Inappropriately (mea culpa) the Mike Larrabee thread slipped off-course and got into altitude-aid value. About a year ago on the Darkwing list I noted that I had always throught that the empirical evidence showed that a site as high as Mexico City (2300m/7546ft) was worth about an extra second in the 400.
That data is, of course, a bit colored by the fact that if you look at any Olympic races you're going to find people running faster than normal.
At any rate, after 30 years of thinking about it but never actually doing it (time flies when you're having fun)I took the 10 guys in the World Rankings for that year and noted their altitude best (for some it was Echo Summit's 1897m/6224 for the OT, not M City), and their non-altitude best for the year and came up with the differentials:
1. Evans 43.8-45.0 (1.2)
2. James 43.9-44.9 (1.0)
3. Freeman 44.4-45.4 (1.0)
4. Matthews 44.4-45.0 (0.6)
5. Gakou 45.0-46.7 (not enough sea-level data to trust)
6. Jellinghaus 44.9-46.0 (1.1)
7. Collett 44.9-45.4 (0.5)
8. Bezabeh (only altitude data was available)
9. Badenski 45.4-46.2 (0.8)
10. Taylor (hurt in OT quarters, so doesn't have "real" altitude mark)
Average improvement of the 7 guys who had numbers one could work with: 0.89.
***
Now let's look at the 400H:
1. Hemery 48.1-49.6 (1.5)
2. Hennige 49.0-50.0 (1.0)
3. Vanderstock 48.8-49.6 (0.8)
4. Sherwood 49.0-50.5 (1.5)
5. Whitney 49.0-49.5 (0.5)
6. Skomorokhov 49.1-50.1 (1.0)
7. Frinolli 49.2-49.7 (0.5)
8. Schubert 49.1-50.3 (1.2)
9. Knoke 49.6-50.0 (0.4)
10. Gittins 49.1-50.5 (1.4)
Average improvement: 0.98
So, the OT/OG sites were clearly worth about a second, but how much of that was caused by the meet I don't know. Maybe in the next 30 years I'll find the time to do similar calculations for other Olympic years and find out how much "adrenaline" is responsible for of that second.
Dr. Jonas Mureika, noted researcher, would probably say about half of it, becuase here's his response to my babblings:
"Luckily, I'm working on 400m altitude assistance at this very moment! Based on my models, I find the altitude assistance of the two venues (2250m) to be almost exactly 0.5s. That's purely altitude assistance, mind you, no wind considerations. Wind can play havock with 400m performances, since unless you have absolutely still conditions or a cross-wind (which helps you on the last turn), or arguably favorable swirling winds, you're done for.
The real problem with correcting 400m races is that there is absolutely *no* wind data avaialble to work from, so it's mostly guesswork when comparing to actual races, or has to be based on similar statistical analyses to this which don't account for that factor. The fact that you found a few in the 0.5s range is encouraging (glass is half-full!)
I'm still working on the data, but I anticipate throwing together something for publication in a little while. If anyone is interested, I'd be happy to elaborate further.
Dr. Jonas R. Mureika W. M. Keck Science Center The Claremont Colleges Claremont, California 91711-5916
Web: http://desert.jsd.claremont.edu/~newt/ Email: [email protected]"
That data is, of course, a bit colored by the fact that if you look at any Olympic races you're going to find people running faster than normal.
At any rate, after 30 years of thinking about it but never actually doing it (time flies when you're having fun)I took the 10 guys in the World Rankings for that year and noted their altitude best (for some it was Echo Summit's 1897m/6224 for the OT, not M City), and their non-altitude best for the year and came up with the differentials:
1. Evans 43.8-45.0 (1.2)
2. James 43.9-44.9 (1.0)
3. Freeman 44.4-45.4 (1.0)
4. Matthews 44.4-45.0 (0.6)
5. Gakou 45.0-46.7 (not enough sea-level data to trust)
6. Jellinghaus 44.9-46.0 (1.1)
7. Collett 44.9-45.4 (0.5)
8. Bezabeh (only altitude data was available)
9. Badenski 45.4-46.2 (0.8)
10. Taylor (hurt in OT quarters, so doesn't have "real" altitude mark)
Average improvement of the 7 guys who had numbers one could work with: 0.89.
***
Now let's look at the 400H:
1. Hemery 48.1-49.6 (1.5)
2. Hennige 49.0-50.0 (1.0)
3. Vanderstock 48.8-49.6 (0.8)
4. Sherwood 49.0-50.5 (1.5)
5. Whitney 49.0-49.5 (0.5)
6. Skomorokhov 49.1-50.1 (1.0)
7. Frinolli 49.2-49.7 (0.5)
8. Schubert 49.1-50.3 (1.2)
9. Knoke 49.6-50.0 (0.4)
10. Gittins 49.1-50.5 (1.4)
Average improvement: 0.98
So, the OT/OG sites were clearly worth about a second, but how much of that was caused by the meet I don't know. Maybe in the next 30 years I'll find the time to do similar calculations for other Olympic years and find out how much "adrenaline" is responsible for of that second.
Dr. Jonas Mureika, noted researcher, would probably say about half of it, becuase here's his response to my babblings:
"Luckily, I'm working on 400m altitude assistance at this very moment! Based on my models, I find the altitude assistance of the two venues (2250m) to be almost exactly 0.5s. That's purely altitude assistance, mind you, no wind considerations. Wind can play havock with 400m performances, since unless you have absolutely still conditions or a cross-wind (which helps you on the last turn), or arguably favorable swirling winds, you're done for.
The real problem with correcting 400m races is that there is absolutely *no* wind data avaialble to work from, so it's mostly guesswork when comparing to actual races, or has to be based on similar statistical analyses to this which don't account for that factor. The fact that you found a few in the 0.5s range is encouraging (glass is half-full!)
I'm still working on the data, but I anticipate throwing together something for publication in a little while. If anyone is interested, I'd be happy to elaborate further.
Dr. Jonas R. Mureika W. M. Keck Science Center The Claremont Colleges Claremont, California 91711-5916
Web: http://desert.jsd.claremont.edu/~newt/ Email: [email protected]"
Comment