Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Powell's time before rounding?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Powell's time before rounding?

    Hello,
    There are several related thread on the WR 100 meters topic, so I hope I've checked them all for an answer I'm looking for on a question somebody in The Netherlands posted:

    I believe Gatlin's time was/is 9.766 before (eventually) rounding it to 9.77. Does anybody know what Powell's original time was - if measured in three decimals?

    Thanks, regards,
    WK

  • #2
    Someone posted a blown up picture of phototimer result of Powell's race yesterday, and to the naked eye it appeared to be clearly but slightly less than 9.770... about in the 9.768 or 9.769 range.

    Comment


    • #3
      I saw where the time for the second place finisher in the 100 meters at the Adidas Track Classic, Tyson Gay, was listed as 10.031 to the right of his official time of 10.04. Are all times above a 0 in the third column to the right of the decimal point rounded up to the next highest number in tenths? Even if the number in the third column over is a 1,as it was for Tyson, is it still rounded up to the next digit in tenths? Any help out there. Thanks.

      Comment


      • #4
        All times are rounded UP to the next 100th of a second.

        Thus 10.031 is rounded up 10. 10.04s. A time of 10.030 or down to 10.021 would be considered as 10.03s.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks for the clarification. I appreciate you help.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Powell's time before rounding?

            Originally posted by Wilmar
            Hello,
            There are several related thread on the WR 100 meters topic, so I hope I've checked them all for an answer I'm looking for on a question somebody in The Netherlands posted:

            I believe Gatlin's time was/is 9.766 before (eventually) rounding it to 9.77. Does anybody know what Powell's original time was - if measured in three decimals?

            Thanks, regards,
            WK
            I don't have the answer, but I can anticipate the next question someone would ask if an answer to your question were available: then isn't one really faster than the other?

            Finishlynx, the timing system with which I am familiar, can provide times accurate to .001 sec as long as the units are sent back for calibration once a year. Certainly the times in a given unit on a given day are that accurate, hence the rules allow for breaking ties at the .001 level.

            However, apparently IAAF is not satisfied that such accuracy is currently attainable from system to system. Hence, times to .01 is the rule. They might have several reasons for doubting. First, has everyone properly accounted for all of the instrumental delays to this accuracy (.001 sec)? That would be things like start sensor response, response in the programs to register a start, etc. (Maybe, but one would like to see all timing systems together to check.) Second, to make such timing measure only the runners abilities rather than their placement in lanes, the start signal would have to be delivered to the runners within the same .001 second. That amounts to differences in sound path to each runner of less than 30 cm. We currently don't have anything like that in common use. (And, as another thread a while ago investigated, many races are not even equalized to the .1 second accuracy.) Third, as another recent thread has gone into in detail, it is often difficult to honestly place the cursor to .001 second accuracy in the real photos.

            Pat Palmer

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Powell's time before rounding?

              Great post Pat, that sums it up perfectly. The timing may well be accurate enough but is not the cause of the greatest error. Consequently, there is no sense in timing to thousandths even if it is possible.

              Comment


              • #8
                I would add an additional question and comment. Can they measure the track accurately enough to time to that level of real precision? Of course, the wind/altitude/track surface etc make comparisons that are too fine appear to mean more than they really do.

                Comment

                Working...
                X