, but his PR is 2:10. Hall has run 2:06 without wind, 59:43, ran the second half of the '08 trials in 62 looking like he was out having fun while doing it, and his boston time is probably worth a 2:07 without the wind. Even his underpeformance in Chicago is a fair bit faster than Shorter ever ran. If Shorter in '72 shape was in the race tomorrow, the odds would still be heavily stacked in Hall's favor, not Shorter's.

excoastranger wrote:

I'd say Shorter would finish top-3, and maybe take the whole thing.

If we're going to consider Ritz a contender to make the team, we have to think about Shorter with a similar PR and really solid racing skills.

And he did have wheels.

Let's not forget on the track Shorter ran an AR 27:51 and finished fifth in the Munich 10,000 final before the marathon. He was ranked fifth in the world at 10,000 for '72 as well.

he had a personal best of 27:45 for a track 10000

douglas burke wrote:

he had a personal best of 27:45 for a track 10000

I know. I don't think he ran that until '74 or '75. In the heats in Munich he dropped the AR from Greg Frederick's 28:08 to 27:58.2. In the final he ran 27:51.4. I think by the time Shorter ran 27:45 Pre had taken the record down to 27:43.

I think Frank and a "B" novelist did very well for themselves. The record is now sub 13:00 and sub 27:00. What a difference a few decades makes .... not.

If Shorter was in his 1972 form and running tomorrow he'd have a pretty good chance of taking 30 minutes off Clive Davies' 2:42:44 world record for 64-year-olds.

Scott56 wrote:

He went out in 1:03 in Fukuoka 72 right after the Olympics and held on and ran his PR.

Going out in 1:03 and finishing in 2:10:30 is more like "fading by four minutes" than like "holding on."

Shorter ran 2:13 at New York right after Montreal.

He would be in the field but that's about it.

get Hall back on the track. how sick>?

Except we're talking about '72.

Shorter was hot.

In July he ran 2:15:58 to tie for first at teh Trials.

In September he ran 2:12:19 to win the Games by over 2 min.

In early December he ran 2:10:30 to Fukuoka.

He also ran the track Trials and finished fifth in a WR 10,000 at the Munich Games.

Beat Hall? Maybe not. But maybe.

The rest of 'em? Why not?

I think he and Hall would take out the front, and now since there's a pile of money for the win, he would push Hall to the end, but end up second qualifier.

excoastranger wrote:

He also ran the track Trials and finished fifth in a WR 10,000 at the Munich Games.

How do you finish 5th in a WR?