Swimming Finals at the World Championships in Barcelona, Spain
Former Member
The finals of the first day, show:
.) in the men 400 meter free final, Thorpe (Aus.) went 3:42.58 for #1, Hackett (Aus.) went 3:45.17 for #2, and Coman (Rom.) went 3:46.8x for #3;
Coman -who is my fellow countryman, and I was telling you about him for years-, defeated Rossolini (Ita.) of the 2000 Olympics fame, Keller (U.S.) and Carvin (U.S.);
.) in the women 400 meter free final, Simona Paduraru (Rom.) finished #7, with a fast time;
.) in the 4x100 men free relay, Russia won;
the fastest split was by Frenchman Frederic Bousquet at 47.03 -which is the second fastest split in history-, and fast splits (in the 47s) were recorded by Alex. Popov (Rus.) and Jason Lezak (U.S.);
.) in the 4x100 women free relay, U.S. won, anchored by an ace 53.xx from Jenny Thompson (U.S.).
He! he! he! :D ho! ho! ho!
I post this, ahead of www.swiminfo.com and www.swimnews.com who are sandbagging...
Parents
Former Member
There are two errors in this post:
Originally posted by Bert Bergen
...
BTW, still loving that you were so wrong on that whole Guinness thing with Biondi. Bond! That still gets me.
...
...and Jim Nabors all say hi.
...
1.) It still gets me after seven years in the U.S., that Americans like this poster here, cannot spell in their native language, sometimes in vocabulary and sometimes in public names:
how does John Naber sound to you?
I think, you should learn the real John Naber, instead of a fantasy Jim Nabors.
2.) You mindlessly blame me because Bond and not Biondi is in the Guinness book report of 1984 and I point this out in a post.
I explain this to you, for the second time:
.) in the Guinness book, Bond -not Biondi- is in the 1984 4x100 U.S. men free relay;
.) I didn't write the Guinness book;
.) I read the Guinness book, I point out on the fly what I read, and this specific information is no big deal to my main point.
Better now for your grasp?
My main point was and is:
Bond or Biondi, is there any relevance in this in making Biondi a repeat or a three-peat winner in different Olympics?
Because I told you:
you lose focus on the key.
There are two errors in this post:
Originally posted by Bert Bergen
...
BTW, still loving that you were so wrong on that whole Guinness thing with Biondi. Bond! That still gets me.
...
...and Jim Nabors all say hi.
...
1.) It still gets me after seven years in the U.S., that Americans like this poster here, cannot spell in their native language, sometimes in vocabulary and sometimes in public names:
how does John Naber sound to you?
I think, you should learn the real John Naber, instead of a fantasy Jim Nabors.
2.) You mindlessly blame me because Bond and not Biondi is in the Guinness book report of 1984 and I point this out in a post.
I explain this to you, for the second time:
.) in the Guinness book, Bond -not Biondi- is in the 1984 4x100 U.S. men free relay;
.) I didn't write the Guinness book;
.) I read the Guinness book, I point out on the fly what I read, and this specific information is no big deal to my main point.
Better now for your grasp?
My main point was and is:
Bond or Biondi, is there any relevance in this in making Biondi a repeat or a three-peat winner in different Olympics?
Because I told you:
you lose focus on the key.
