Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

200m or 400m - which is more exciting now?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    well, you've got a 0.5s difference there between lane 3 & lane infinity

    i can't see difference between 1 & 8 being anywhere in the same ballpark

    Comment


    • #32
      A lane 3 in 1966 probably close to a lane 1 today. (Smith's run out of lane 1 at the '68 Oly Trials is one of the great performances ever.)

      Comment


      • #33
        finally gh is fully committed to the proposal that synthetic tracks are faster than dirt......yureka!
        ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by paulthefan
          finally gh is fully committed to the proposal that synthetic tracks are faster than dirt......
          don't know about that ?!

          more relevant is his "belief" of "tighter" tracks in ole days, meaning slower times :

          give modern example :

          oslo was 105/95

          brussels is 125/75

          "standard" is 116/84

          oslo "tightness" still affords compensation of 11m of more stretch to make up lost time on curve compared to standard :

          i've asked jrm at least 1/2 dozen times to analyse it & give us an answer ( it's a top-level physicist's problem ) :

          but he never replies !

          gh

          if you get a chance, ask dapena for an opinion

          Comment

          Working...
          X
          😀
          🥰
          🤢
          😎
          😡
          👍
          👎