Athletics Weekly | London 2017 Post Mortem - Athletics Weekly

London 2017 Post Mortem

This topic contains 131 replies, has 30 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of biggut Biggut 1 month ago.

Viewing 25 posts - 76 through 100 (of 132 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #68188
    Profile photo of ursus
    Ursus
    Participant

    Unlike most of our throwers who have a habit of peaking pretty early, which I’ve noticed over a number of years. Then again I guess most of them haven’t got champs on their minds….

    Only one of this year’s leads was set in anything like peak season.

    mJT 31.3, mHT 21.4, mDT 14.5, mSP 12.3.

    wJT 30.7 (OK), wHT 21.5, wDT 5.2 wSP 11.3

    If I was being facetious I might wonder why so little happens once they come off the heavy weights.

    #68190
    Profile photo of sidelined
    sidelined
    Participant

    I went off to Po10 looking for some data, but came back surprised. I was expecting to see a dearth of young throwers with “respectable” distances, but this is instead what I found.

    Using the Po10s “UK 100” expectations, for U15 boys there are 92 boys who have the target for 800m and 89 for 1500m. For javelin there are 74, discus 76, shot 76 and hammer 82. So in volume terms (assuming the Po10 UK 100 targets are in any way reasonable in terms of a trajectory likely to lead to “good” senior performances, the volumes of successful throwers at young ages actually seems remarkably similar to the mainstay of middle distance running. I didn’t look too much further but glancing at U17M the picture seemed similar.

    Others more interested and expert in throws than me will know whether those UK100 targets are at all meaingful, but I know from experience with my own son (an “OK” middle distance runner) that the targets are generally quite stretching.

    Larkim, those are interesting stats. So if we have the talent, why are we worse at developing it in the throws than other events? (Not that we are setting the world alight in – say – the triple jump at the moment.) I’m sure there are a host of reasons. Here’s Goldie Sayers’ view:

    Relay medals paper over the cracks

    It’s true that there is no proper pathway for developing coaches and that the remnants of the old amateur ethos can hold things back, but I think it’s a rare former elite-level athlete who makes a good coach.

    #68194
    Profile photo of leadleg
    LeadLeg
    Participant

    Totally agree with Goldie Sayers… I also know that what she is suggesting will not be new to our ngb. The decisions they have made are in order to meet the UK Sport and Sport England targets (regardless of what the sport say).

    I would also suggest that main reason we have such a demographically diverse GB athletics team is because cost is of little barrier in our sport (pole vault the exception). So I am a little guarded about going entirely down British Gymnastics model, although there are elements of what they do that we should envy. I see that British Swimming seem to have been looking at them too, and their new beacon club system seems to be the result.

    #68347
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    When looking at the placings table, don’t forget we’ve gained some points due to the Russian ban.
    That said, I think we can say that in the context of overall declining standards, we are declining at a slower rate than most countries.
    Much as we love to bemoan our weaknesses in events such as JT, USA aside, no country has such a spread of decent athletes across events.
    I also take heart from the fact that most of our 4th and 5th placers were athletes in their early twenties who can be expected to be performing better in 2 years (not that that guarantees a medal).
    Whatever happens, you can be sure in 30 years time, my girls and their generation will view the athletes of this era through the same rose tinted spectacles we view the athletes of the 80s and early 90s.

    I seem to recall in the 1980s 1990s we did win some rather great gold, silver and bronze medals in world record performances… nothing “rose tinted” posters. we had very fine athletes and the PR merchants like the overpaid 200 grand a year de Vos and the PD who countlessly invent new ways to tell us that all is well, are better at their spivy skills than the guys in the 1980s/1990s.

    All I can say is MO was our only medallist in 44 individual events and upwards of 40 to 50 athletes did not cover themselves in any glory , to put it mildly. Just like 2012 when 3 gold medallists saved the UKA honchos bacon now we have the same stuff about points and final and wonderful relays when 28 points came from relays not individual events.
    Some of the performances by our athletes screaming about their entitlements to be selected were worse than awful… have a look at P of 10 for their efforts this season.; I will save blushes by not mentioning some who were hardly inspired by the loyal support of the fans. But that dreadful 10 K female athlete, who would for sure would have moaned about unfairness if she had not been selected, was abysmal and has now retired with some PR crap about supporting her man… These people make me feel sad, to say the least.

    The latest attempt to justify the mediocre, or rather underwhelming, performances overall of many athletes in individual events( good to hear that Jessica’s coach was NOT afraid to use the word when referring to the British love of the mediocre) was unworthy.
    Black and his pals probably had a series of different speeches ready stating how everything was really good, transitional, despite many of our best are not juniors or anything similar. This team of British athletes comprised approx. 79 individual athletes, how many really performed as they could have or even should have. Mmmmmm. Under 20 by my reckoning.

    #68350
    Profile photo of sovietvest
    sovietvest
    Participant

    Morning Philipo,
    Would you like me to rewrite my post, taking out reference to the impact of the Russian absences and overall declining standards, so that you’ve actually got something to disagree with?
    All the best,
    John
    P.S. Just out of interest, how would you define the standard athletes should have achieved in London: SBs (surely not fair in distance events or sprints when the conditions weren’t great)? Finishing above their pre-champs ranking? Beating the best performance of our great athletes of the 80s or 90s?

    #68352
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    Soviet

    I was very wary of what our team might achieve prior to London.

    And despite the paucity of individual medals I was very encouraged by what they actually achieved.

    I’m also hopeful that we may be watching a spectacle that is no longer completely riddled with drug cheats, the sprints and some throws are no longer in the realms of the supernatural.

    #68353
    Profile photo of robo2
    robo2
    Participant

    When looking at the placings table, don’t forget we’ve gained some points due to the Russian ban.
    That said, I think we can say that in the context of overall declining standards, we are declining at a slower rate than most countries.
    Much as we love to bemoan our weaknesses in events such as JT, USA aside, no country has such a spread of decent athletes across events.
    I also take heart from the fact that most of our 4th and 5th placers were athletes in their early twenties who can be expected to be performing better in 2 years (not that that guarantees a medal).
    Whatever happens, you can be sure in 30 years time, my girls and their generation will view the athletes of this era through the same rose tinted spectacles we view the athletes of the 80s and early 90s.

    I seem to recall in the 1980s 1990s we did win some rather great gold, silver and bronze medals in world record performances… nothing “rose tinted” posters. we had very fine athletes and the PR merchants like the overpaid 200 grand a year de Vos and the PD who countlessly invent new ways to tell us that all is well, are better at their spivy skills than the guys in the 1980s/1990s.

    All I can say is MO was our only medallist in 44 individual events and upwards of 40 to 50 athletes did not cover themselves in any glory , to put it mildly. Just like 2012 when 3 gold medallists saved the UKA honchos bacon now we have the same stuff about points and final and wonderful relays when 28 points came from relays not individual events.
    Some of the performances by our athletes screaming about their entitlements to be selected were worse than awful… have a look at P of 10 for their efforts this season.; I will save blushes by not mentioning some who were hardly inspired by the loyal support of the fans. But that dreadful 10 K female athlete, who would for sure would have moaned about unfairness if she had not been selected, was abysmal and has now retired with some PR crap about supporting her man… These people make me feel sad, to say the least.

    The latest attempt to justify the mediocre, or rather underwhelming, performances overall of many athletes in individual events( good to hear that Jessica’s coach was NOT afraid to use the word when referring to the British love of the mediocre) was unworthy.
    Black and his pals probably had a series of different speeches ready stating how everything was really good, transitional, despite many of our best are not juniors or anything similar. This team of British athletes comprised approx. 79 individual athletes, how many really performed as they could have or even should have. Mmmmmm. Under 20 by my reckoning.

    do you never get bored of moaning philipo?

    ill not deny that our feild events barring the jumps are crap at the moment, however we have probably the strongest team we have ever put out (admittedly with no no gold medal guaranteed superstars barring mo) we have a number of athletes who can hopefully push on and win medals at global events in the future or are already medal contenders – muir, dasher, ugen, rutherford, prescod, ujah, nmb, gemili, hudson smith, butchard, hawkins, pozzi, grabarz, bosworth, kjt, hitchon, bradshaw as well as the relays – theres a strong possiblity next years euros could be our best ever

    as for athletes not performing, it happens to athletes from every country in the world and i am not sure you can claim that we were worse than anybody else, i often read that on here about performances and injuries and our situation is no different to any other country

    #68354
    Profile photo of trickstat
    trickstat
    Participant

    Unlike most of our throwers who have a habit of peaking early, which I’ve noticed over a number of years. Then again I guess most of them haven’t got champs on their minds….

    Only one of this year’s leads was set in anything like peak season.

    mJT 31.3, mHT 21.4, mDT 14.5, mSP 12.3.

    wJT 30.7 (OK), wHT 21.5, wDT 5.2 wSP 11.3

    If I was being facetious I might wonder why so little happens once they come off the heavy weights.

    That is interesting stuff, Ursus.
    For what it’s worth here are the corresponding dates for the current World leads-

    mJT 11.7, mHT 27.6, mDT 29.6, mSP 25.6. (all 3 ‘heavy’ throws’ within a 5 day period!)

    wJT 6.7, wHT 29.7, wDT 18.7, wSP 28.7. (all in July)

    I think these all came within a lead up period of about 6 weeks before the Worlds.

    #68355
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    A must to read is on the back page of todays Sunday Times by the respected David Walsh who sorted out Armstrong. Headline begins “Embarassing lack of glory will not be solved by investing 27 million every four years in pursuit of Olymoic glory. Something has to change” Too bloody right.

    How right in the excellent article to point out the stupidity of Warner’s remarks about leaving all in British athletics in excellent order. How right to note Minichiello’s true comments that Warner and his henchmen have presided over the ruination of coaching. How right to point that the world of track and field hardly gives a toss for relay medals; suddenly the flavour of the month cos we did not screw up this time and we got 4 medals. Wowee.!
    How right to use an athlete who was unlucky with his body, Ridgeon,to say that todays athletes enjoy what his generation never had; to note that the records of the 80s and 90s still stand despite the ridiculous sneering by certain people on this Forum about the golden era.. much superior they were to days British athletes right across the board.
    Why were our top sprinters, top middle distance athletes and top hurdlers better than the todays athletes are ever likely to be. Pozzi was a failure and Bradshaw should have been better. Mentally challenged like so many of our overrated says Ridgeon and I heartily agree.
    The trouble with todays athletes they are indulged often with money and facilities far more and better than the past to achieve what??. No Mo now gents.!!!
    The pool of athletes is shallower, the coaching is poorer( as Greg and |Mo might agree) The athletes are not up to scratch in their heads as Rooney said about Hudson Smith.
    Medals in Relays wont cut it , in my view.

    #68358
    Profile photo of sovietvest
    sovietvest
    Participant

    Sp Philipo, Jon Ridgeon was ‘unlucky with his body’ but Pozzi is a failure? This is what I mean about rose tinted glasses. I fully appreciate the quality of former athletes but if Jon Ridgeon, post 1988 was teleported to the modern world, he’d be top of your list of failures.

    If you seriously think modern athletes have more money than their counterparts enjoyed in the 80s and 90s you simply don’t know your history or the economic realities of modern athletics. I can absolutely guarantee to you that Jon Ridgeon has a far better sponsorship deal than Andrew Pozzi (I had a girlfriend who worked with him when he was pretending to Nike her was still competing but had actually given up training).

    #68359
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    I’m not really sure why there is a need to constantly refer back to the 80’s and 90’s. I loved that era, but its gone.

    There is a lot to like about the present, and I’m looking forward to the Commonwealths next up.

    As far as relays go, Philipo, I love them. Always have. Usually full of drama, and fun to watch (and talk about).
    Nobody gives a fig about relays? Do you seriously believe that? I think thats just an easy thing to say when it fits your argument.

    #68360
    Profile photo of treadwater1
    treadwater1
    Participant

    When looking at the placings table, don’t forget we’ve gained some points due to the Russian ban.
    That said, I think we can say that in the context of overall declining standards, we are declining at a slower rate than most countries.
    Much as we love to bemoan our weaknesses in events such as JT, USA aside, no country has such a spread of decent athletes across events.
    I also take heart from the fact that most of our 4th and 5th placers were athletes in their early twenties who can be expected to be performing better in 2 years (not that that guarantees a medal).
    Whatever happens, you can be sure in 30 years time, my girls and their generation will view the athletes of this era through the same rose tinted spectacles we view the athletes of the 80s and early 90s.

    I seem to recall in the 1980s 1990s we did win some rather great gold, silver and bronze medals in world record performances… nothing “rose tinted” posters. we had very fine athletes and the PR merchants like the overpaid 200 grand a year de Vos and the PD who countlessly invent new ways to tell us that all is well, are better at their spivy skills than the guys in the 1980s/1990s.

    All I can say is MO was our only medallist in 44 individual events and upwards of 40 to 50 athletes did not cover themselves in any glory , to put it mildly. Just like 2012 when 3 gold medallists saved the UKA honchos bacon now we have the same stuff about points and final and wonderful relays when 28 points came from relays not individual events.
    Some of the performances by our athletes screaming about their entitlements to be selected were worse than awful… have a look at P of 10 for their efforts this season.; I will save blushes by not mentioning some who were hardly inspired by the loyal support of the fans. But that dreadful 10 K female athlete, who would for sure would have moaned about unfairness if she had not been selected, was abysmal and has now retired with some PR crap about supporting her man… These people make me feel sad, to say the least.

    The latest attempt to justify the mediocre, or rather underwhelming, performances overall of many athletes in individual events( good to hear that Jessica’s coach was NOT afraid to use the word when referring to the British love of the mediocre) was unworthy.
    Black and his pals probably had a series of different speeches ready stating how everything was really good, transitional, despite many of our best are not juniors or anything similar. This team of British athletes comprised approx. 79 individual athletes, how many really performed as they could have or even should have. Mmmmmm. Under 20 by my reckoning.

    I know it’s a regular gripe of yours that modern athletes are pampered by the lottery system and underperform because there’s less of an imperative to strive for medals, how do you explain the incredible improvement in other Olympic sports since 96?

    If you’re going to hold up the class of 93 as a shining example of how it should be done can you explain the regression in ’95 and ’96 given that the vast majority from that period were still active a few years later?

    #68365
    Profile photo of robo2
    robo2
    Participant

    A must to read is on the back page of todays Sunday Times by the respected David Walsh who sorted out Armstrong. Headline begins “Embarassing lack of glory will not be solved by investing 27 million every four years in pursuit of Olymoic glory. Something has to change” Too bloody right.

    How right in the excellent article to point out the stupidity of Warner’s remarks about leaving all in British athletics in excellent order. How right to note Minichiello’s true comments that Warner and his henchmen have presided over the ruination of coaching. How right to point that the world of track and field hardly gives a toss for relay medals; suddenly the flavour of the month cos we did not screw up this time and we got 4 medals. Wowee.!
    How right to use an athlete who was unlucky with his body, Ridgeon,to say that todays athletes enjoy what his generation never had; to note that the records of the 80s and 90s still stand despite the ridiculous sneering by certain people on this Forum about the golden era.. much superior they were to days British athletes right across the board.
    Why were our top sprinters, top middle distance athletes and top hurdlers better than the todays athletes are ever likely to be. Pozzi was a failure and Bradshaw should have been better. Mentally challenged like so many of our overrated says Ridgeon and I heartily agree.
    The trouble with todays athletes they are indulged often with money and facilities far more and better than the past to achieve what??. No Mo now gents.!!!
    The pool of athletes is shallower, the coaching is poorer( as Greg and |Mo might agree) The athletes are not up to scratch in their heads as Rooney said about Hudson Smith.
    Medals in Relays wont cut it , in my view.

    our womens team has never been this good or had as much strength in depth

    the womens 60, 100, 200, 400, 1500, 3000 steeplechase, 60h, 100h, high jump, long jump , pole vault records have all been set in the past 5 years

    8 out of the top 20 all time list in the 100 metres are competing today and are all under 26
    4 out of the all times 200 are competing today
    2 in the 400
    3 of the 800
    3 of the 1500
    4 of the 5000
    3 of the 10000
    4 of the 100h
    3 of the hj (1,2 and 3)
    most of the pole vault
    3 in the long jump (1,2,3)

    #68367
    Profile photo of stevek26
    SteveK26
    Participant

    There is a lot of talent in both mens and womens 100/200 in GB just now. I’m hoping that might spill over into the 400 events as well.

    #68391
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    I will be the first to say that BA are paving over cracks with relay medals as so many events are very poor but…..

    The ongoing comparison with the 80s and 90s is ridiculous for those who keep doing it and seem to assume athletes in 2017 get so much more you are insane! Money in track and field has got less and less ZERO corporate sponsors and sports companies literally giving out minimum contracts. Apart from Jess, Mo and Greg etc I no for a fact no GB athlete is getting anywhere near what some of you assume they are getting.

    To put it short the athletes in the 80s and 90s were probably getting more or around the same as some of our athletes today in a economic climate which is 300% more expensive. Also please remember some of our athletes who some of you think don’t do anything or have too much too soon if they played any other sport they would easily be earning six figures plus a year.

    To put it politely get your head out of the past, if we are going to keep being ignorant and compare athletes in 2017 to the drugs ridden 80s and 90s and act as if everyone including GB athletes played fair then you are absolutely just here to bash our athletes. Constantly complaining about our athletes getting too much is a RIDICULOUS assumption and anyone who says this I am going to want you to point out what do they get please tell us!?

    We are in 2017 Majority of the worlds best train full time and there are FAR more nations now competing in various events compared to 30 years ago. Yet some of you on here want our athletes to have next to nothing and be world class performers? This idea that some of you have that the athletes in the 80s and 90s were super grafters and had nothing is an absolute lie. Especially when there was 10x more meets in Europe with a lot more money and less people competing, GB athletes used to CLEAN UP on the european circuit tell the full story!!!!

    #68407
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    Nonsense being talked about the drug infested stuff of our British athletes for which accusers have no proof. Coe, Ovett, Cram, Regis ,Black, Thomas, Jackson, Elliott and a host of others all on drugs with no evidence of course… just a load of drivel.
    Should be ashamed to pen such muck.!!!!
    Britain was not East Germany, USA or East Europe.
    As for the stuff about they were earning what todays athletes in this country earn… more rubbish. No funding, sponsorship yes but talk of the rich days of 1980s 1990s is more drivel.
    Rarely read so much tosh in one post.

    #68408
    Profile photo of justrunfast
    justrunfast
    Participant

    @philipo

    I never accused anyone you named eight athletes over twenty years as if they were the only GB athletes around at that time.

    My proof is from meet directors who used to run Golden League and other meets back then they are the ones who have told me how much was available and the prize money that was available

    Just incase you think I am making things up here is a DIRECT quote from one of the GB athletes YOU mentioned and what they had at 21 years old!

    ” I was earning enough to buy my first house. It was about 10 minutes from my parents and I paid £83,000. I’d only left school a few years previously, and my economics teacher and PE teacher lived on the same street. I’d drive past them in my Mercedes and yell that I was just off to my starter pad.”

    So il ask you since you seem to be do is be dismissive with no facts please tell us what GB athletes get today that is “too much” because I can tell you no 21 year old athlete regardless of what they have ran can do that now.

    I await your reply with no facts, if you would like me to pull out even more direct quotes from our own GB athletes from the 80s and 90s there is heaps more :)

    • This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Profile photo of justrunfast justrunfast.
    • This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Profile photo of justrunfast justrunfast.
    #68411
    Profile photo of fangio
    fangio
    Participant

    I can’t see how anyone can accuse anyone else of writing drivel when they themselves posted “I seem to recall in the 1980s 1990s we did win some rather great gold, silver and bronze medals in world record performances… nothing “rose tinted” posters.”

    Nothing rose tinted?

    You think people won silver and bronze medals with world record performances?

    It’s abject nonsense that depth was that great across the board in any year of the 80’s or 90’s. Look at the British records. For example when convicted drug cheat Linford Christie set his British record, in 1993, one year before blood tests came in and in an era where there were loads of drug cheats in the sprints, our second best 100m runner ran 10.15 and our third best 10.30.

    The same year Jon Regis set the British non altitude 200m record in 19.94, the second best was 20.39 and the third best 20.86.

    Across the rest of the events that year and yes there are some good ones, but there are also lots of really poor events.

    Tell you what Jeremy… sorry Phillipo, pick a year where you think the top 3 across all events are better than this year so far, and I’ll do a paper match for you. One point each for 1st vs 1st 2nd vs 2nd, 3rd vs 3rd. See if you can pick a year that is better than the 3 person team we have now across all of the events of track and field overall, not just cherry picking a couple of events.

    #68621
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    Every thing is wonderful, says Fangio and that other …. De Vos.
    One medallist, 2 individual medals by Farah, 4 relatively unimportant relay medals, 8 PBs and a few season bests so all is great; Yeah right on Fangio.!!!.
    79 individual athletes, in the team and many were not worth a place .

    What balderdash is written here despite the poor state of athletics at the elite and the lower levels. Our great coaches, according to the chief spin doctor, De Vos, can’t even train up a decent javelin, Discus, pv for men,triple jumps, long jump,(Greg wont be around for much longer); no more than a handful of other field events athletes. Only a couple of events say s Fangio… there are lots of events that we are poor at and any fan here knows that.

    Great performances in front of our own London crowd, no thank you very much;; but people like Minichiello and Arnold who have forgotten more than most posters here will ever know about coaching elite and lesser levels of track and field think we are doing badly, but we are infected with the PR spivs representing UKA telling us its all great, guys and gals. Everthing will be fine in Doha and Tokyo. They are all paid to come up with such nonsense…

    Good job Mo was not injured otherwise the experts here would have told us that no medals does not matter, only the points; and as for the 105 placement points I reckon 28 points were from relays, that’s 77 in individual events, which athletes train their lives for( NOT Relays), a poor performance in my view..
    I loved Arnolds recent comments… “we got more medals when we were skint”. Think how marvellous the performances were in the 80s and 90s when the funding of twenty seven millions over the 4 year cycle was not available.

    Some like “you know who” are plainly in a denial mode and stats will always be brought forward to justify the gob like in the Times today by De Vos.

    #68633
    Profile photo of mysterybrick
    MysteryBrick
    Participant

    Some like “you know who” are plainly in a denial mode and stats will always be brought forward to justify the gob like in the Times today by De Vos.

    No point in responding to the above, as it hasn’t answered any of what Fangio put forward and appears to be a rehash of previous posts (I note that the challenge to find a better year from the ‘glory days’ was unmet) but i love the sheer venom with which ‘stats’ is spouted above. How dare they come at us with their ‘facts’ and ‘data’ when raw emotion will do. Did you by any chance vote for Brexit, Philipo/Jeremy?

    #68638
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    I sure did … nation state for me for the last decades. we were lied to the late 1960s and prior to the likes of Heath” its just a Common Market for trade old boy” not the euro fanatics dream.
    Don’t want to belong to a European federal super state run by second grade authoritarian civil servants for the benefit of German industry, and the poverty stricken East Europeans, thank you very much. Think of all those silly 17 million people, who did not vote the way the so called experts and the British establishment and politicians told them they had to.
    Did not respond to Fangio ., a complete waste of time discussing the poor state of our track and field with the chief UKA apologist.!!Hope he is not De Vos in disguise :yahoo:
    Some expert self styled tells us that All- Athletics site has told us GB are the second best country in the world in TF by their stats.
    It gives us a great laugh that’s for sure.

    #68639
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    Some like “you know who” are plainly in a denial mode and stats will always be brought forward to justify the gob like in the Times today by De Vos.

    No point in responding to the above, as it hasn’t answered any of what Fangio put forward and appears to be a rehash of previous posts (I note that the challenge to find a better year from the ‘glory days’ was unmet) but i love the sheer venom with which ‘stats’ is spouted above. How dare they come at us with their ‘facts’ and ‘data’ when raw emotion will do. Did you by any chance vote for Brexit, Philipo/Jeremy?

    So this was the great and better year of athletics in this country… quite mad !!!.
    The trouble is if we had done even worse in our own backyard with say no Mo and the usual chances of foul ups in Relays some posters would have their petty little stats all ready to prove that we are doing so much better than
    previous periods, like the 80s and 90s. Hope that BS keeps Fangio and his troops warm during the winter.

    #68640
    Profile photo of philipo
    philipo
    Participant

    Medals won by British individuals at World Champs 1983 to 1999 and relay medals.

    1983 5 medals and 2 relays
    1987 7 medals and 1 relay
    1991 5 medals and 2 relays
    1993 8 medals and 2 relays
    1995 5 medals
    1997 4 medals and 2 relays
    1999 6 medals and 1 relay

    2017 2 medals (by one athlete) and 4 relays. Must be the London effect.

    Yes indeed far better results in the 80s and 90s non lotteryfunded era.!!!

    #68641
    Profile photo of robo2
    robo2
    Participant

    Medals won by British individuals at World Champs 1983 to 1999 and relay medals.

    2017 2 medals (by one athlete) and 4 relays. Must be the London effect.

    Yes indeed far better results in the 80s and 90s non lotteryfunded era.!!!

    1993 -10 medals
    1987, 2011 – 8 medals
    1983, 1991, 1999, 2009, 2015 – 7 medals
    1997, 2007,2013, 2017 -6 medals
    1995 – 5 medals
    2003, 2005 – 3 medals
    2001 -2 medals

    in the last 10 years or 6 championships we achieved 40 medals compared to the 50 medals in the 7 championships in the 80’s and 90’s our golden age is not much better than the last 10 years

    #68642
    Profile photo of treadwater1
    treadwater1
    Participant

    Things aren’t perfect but they’re certainly not as bad as they were in the early 2000s. From the championships of 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005 we won a combined total of 12 medals. We’ve won more than that in the last two championships combined. You can’t pick out the highs whilst ignoring the lows

Viewing 25 posts - 76 through 100 (of 132 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Product Reviews View All
Don't Miss
Videos
AW Offers