Best V.Borzov Video!

mastermulti

Master
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
2,242
Location
Sydney Australia
I remember reading about Shirvington running a 10.03 into a negative wind when he was only 19 years old. The Track and Field News article related how the sports community in Australia was super excited about the new sprint find. I remember thinking he was a shoo in to do it. The next year he took on a Russian coach, Kemel, or something like that. After that, it was just one injury after another. Apparently Kemel believed in super calf strength, and it messed up Shirvo's tendons.

Not too long after that, Macrozonaris of Canada also went after it. He came close (10.03 at altitude), but also ran into injuries. Oh, and as a side note, if you watch the vid of his 10.03, he looked back!! He gave up valuable 100ths because he was so surprised to be ahead. It was the worst look back since Lot's wife.

When Lemaitre approached it, i.e., his 10.04 at the euro juniors, they interviewed him and he thought nothing of the barrier. He said it will happen in its time. He didn't even think about it.

Shirvo linked up with Khmel in 1995 after his dad phoned around seeking a suitable coach. Before then dad was coach but neither of them totally committed. Shirvo was good at any number of sports, preferably those that entailed having friends in a team environment.
The overtraining and (seemingly never ending) illnesses became an issue after he had been offered $1 million to become Australia's first (read "world's first white) sub 10 sprinter. He remembers striving for that goal every time he took to the track. In 2000, setting out for 8 weeks in Europe in the best possible shape (just knowing a sub 10 would come home with him) he started with a 10.33, then 10.37 and couldn't believe he was running so slowly. From this time he seemed to struggle with doubt.
Years later I watched him rejoice to post a 10.11, saddened to see his expectations lowered, his aspirations in tatters.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
^^limitless
Lot's wife lol! That 10.03 (-0.1w, 70M alt.) was run in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia during the Commonwealth games. He finished 4th in that final that was won by Alto Bolden in (9.88). I was wrong when I said it was 1999 as it was 1998 when he was, as you said, 19 yrs. old.
To your comment about the calves; I remember Borzov and his coach training differently than the rest of the Soviet squad, which included their disdaining the over emphasis on calf development by the other Soviet sprint coaches. He really was a one-man program who was actively engaged in the development of "new" techniques. The pioneering technique his team is most remembered for was the use of plyometric exercises.
^mastermulti
I recall that $1,000,000 which became it seems an albatross around Shirvo's neck. Thanks for the details.
 

limitless

Mentor
Joined
Jul 21, 2012
Messages
696
No, Macro ran his 10.03 in Mexico City.

What the hell happened to Teeters?? He had a 10.07 last year, now is in the 10.2s
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
No, Macro ran his 10.03 in Mexico City.

What the hell happened to Teeters?? He had a 10.07 last year, now is in the 10.2s
Yes Macro did, but my mind had immediately switched over from the Lot' reference to thinking about Shirvo (who I was writing about) without warning--back to English 101.
Indoors Teeters wasn't much slower this season to have predicted these kind of outdoor performances. And yet he's barely raced, so it's hard to judge.
 
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
16
Any athlete who can run 20 flat ...has at least 10 flat ability ....wind etc .....had borzov run against the 2 Americans he would have been pushed sub 10 ...of that I am convinced .....borzov only ever did what it took to win a race .....times did not interest him ...titles did ...borzov was always super controlled ....at that period Americans never really performed well outside of the us .....which makes me think some of the so called sub 10s in the states come into question .....and wind readings have been queried many times ....one thing is a fact borzov was like bolt today ...head and shoulders above the rest over a 6 yr period from 69 through to ,75 .....remember this guy came back from double Achilles surgery to win bronze in 76 ....10.14 .....same time as winning time of 72 ....which obviously means borzov had so much more in the tank in 72 .......regardless of sub 10 sub 20 ability .....athletes are only really remembered for what they have achieved not what coulda,,,woulda ....shoulda ....

The media at the time (and still) hyped Black athletes like they were deities. The
Any athlete who can run 20 flat ...has at least 10 flat ability ....wind etc .....had borzov run against the 2 Americans he would have been pushed sub 10 ...of that I am convinced .....borzov only ever did what it took to win a race .....times did not interest him ...titles did ...borzov was always super controlled ....at that period Americans never really performed well outside of the us .....which makes me think some of the so called sub 10s in the states come into question .....and wind readings have been queried many times ....one thing is a fact borzov was like bolt today ...head and shoulders above the rest over a 6 yr period from 69 through to ,75 .....remember this guy came back from double Achilles surgery to win bronze in 76 ....10.14 .....same time as winning time of 72 ....which obviously means borzov had so much more in the tank in 72 .......regardless of sub 10 sub 20 ability .....athletes are only really remembered for what they have achieved not what coulda,,,woulda ....shoulda ....

Just want to say that the media of the time (and of course today) hyped Black sprinters constantly. In the U.S. trials in '72, the media always has conveniently forgotten to mention that Robert Taylor was ALSO timed in 9.9 seconds. If you watch the video you can see that only several inches separated the top 3 - Hart, Robinson & Taylor. It was almost a photo-finish. Hart's hand-timed 9.9 was never ratified as a world record, but listening to the media of then, (and I was around), they kept emphasizing how these two great American's had tied the WR for the 100 meters and then were robbed of their chance by a mistake in the scheduling. The American media did not want to give much credit to a White sprinter, (Borzov) for winning the 100, that's the bottom line. Taylor, who was also timed in 9.9 in the hand-timed '72 trials, could only manage a 10.16 to Borzov's 10.07 in the semi-final. This I think, more than anything else shows the inaccuracy of those hand-timed times. I had also watched the much-touted Steve Williams, and he was also given more than one 9.9 in the years from '73-'76. Williams of course, had a habit of getting injured right before the Olympics and did not compete in either '72 or '76 (a result of "tightening up" before major competitions?). Williams, I believe, was also "given" a 19.9 or two for the 200 in those years. When Williams won the 100 at the World Games in '77 his time was a "mere" 10.13, so I think we can see the difference between the hand-timed races and the electronically timed ones.

Another thing; in the video Frank Litsky says, "In the American mentality of those days, he was a Russian, he was a communist, he was a bad person, . . ." I guess to explain the media's indignant reaction to Borzov's winning the 100 meters. But Borzov's fellow "Russian, Communist, Bad Person", female Russian gymnast Olga Korbut, who won 3 Gold Medals at the same Olympics - was a "darling" of the American Press, so Litskee's line about the American media's negative treatment of Borzov because he was Russian Communist, does not hold water. Then Litsky says that Borzov was, "just a good athlete". Well, this is just another clever way of putting the guy down. The man won 5 Olympic Medals: 2 Gold, 1 Silver, and 2 Bronze, over the course of two Olympics and he's "just a good athlete"??? Would he describe any Black American Gold medalists as "just good athletes" I wonder?

Concerning the 200 meters, Borzov's 20.00 was the fastest time in the World in 1972 and I think the 3rd fastest of all-time at that point. I noticed the clock stopped at 19.99. The officials then changed it to a 20.00. Did this have anything to do with reverse racism I wonder? Is it possible they didn't want a White man with a sub-20 flat? Even today Borzov says his time was 19.99. After the race he waved his hand at the clock when they upped his time to a 20.00 flat. After the race Larry Black was angry as hell that he finished 2nd to Borzov. On the medal stand he stood as far from Borzov as he could. I saw it. Then after the race he tried to diminsh Borzov's victory by stating words to the effect, "Did you see him look around? I don't know any quality runner that does that! He didn't even break the World Record!" Talk about a sore loser!!! And the coach Stan Wright (the same African-American coach that had the wrong schedule that cost Hart and Robinson their chances in the 100) was also doing his share to diminish Borzov's victory by saying that, "If Larry had lane 5, I do think it would have been a different race . . ." or something to that effect, implying that the tight turn of lane 1 deprived Black of a victory. The same coach though - Stan Wright - put Black on the lead-off leg of 400 meter relay final BECAUSE the U.S. was running in lane 1 and BLACK WAS SUCH A GOOD TURN RUNNER. We don't hear this stuff mentioned too often. By the way, Borzov ran his 20 flat (or 19.99) easing up at the end.

Was Borzov the best in 1972? The answer is a resounding, YES!!!
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
The media at the time (and still) hyped Black athletes like they were deities. The


Just want to say that the media of the time (and of course today) hyped Black sprinters constantly. In the U.S. trials in '72, the media always has conveniently forgotten to mention that Robert Taylor was ALSO timed in 9.9 seconds. If you watch the video you can see that only several inches separated the top 3 - Hart, Robinson & Taylor. It was almost a photo-finish. Hart's hand-timed 9.9 was never ratified as a world record, but listening to the media of then, (and I was around), they kept emphasizing how these two great American's had tied the WR for the 100 meters and then were robbed of their chance by a mistake in the scheduling. The American media did not want to give much credit to a White sprinter, (Borzov) for winning the 100, that's the bottom line. Taylor, who was also timed in 9.9 in the hand-timed '72 trials, could only manage a 10.16 to Borzov's 10.07 in the semi-final. This I think, more than anything else shows the inaccuracy of those hand-timed times. I had also watched the much-touted Steve Williams, and he was also given more than one 9.9 in the years from '73-'76. Williams of course, had a habit of getting injured right before the Olympics and did not compete in either '72 or '76 (a result of "tightening up" before major competitions?). Williams, I believe, was also "given" a 19.9 or two for the 200 in those years. When Williams won the 100 at the World Games in '77 his time was a "mere" 10.13, so I think we can see the difference between the hand-timed races and the electronically timed ones.

Another thing; in the video Frank Litsky says, "In the American mentality of those days, he was a Russian, he was a communist, he was a bad person, . . ." I guess to explain the media's indignant reaction to Borzov's winning the 100 meters. But Borzov's fellow "Russian, Communist, Bad Person", female Russian gymnast Olga Korbut, who won 3 Gold Medals at the same Olympics - was a "darling" of the American Press, so Litskee's line about the American media's negative treatment of Borzov because he was Russian Communist, does not hold water. Then Litsky says that Borzov was, "just a good athlete". Well, this is just another clever way of putting the guy down. The man won 5 Olympic Medals: 2 Gold, 1 Silver, and 2 Bronze, over the course of two Olympics and he's "just a good athlete"??? Would he describe any Black American Gold medalists as "just good athletes" I wonder?

Concerning the 200 meters, Borzov's 20.00 was the fastest time in the World in 1972 and I think the 3rd fastest of all-time at that point. I noticed the clock stopped at 19.99. The officials then changed it to a 20.00. Did this have anything to do with reverse racism I wonder? Is it possible they didn't want a White man with a sub-20 flat? Even today Borzov says his time was 19.99. After the race he waved his hand at the clock when they upped his time to a 20.00 flat. After the race Larry Black was angry as hell that he finished 2nd to Borzov. On the medal stand he stood as far from Borzov as he could. I saw it. Then after the race he tried to diminsh Borzov's victory by stating words to the effect, "Did you see him look around? I don't know any quality runner that does that! He didn't even break the World Record!" Talk about a sore loser!!! And the coach Stan Wright (the same African-American coach that had the wrong schedule that cost Hart and Robinson their chances in the 100) was also doing his share to diminish Borzov's victory by saying that, "If Larry had lane 5, I do think it would have been a different race . . ." or something to that effect, implying that the tight turn of lane 1 deprived Black of a victory. The same coach though - Stan Wright - put Black on the lead-off leg of 400 meter relay final BECAUSE the U.S. was running in lane 1 and BLACK WAS SUCH A GOOD TURN RUNNER. We don't hear this stuff mentioned too often. By the way, Borzov ran his 20 flat (or 19.99) easing up at the end.

Was Borzov the best in 1972? The answer is a resounding, YES!!!
Amen, he was the best that year, and everything else is speculation.
Good point about the media's difference in reaction to Olga Korbut. I remember the general media being condescending towards Borzov's accomplishments in just the manner Frank Litsky of the NYT described. It's not surprising that the NYT would mock American patriotism since they were, and still are the leading American Jewish Marxist owned propaganda organ.
But truth be known Litsky was right that most Americans (majority were still patriot) were reflexively dismissing Borzov as a robotic caricature of the Cold War--not because of some anti-white love of the rioting blacks of that time. Most Whites had not yet become the self-hating cucks we see today. The NON belt-way/north-eastern media still largely catered to patriotic American sensibilities. The adoring contradiction that the media had for Korbut was because she was such a contrast to the anti-Soviet image of what Russian women were portrayed as. If you didn't live then you wouldn't remember how almost every media depiction of a Russian woman was of a ugly fat peasant. It was as if-- a revelation--and she also turned female gymnastics into something more than an athletic event--an artful display like the Bolshoi Ballet.

I also like your point about the lane 1 complaint in the 200. Ordinarily a runner would prefer to not run in that lane due to it being a tighter curve, but if there ever was a runner who was great at running that lane, Larry Black would be in that conversation. I've noticed that there have been commenters in today's age who don't know the history of the rules who ask why he was placed in that lane in the QF, SF, and Final when he had won all his prior heats. Back then they didn't award runners preferred lanes on the basis of their (placing/time) in the prior heat. A random draw was used, that in this case led to the unusual odds of Larry landing in lane 1 in the last 3 races. The sport eventually got around, no doubt due to the athletes complaining, to the more fair, equitable system of lane reward based on the previous heat performance.
The reaction from the team coach Wright is understandable when you consider how stupid he looked after the 100 scheduling error. Poor Stan took the heat even though subsequently he was exonerated:
"Wright, who died in 1998, initially took the blame for the scheduling confusion. But in a report to the United States Olympic Committee, George Wilson, the manager of the Olympic track team, later took responsibility, saying the schedule had been changed only 48 hours before the event and that, distracted, he had forgotten to tell Wright."
Larrys reaction to his loss was pure classless *****. He was the sore loser.
The 19.99? is explainable in that the times are rounded up to the next hundredth when the thousandths are greater than 0. As an example Marian Woronin's 10.00 was actually 9.992 so technically he was the first white man to run a sub 10, but dem's da rules.
By the way the 9.9 that Robert Taylor ran at the 72 Oly. trials was a wind-aided time in the Quarter-finals. In the final he was timed at (10.0). He was very close to Hart & Robinson but as you know the whole art of hand timing was a subjective exercise that was gladly disposed of eventually. I mentioned earlier in this thread that he also had a better head to head that yr. against Hart, and I believe also Robinson, that was part of the reason Track & Field News ranked him #2 that year in the 100.
Speaking of Borzov's 20.00(20.07 adjusted) his time would have been the 2nd fastest adjusted time to that date as Quarrie's 19.86(20.02 adjusted) would have been the fastest and Tommie Smith's 19.83(20.09) being 3rd fastest.
It's a shame Borzov didn't concentrate more on the 200 as I think he was actually better at that distance. Well the 100 was the glamour event and he never again trained to the shape he was in 72, so just more speculation.

Nice article: https://in.rbth.com/articles/2012/08/09/borzovs_burst_remembering_the_soviet_express_16903
One little error I noted in the article was when they mentioned the technique of the sprinters training with a paper (cardboard) tube in their mouths as they practice sprinted. The writer said when they left an imprint, that was when they were considered sprinters. Actually it was the opposite as relaxing while running would be indicated by not clenching the jaw, therefore not leaving the teeth imprint on the tube. I'm sure the writer understood it but his editor clearly didn't by not fixing the error. I've read in Borzov's own words about that technique. That technique is so cool when you think about it. "Young grasshopper, you kung fu master when you snatch pebble out of my hand."
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
From start to finish and medal, the men's 1972 Munich Olympic 200 meters.
image.jpeg image.jpeg image.jpeg image.jpeg image.jpeg
image.jpeg
A montage of images from the 1972 Olympics 200 meters.
 

limitless

Mentor
Joined
Jul 21, 2012
Messages
696
Thank you for posting those awesome pictures. As I recall, the brainwashing was pretty well set in by that time. I remember arguing with kids at the all white Catholic school I attended about it who said Hart would've won had he been in. One kid in particular said, "Hart gained a step on him in the final leg of the relay." Like a year later when the first black kid enrolled in the school, they all surrounded the black kid and worshipped his coolness. You know the story. The guy would wear big hats, bright clothes and talk dirty. Everyone was like, "wow!!"
 
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
16
Amen, he was the best that year, and everything else is speculation.
Good point about the media's difference in reaction to Olga Korbut. I remember the general media being condescending towards Borzov's accomplishments in just the manner Frank Litsky of the NYT described. It's not surprising that the NYT would mock American patriotism since they were, and still are the leading American Jewish Marxist owned propaganda organ.
But truth be known Litsky was right that most Americans (majority were still patriot) were reflexively dismissing Borzov as a robotic caricature of the Cold War--not because of some anti-white love of the rioting blacks of that time. Most Whites had not yet become the self-hating cucks we see today. The NON belt-way/north-eastern media still largely catered to patriotic American sensibilities. The adoring contradiction that the media had for Korbut was because she was such a contrast to the anti-Soviet image of what Russian women were portrayed as. If you didn't live then you wouldn't remember how almost every media depiction of a Russian woman was of a ugly fat peasant. It was as if-- a revelation--and she also turned female gymnastics into something more than an athletic event--an artful display like the Bolshoi Ballet.

I also like your point about the lane 1 complaint in the 200. Ordinarily a runner would prefer to not run in that lane due to it being a tighter curve, but if there ever was a runner who was great at running that lane, Larry Black would be in that conversation. I've noticed that there have been commenters in today's age who don't know the history of the rules who ask why he was placed in that lane in the QF, SF, and Final when he had won all his prior heats. Back then they didn't award runners preferred lanes on the basis of their (placing/time) in the prior heat. A random draw was used, that in this case led to the unusual odds of Larry landing in lane 1 in the last 3 races. The sport eventually got around, no doubt due to the athletes complaining, to the more fair, equitable system of lane reward based on the previous heat performance.
The reaction from the team coach Wright is understandable when you consider how stupid he looked after the 100 scheduling error. Poor Stan took the heat even though subsequently he was exonerated:
"Wright, who died in 1998, initially took the blame for the scheduling confusion. But in a report to the United States Olympic Committee, George Wilson, the manager of the Olympic track team, later took responsibility, saying the schedule had been changed only 48 hours before the event and that, distracted, he had forgotten to tell Wright."
Larrys reaction to his loss was pure classless *****. He was the sore loser.
The 19.99? is explainable in that the times are rounded up to the next hundredth when the thousandths are greater than 0. As an example Marian Woronin's 10.00 was actually 9.992 so technically he was the first white man to run a sub 10, but dem's da rules.
By the way the 9.9 that Robert Taylor ran at the 72 Oly. trials was a wind-aided time in the Quarter-finals. In the final he was timed at (10.0). He was very close to Hart & Robinson but as you know the whole art of hand timing was a subjective exercise that was gladly disposed of eventually. I mentioned earlier in this thread that he also had a better head to head that yr. against Hart, and I believe also Robinson, that was part of the reason Track & Field News ranked him #2 that year in the 100.
Speaking of Borzov's 20.00(20.07 adjusted) his time would have been the 2nd fastest adjusted time to that date as Quarrie's 19.86(20.02 adjusted) would have been the fastest and Tommie Smith's 19.83(20.09) being 3rd fastest.
It's a shame Borzov didn't concentrate more on the 200 as I think he was actually better at that distance. Well the 100 was the glamour event and he never again trained to the shape he was in 72, so just more speculation.

Nice article: https://in.rbth.com/articles/2012/08/09/borzovs_burst_remembering_the_soviet_express_16903
One little error I noted in the article was when they mentioned the technique of the sprinters training with a paper (cardboard) tube in their mouths as they practice sprinted. The writer said when they left an imprint, that was when they were considered sprinters. Actually it was the opposite as relaxing while running would be indicated by not clenching the jaw, therefore not leaving the teeth imprint on the tube. I'm sure the writer understood it but his editor clearly didn't by not fixing the error. I've read in Borzov's own words about that technique. That technique is so cool when you think about it. "Young grasshopper, you kung fu master when you snatch pebble out of my hand."

I think the 200 that Borzov ran in the '72 Olympic finals was probably his best race. I also agree that he should have run more 200's. I remember anticipating the 200 final in '76, but they said that he had 'scratched' from the race. I had looked forward to seeing him run the 200, because even at that time, I had become a fan, and thought it more appropriate to root for Russian White man rather than an American Black.

One thing that I began to notice even at that time is the phenomenon of Black cohesion; for example when Crawford, Quarrie, and Borzov were on the Victory platform you may have seen the photo where I think Crawford instinctively grabbed Quarrie's hand and held it up - but not Borzov's - Borzov was sort of forced to 'hold up' the hand of Crawford, otherwise be "left out" so-to-speak. I interpret Crawford's action as a supportive gesture of his "Black brother" and a dis to a White man - Borzov. Others may interpret it differently. However, after the '76 200 final the three top finishers all got together after the race - Quarrie, Hampton & Evans in what appeared to be an implicit show of Black solidarity (at least that's the way I interpret it). I also remember the '72 400m relay. I watched that race on TV and I can remember Jim McKay saying, "And here it comes . . . Hart had the lead, and I'm sure he lengthened it . . .!" I don't think he lengthened it. If anything it was quite even and Borzov may have gained just a trifle. But getting back to "Black cohesion", it seems to me that Whites always seem to try to be in the role of being the "good guy", always trying to act fair and balanced, while Blacks take an adversarial role against Whites when it comes to fellow Blacks. It's like, they defend their own kind right or wrong, while we, on the other hand are always trying to be fair and impartial, and sometimes - and this seems to be happening more and more now - we can't even defend ourselves when we ARE right. On the one hand we have a race that defends itself right or wrong (Blacks), and on the other hand we have a race (Whites) that can't stand up for itself wrong OR right. To me, this is a deadly combination. Deadly for us, that is.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
I think the 200 that Borzov ran in the '72 Olympic finals was probably his best race. I also agree that he should have run more 200's. I remember anticipating the 200 final in '76, but they said that he had 'scratched' from the race. I had looked forward to seeing him run the 200, because even at that time, I had become a fan, and thought it more appropriate to root for Russian White man rather than an American Black.

One thing that I began to notice even at that time is the phenomenon of Black cohesion; for example when Crawford, Quarrie, and Borzov were on the Victory platform you may have seen the photo where I think Crawford instinctively grabbed Quarrie's hand and held it up - but not Borzov's - Borzov was sort of forced to 'hold up' the hand of Crawford, otherwise be "left out" so-to-speak. I interpret Crawford's action as a supportive gesture of his "Black brother" and a dis to a White man - Borzov. Others may interpret it differently. However, after the '76 200 final the three top finishers all got together after the race - Quarrie, Hampton & Evans in what appeared to be an implicit show of Black solidarity (at least that's the way I interpret it). I also remember the '72 400m relay. I watched that race on TV and I can remember Jim McKay saying, "And here it comes . . . Hart had the lead, and I'm sure he lengthened it . . .!" I don't think he lengthened it. If anything it was quite even and Borzov may have gained just a trifle. But getting back to "Black cohesion", it seems to me that Whites always seem to try to be in the role of being the "good guy", always trying to act fair and balanced, while Blacks take an adversarial role against Whites when it comes to fellow Blacks. It's like, they defend their own kind right or wrong, while we, on the other hand are always trying to be fair and impartial, and sometimes - and this seems to be happening more and more now - we can't even defend ourselves when we ARE right. On the one hand we have a race that defends itself right or wrong (Blacks), and on the other hand we have a race (Whites) that can't stand up for itself wrong OR right. To me, this is a deadly combination. Deadly for us, that is.

Deadly combo, that suicidal altruism that plagues Western White Man. It's like an invited cultural Trojan horse virus has attacked our Civilizations immune (defense) system, and has induced a crippling auto-immune disease where our own body politic is attacking itself and we no longer recognize friend from foe as we turn on ourselves and invite our own destruction into our midst. That virus started as class/religion warfare Marxism, but has now mutated into this post-modern cultural Marxism which is overturning our very sanity.
I too at that time was rooting for the Soviet white man against the American black, because instinctively I was a proto-alternative Right man without knowing it. The hollow empires outlines were just coming into view.
I have no problem with other kinds having racial "cohesion" so long as it doesn't come at my expense. What I do have a problem with is self-hating whites.
Mckay may have been a black cheering cuck or blinded by nationalism or even a innocent victim of the camera angle effect that like the Doppler effect creates an illusion. The last leg was timed as 9.24 for Borzov and 9.29 for Hart, admittedly not timed as accurately as FAT since they are running starts. We can see Borzov was too far behind to begin with to have any chance, so wasn't going all out in the end (another reflexive arm raise) and so it seemed that Harts last strides were also relaxed knowing that Borzov had no chance. Lets pretend that those times indicated they were equal in the running phase, then Hart would have still lost in the 100 meters as Borzov's reaction time and acceleration out of my blocks and 1st 40 meters pick up (undisputedly the best in the world at that time) would have had him trying to chase Borzov down.


Here's some delicious irony and a treat (see if you can guess from the montage, I'll have the answer at the end.)
image.jpeg

image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.gif
image.gif

That's the Voyager spacecraft which recently, officially entered what is defined as interstellar space.
Onboard that spacecraft is a plaque and record of human kind that is meant to convey salutations and " we are your neighbors" to any alien life that may come across this star traveler. Among the photos is one of Borzov in the 200 heats of Munich who will be the human representative of pi-pedal locomotion and athletic sprinting. A fitting representative, as we don't want to confuse our galatic neighbors with a simian as opposed to a sapien as the leader in the "human race."
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
16
Deadly combo, that suicidal altruism that plagues Western White Man. It's like an invited cultural Trojan horse virus has attacked our Civilizations immune (defense) system, and has induced a crippling auto-immune disease where our own body politic is attacking itself and we no longer recognize friend from foe as we turn on ourselves and invite our own destruction into our midst. That virus started as class/religion warfare Marxism, but has now mutated into this post-modern cultural Marxism which is overturning our very sanity.
I too at that time was rooting for the Soviet white man against the American black, because instinctively I was a proto-alternative Right man without knowing it. The hollow empires outlines were just coming into view.
I have no problem with other kinds having racial "cohesion" so long as it doesn't come at my expense. What I do have a problem with is self-hating whites.
Mckay may have been a black cheering cuck or blinded by nationalism or even a innocent victim of the camera angle effect that like the Doppler effect creates an illusion. The last leg was timed as 9.24 for Borzov and 9.29 for Hart, admittedly not timed as accurately as FAT since they are running starts. We can see Borzov was too far behind to begin with to have any chance, so wasn't going all out in the end (another reflexive arm raise) and so it seemed that Harts last strides were also relaxed knowing that Borzov had no chance. Lets pretend that those times indicated they were equal in the running phase, then Hart would have still lost in the 100 meters as Borzov's reaction time and acceleration out of my blocks and 1st 40 meters pick up (undisputedly the best in the world at that time) would have had him trying to chase Borzov down.


Here's some delicious irony and a treat (see if you can guess from the montage, I'll have the answer at the end.)
View attachment 1297

View attachment 1298
View attachment 1299
View attachment 1300
View attachment 1301

That's the Voyager spacecraft which recently, officially entered what is defined as interstellar space.
Onboard that spacecraft is a plaque and record of human kind that is meant to convey salutations and " we are your neighbors" to any alien life that may come across this star traveler. Among the photos is one of Borzov in the 200 heats of Munich who will be the human representative of pi-pedal locomotion and athletic sprinting. A fitting representative, as we don't want to confuse our galatic neighbors with a simian as opposed to a sapien as the leader in the "human race."

I've known that for a while. I seem to have heard that the photo was the '72 200 final photo at the finish line with Borzov's hands raised.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
You would've thought they'd have used a photo from the final but my search indicated they used the one I posted.
 

sprintstar

Mentor
Joined
Jun 3, 2016
Messages
1,885
Location
Canada
cool pictures, I see that Borzov had quite long legs comparative to hi upper torso. All I can say is he was faasstttt!!! Training tip we used in High school and my own training was to tuck a tennis ball under chin from out of the blocks during drive then theoretically your shoulders, neck, chin face were to relax enough the tennis ball would drop from under your chin, must say it worked well. Great article..
 

greyghost

Mentor
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
711
Fernchris ...you need to find a lady in your life ...and I am guessing you couldn't run from hear to your toilet without a cheese burger .....but ...why a tirade ......I thought these blogs are for open discussion ...regardless of ones opinion ...not just a load of fat white dudes siting in their sir underwear being delusional with absolutely no idea or insight intent on picking grammar mistakes ....then maybe you don't belong on the website if you can't keep your temper together ......hhhhhmmmmmm......look at yourself in the mirror first buddy ......
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
"Tirade"? There's a book called a dictionary, look it up.
"...open discussion". No ones stopping you from expressing your incoherence.
"...Insight intent..."--is that like contextualizing ???
"Maybe you don't belong on this website..." Are you the new administrator? What happened to Don?
"Temper."? "Mirror."? gg you are seriously disturbed. Don't waste your time trying to engage me in a flame war. You'll only succeed in making yourself look worse than you already do. Please. Grow up.
 
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
16

This is taken from the '72 Olympics. I'm not going to say what, but do you notice anything unusual about the clock time in the upper right portion of the video?
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238

This is taken from the '72 Olympics. I'm not going to say what, but do you notice anything unusual about the clock time in the upper right portion of the video?

Nothing unusual since almost every race posts times immediately that then get corrected. No conspiracy. In Borzov's case the Electronic (FAT) time was rounded up to the next hundredth because the thousandth was more than 0.
I mentioned this earlier in the thread. An example I used was Marian Woronin who ran an official 10.00 (2.0w) in 1984. He was timed in (9.992). Since the thousandth (2) was more than (0) the hundredth gets rounded up to the next highest (as per the rule) which in this case was 10.0(0). All sprint times are treated that way. Technically both Woronin and Borzov ran under 10.00 and 20.00 respectively, but officially were recorded a hundredth slower due to the rounding rule. If they didn't do that the times would have to be recorded in the thousanths and the rounding would then occur based on the ten-thousandths.
Woronin likes to remind reporters that he was ttechnically the first White Man to run a sub-10 and he's correct though he does so in a humorous way since he understands the timing rules.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
16
Nothing unusual since almost every race posts times immediately that then get corrected. No conspiracy. In Borzov's case the Electronic (FAT) time was rounded up to the next hundredth because the thousandth was more than 0.
I mentioned this earlier in the thread. An example I used was Marian Woronin who ran an official 10.00 (2.0w) in 1984. He was timed in (9.992). Since the thousandth (2) was more than (0) the hundredth gets rounded up to the next highest (as per the rule) which in this case was 10.0(0). All sprint times are treated that way. Technically both Woronin and Borzov ran under 10.00 and 20.00 respectively, but officially were recorded a hundredth slower due to the rounding rule. If they didn't do that the times would have to be recorded in the thousanths and the rounding would then occur based on the ten-thousandths.
Woronin likes to remind reporters that he was ttechnically the first White Man to run a sub-10 and he's correct though he does so in a humorous way since he understands the timing rules.

Well, let me point it out to you. It took me a while to see it. Look at the decimal point between the seconds and tenths. What does it look like to you?
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
238
Well, let me point it out to you. It took me a while to see it. Look at the decimal point between the seconds and tenths. What does it look like to you?
Oh, now I see it, the use of a hexagram instead of a period as the decimal mark between the seconds and the tenths-of-a- second. I wonder if the manufacturer of that digital time display ("Swiss company Longines") the FAT device provider for that Olympics) was using that star, instead of period, for an aesthetic reason? I won't venture any further than that to imagine some more sinister symbology. I'm sure there must be some trending meme on the Internet that searches for that kind of hidden meaning. Just a quick glance in Wikipedia turns up many religious uses besides the most recognized use of that symbol as the "Star of David."
 
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
16
Oh, now I see it, the use of a hexagram instead of a period as the decimal mark between the seconds and the tenths-of-a- second. I wonder if the manufacturer of that digital time display ("Swiss company Longines") the FAT device provider for that Olympics) was using that star, instead of period, for an aesthetic reason? I won't venture any further than that to imagine some more sinister symbology. I'm sure there must be some trending meme on the Internet that searches for that kind of hidden meaning. Just a quick glance in Wikipedia turns up many religious uses besides the most recognized use of that symbol as the "Star of David."

Yes. That's what it is, a Star of David.
 
Top