Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GL Bruxelles m100m - Usain Bolt 9.77

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
    I enjoy it for what it is and not what it could/should have been.
    Just my personal opinion - I enjoy it on both levels (and have nothing wrong with people enjoying these types of performances at either level). By itself, runs like Bolt's are great because they are the fastest ever, and also in the pressure cooker that is in the Olympics. But I also enjoy the "what if/what could have been" aspect because performances like Bolt's naturally make you wonder what really are the limits of human performance, or of a certain athlete. If Bolt had to run hard through the line and lean to get 9.69, I think people would still be excited since he was the first one to break 9.70, but not as excited and amazed and buzzed as the performance he actually did turn in. Other examples that come to mind (for me) are ElG's 3000, Morceli's 1994 5000m, or some of Isi's pre-Oly vaults this year where she had major clearance. Anyway, just my two cents...

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by triple50
      Feeling a little tired from all this action I am now relaxing in a tub of milk listening to 50 cent.
      Well, I sure hope you made it half and half in honor of fitty.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by malmo
        Tracknut - 35 million posts and counting. It's all about YOU, I get it.
        I am not the one trying to bully others into thinking my opinions are the only ones allowed. I am not the one who doesn't understand that there are other perspectives besides my own. I am not the one who resorts to ad hominem attacks when my logic is not slavishly adulated. I am not the one who purports himself to understand the sport better than everyone else. I am not the one who simply cannot allow others to enjoy that sport as they see fit.

        I think the thing that really, really bugs you is that I only accord you the respect that you yourself accord others. You also fundamentally don't understand that nothing you say intimidates me.They amuse me (and others) in a very similar way that MattM amuses us. What will malmo call 'Tracknut' now? Fire away, buddy. I shan't reply here again cuz gh has made the 'petty feud' proscription clear.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Marlow
          Originally posted by malmo
          Tracknut - 35 million posts and counting. It's all about YOU, I get it.
          I am not the one trying to bully others into thinking my opinions are the only ones allowed. I am not the one who doesn't understand that there are other perspectives besides my own. I am not the one who resorts to ad hominem attacks when my logic is not slavishly adulated. I am not the one who purports himself to understand the sport better than everyone else. I am not the one who simply cannot allow others to enjoy that sport as they see fit. .
          Sure you are. You describe yourself to a tee. What bothers you is that I won't cower to you and your petty little clique. You're like the neighborhood beagle that feels compelled to pee on everyone's yard. This message board is not your territory.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Marlow
            Was Ron Clarke a nobody from nowhere because he ran so much slower than today's distance runners? Abebe Bikila? Zatopek? Nurmi? Jesse Owens? It is what it is, isn't it?

            Jesse Ownes is way above the others, almost at the same level as Bolt.
            BTW, his gold medal performance in 1936 topped Brussels 2008.

            Comment


            • #81
              Malmo, everyone knows what you think about "basic" adjustments. You don't believe them, we get it. But unless gh imposes a rule banning these stats, similar to the "no TV splits" one (and since the Big Book contains a correction table, I suspect he won't), we are free to discuss them and their impact on the all-time rankings.

              I don't understand why you seem to thinkthat we are disrespecting his performance in Beijing, just because we deem this run to be of equal calibre. That just isn't the case. We really can appreciate what "is," as well as what "might be" (because in doing the latter, we learn more about the athletes and their performances).

              Such threads will keep appearing, and the usual suspects will continue to participate in them. We'll promise to save you the trouble and preface each thread with a disclaimer: "Not malmo approved.".

              Comment


              • #82
                Was is just me or is that the most ragged Bolt has ever looked in the first 60? He was all over the place and I thought that Asafa's great start and acceleration had caused the relatively inexperienced Bolt to press. His last 40 was unworldly and the fact that this converts to 9.69 'basic' blows me away, cuz I think it really wasn't very pretty execution on Bolt's part. Powell looked great all the way and he was truly happy for Bolt.

                Comment


                • #83
                  not sure how reliable it is but another site is reportiing a 0.223 reaction time for Bolt!!!!!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by knockout
                    not sure how reliable it is but another site is reportiing a 0.223 reaction time for Bolt!!!!!
                    It's official: http://www.sport.be/belgavideo/mvd20...re0010040.html

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Davidokun
                      Originally posted by knockout
                      not sure how reliable it is but another site is reportiing a 0.223 reaction time for Bolt!!!!!
                      It's official: http://www.sport.be/belgavideo/mvd20...re0010040.html
                      Awful start (starter was very quick after the set command in firing the gun) and he still runs that fast...ridiculous
                      "Long may you run"- Neil Young

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Subtract those reaction times:

                        9.69 - 0.165 --> 9.525s

                        9.77 - 0.223 --> 9.547s

                        Even without resorting to basic times, that speaks for itself about today's performance.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by JRM
                          Subtract those reaction times:

                          9.69 - 0.165 --> 9.525s

                          9.77 - 0.223 --> 9.547s

                          Even without resorting to basic times, that speaks for itself about today's performance.
                          wow, no kidding...and in worse sprinting conditions today weatherwise, too, than what was in Beijing...so much for being worn out from the Olympics...Bolt is simply unreal...
                          "Long may you run"- Neil Young

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by JRM
                            Subtract those reaction times:

                            9.69 - 0.165 --> 9.525s

                            9.77 - 0.223 --> 9.547s

                            Even without resorting to basic times, that speaks for itself about today's performance.
                            Even playing your silly game you cannot deduct the reaction time you can only deduct up to the allowable reaction time.

                            9.77 in true basic speaks for itself anyway.

                            "Basic is not" I think there's a bumper sticker in there somewhere.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              What is the average reaction time for a 100m race like the Olympics or GL anyway?
                              "Long may you run"- Neil Young

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by malmo
                                Originally posted by JRM
                                Subtract those reaction times:

                                9.69 - 0.165 --> 9.525s

                                9.77 - 0.223 --> 9.547s

                                Even without resorting to basic times, that speaks for itself about today's performance.
                                Even playing your silly game you cannot deduct the reaction time you can only deduct up to the allowable reaction time.
                                Missed the point, perhaps? Add 0.100 and you have 9.625 vs 9.647. Is that different in some way?

                                I'm not the best friend of basic either, but common sense tells me that Bolt's performance in yesterday's conditions was super-fantastic. -1.3 wind and that poor start certainly does not help. Had it been +1.3, it would have likely been a WR, regardless of the poor start.

                                Bolt seems to have been a bit unlucky with weather conditions lately. Looking forward to a nice tailwind.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X