Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Top 10 all-time basic performances, men's 100m

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Top 10 all-time basic performances, men's 100m

    Apologies for the formatting. I tried to post HTML code, but can't figure out how to do it. Here are the all-time top 10 "basic" performances as of today (5 Sep '08). Note that Bolt and Powell own the top 5 (all sub-9.8 basic!), with the top 4 being added this year!

    Powell's 9.72 (0.2) from two days ago and today's 9.83 (-1.2) are surprisingly consistent with each other. Bolt's run today equals his time in Beijing.

    the column order is: Rank, Basic, Official, Wind, Athlete, Date, Venue, Altitude

    Code:
    Rank	Adjusted	Official	Wind	Athlete	Date	Venue	Altitude (m)
    1	9.69	9.69	0	Usain Bolt	2008-08-16	Beijing	0
    2	9.70	9.77	-1.3	Usain Bolt	2008-05-09	Bruxelles	35
    3	9.74	9.72	0.2	Asafa Powell	2008-02-09	Lausanne	600
    4	9.76	9.83	-1.3	Asafa Powell	2008-05-09	Bruxelles	35
    5	9.79	9.78	0	Asafa Powell	2007-09-09	Rieti	400
    6	9.80	9.79	0.1	Maurice Greene	1999-06-16	Athens	110
    7	9.81	9.8	0.2	Maurice Greene	1999-08-22	Seville	10
    8	9.82	9.84	-0.3	Asafa Powell	2007-09-14	Bruxelles	35
    9	9.82	9.84	-0.5	Tyson Gay	2007-06-22	Indianapolis 	215
    10	9.82	9.85	-0.5	Tyson Gay	2007-08-26	Osaka	15
    11	9.82	9.83	-0.3	Asafa Powell	2007-09-22	Stuttgart	250
    12	9.82	9.82	0	Asafa Powell	2008-07-29	Monaco	0
    13	9.83	9.82	-0.2	Maurice Greene	2001-05-08	Edmonton	680
    14	9.84	9.86	-0.4	Ato Boldon	1998-06-17	Athens	110
    15	9.84	9.74	1.7	Asafa Powell	2007-09-09	Rieti	400
    16	9.84	9.85	-0.1	Usain Bolt	2008-08-16	Beijing	0
    17	9.85	9.79	1.1	Ben Johnson	1988-09-24	Seoul 	100
    18	9.85	9.84	0.2	Bruny Surin	1999-08-22	Seville	10
    19	9.85	9.86	-0.2	Maurice Greene	2000-01-09	Berlin	35
    20	9.85	9.87	-0.3	Maurice Greene	2000-09-23	Sydney	45

  • #2
    JRM; there must be a minor glitch. Look at these two:

    2 9.69 9.77 -1.3 Usain Bolt 2008-05-09 Bruxelles 35
    3 9.73 9.83 -1.3 Asafa Powell 2008-05-09

    the -1.3 wind makes an adjustment of 0.8 for Bolt but 1.0 for Powell. Looked at another way, the gap of 0.06 is narrowed to 0.04. Rule #1 must be for a uniform adjustment in the same conditions.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by 26mi235
      JRM; there must be a minor glitch. Look at these two:

      2 9.69 9.77 -1.3 Usain Bolt 2008-05-09 Bruxelles 35
      3 9.73 9.83 -1.3 Asafa Powell 2008-05-09

      the -1.3 wind makes an adjustment of 0.8 for Bolt but 1.0 for Powell. Looked at another way, the gap of 0.06 is narrowed to 0.04. Rule #1 must be for a uniform adjustment in the same conditions.
      It is not true that the adjustment should be uniform for two different times. At different speeds the wind has a different effect.

      However, the above does look odd, because wind resistance increases with speed, so I would expect faster times to have a bigger adjustment than slower times in the same wind, if there is a difference in the adjustment. So I'd expect Bolt to have the larger adjustment, not the smaller one as above.

      Comment


      • #4
        Why do you insist on calling your list 'basic'? A more apt name would be 'contrived.'

        Here is the true basic list.

        1 9.69 ±0.0 Usain Bolt 1 Beijing 16.08.2008
        2 9.72 +1.7 Usain Bolt 1rA New York City 31.05.2008
        2 9.72 +0.2 Asafa Powell 1rA Lausanne 03.09.2008
        4 9.74 +1.7 Asafa Powell 1h2 Rieti 09.09.2007
        5 9.76 +1.8 Usain Bolt 1 Kingston 03.05.2008
        6 9.77 +1.6 Asafa Powell 1 Athínai 14.06.2005
        6 9.77 +1.5 Asafa Powell 1 Gateshead 11.06.2006
        6 9.77 +1.0 Asafa Powell 1rA Zürich 18.08.2006
        6 9.77 +1.6 Tyson Gay 1q1 Eugene 28.06.2008
        6 9.77 -1.3 Usain Bolt 1 Bruxelles 05.09.2008

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by sprintblox
          Originally posted by 26mi235
          JRM; there must be a minor glitch. Look at these two:

          2 9.69 9.77 -1.3 Usain Bolt 2008-05-09 Bruxelles 35
          3 9.73 9.83 -1.3 Asafa Powell 2008-05-09

          the -1.3 wind makes an adjustment of 0.8 for Bolt but 1.0 for Powell. Looked at another way, the gap of 0.06 is narrowed to 0.04. Rule #1 must be for a uniform adjustment in the same conditions.
          It is not true that the adjustment should be uniform for two different times. At different speeds the wind has a different effect.

          However, the above does look odd, because wind resistance increases with speed, so I would expect faster times to have a bigger adjustment than slower times in the same wind, if there is a difference in the adjustment. So I'd expect Bolt to have the larger adjustment, not the smaller one as above.
          The non-uniformity in these circumstances would have to be of about the third order. If you look at any underlying equations you will either find a flaw or nothing that should cause any big difference. If they took height into account for the wind resistance, then I could see a very slightly larger effect for someone with relatively more wind resistance, but that would be Bolt, not AP. I can get a tenth through the rounding (a procedure that is slightly flawed in this context, especially if it is a rounding up, since the mark that is being used as the basis is not the 'true' time, but a rounded up one.

          Comment


          • #6
            Simply plugging the data into JRM's calculator
            (http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/wind/index.html)
            shows that Powell's time is 0.02s too fast.

            Another issue, however, is whether the reporting is correctly rounded. Using
            three decimal places, I have the impression that the times should be one
            hundredth higher than they are when using two decimal places. (The exactness
            of the calculation is hardly large enough to warrant truncation over
            rounding.)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by imaginative
              Simply plugging the data into JRM's calculator
              (http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/wind/index.html)
              shows that Powell's time is 0.02s too fast.
              Bolt's time is actually 9.70s (rounding to the nearest), and Powell's is 9.76. Obviously the 9.73 is a numeric keypad typo. I've updated the original list, thus making all you guys look crazy.

              Another issue, however, is whether the reporting is correctly rounded. Using
              three decimal places, I have the impression that the times should be one
              hundredth higher than they are when using two decimal places. (The exactness of the calculation is hardly large enough to warrant truncation over
              rounding.)
              The calculator rounds down to the nearest 0.01s if you set the precision to 2 decimal places. I think that was my way of giving the benefit of the doubt when adjusting. It's probably more reasonable to round off in the usual fashion, or just specify 3 decimal precision and make your own decision.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by malmo
                Why do you insist on calling your list 'basic'? A more apt name would be 'contrived.'

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by JRM
                  Originally posted by malmo
                  Why do you insist on calling your list 'basic'? A more apt name would be 'contrived.'
                  I think that cartoon more appropriately represents your quixotic quest to redefine great performances. You're the one 'yelling at clouds' and challenging windmills with your 'basic' nonsense.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by malmo
                    I think that cartoon more appropriately represents your quixotic quest to redefine great performances. You're the one 'yelling at clouds' and challenging windmills with your 'basic' nonsense.
                    Let me be blunt: you're not wanted in this thread. We know what you think. We don't agree. Scram.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by JRM
                      Originally posted by malmo
                      I think that cartoon more appropriately represents your quixotic quest to redefine great performances. You're the one 'yelling at clouds' and challenging windmills with your 'basic' nonsense.
                      Let me be blunt: you're not wanted in this thread. We know what you think. We don't agree. Scram.
                      No, make me.

                      The IAAF agrees with me. Athletes around the world agree with me. Athletics Federations around the world agree with me. The only ones who agree with you are the Matt Mariot types.

                      I'll repeat again. These are the best 100m performances ranked in order according to the IAAF.

                      1 9.69 ±0.0 Usain Bolt 1 Beijing 16.08.2008
                      2 9.72 +1.7 Usain Bolt 1rA New York City 31.05.2008
                      2 9.72 +0.2 Asafa Powell 1rA Lausanne 03.09.2008
                      4 9.74 +1.7 Asafa Powell 1h2 Rieti 09.09.2007
                      5 9.76 +1.8 Usain Bolt 1 Kingston 03.05.2008
                      6 9.77 +1.6 Asafa Powell 1 Athínai 14.06.2005
                      6 9.77 +1.5 Asafa Powell 1 Gateshead 11.06.2006
                      6 9.77 +1.0 Asafa Powell 1rA Zürich 18.08.2006
                      6 9.77 +1.6 Tyson Gay 1q1 Eugene 28.06.2008
                      6 9.77 -1.3 Usain Bolt 1 Bruxelles 05.09.2008

                      Your basic nonsense is a direct assault on the fundamentals of our sport, one that separates our sport from all others - that performances are measurable and are not influenced by the whim of judges and self-appointed jury foremen like yourself who try to change history to suit your personal biases.

                      1) The person who wins the race is the winner, not the one who was leading for part of the race or has the best publicist .

                      2) An athlete who runs faster, or jumps higher, or throws farther will always be faster, higher and farther than the ones who aren't.

                      "Basic is not!"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        jrm

                        do you have any info on whether wind-gauges have improved from linthorne's study on +/- 0.9m/s error on wind readings ?

                        if not, it does play havoc with conversions

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by malmo
                          I'll repeat again. These are the best 100m performances ranked in order according to the IAAF.
                          At the risk of seeming nit-picky: Those are the best races ranked by _time_
                          by the IAAF, not necessarily ranked by what the IAAF considers the best
                          performances.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Top 10 all-time basic performances, men's 100m

                            Originally posted by JRM
                            Apologies for the formatting. I tried to post HTML code, but can't figure out how to do it.
                            Code:
                            =============================================================================
                            Rank Adjusted Official Wind   Athlete        Date       Venue    Altitude (m)
                            1     9.69     9.69     0    Usain Bolt     2008-08-16 Beijing        0
                            2     9.70     9.77    -1.3  Usain Bolt     2008-05-09 Bruxelles     35
                            3     9.74     9.72     0.2  Asafa Powell   2008-02-09 Lausanne     600
                            4     9.76     9.83    -1.3  Asafa Powell   2008-05-09 Bruxelles     35
                            5     9.79     9.78     0    Asafa Powell   2007-09-09 Rieti        400
                            6     9.80     9.79     0.1  Maurice Greene 1999-06-16 Athens       110
                            7     9.81     9.8      0.2  Maurice Greene 1999-08-22 Seville       10
                            8     9.82     9.84    -0.3  Asafa Powell   2007-09-14 Bruxelles     35
                            9     9.82     9.84    -0.5  Tyson Gay      2007-06-22 Indianapolis 215
                            10    9.82     9.85    -0.5  Tyson Gay      2007-08-26 Osaka         15
                            11    9.82     9.83    -0.3  Asafa Powell   2007-09-22 Stuttgart    250
                            12    9.82     9.82     0    Asafa Powell   2008-07-29 Monaco         0
                            13    9.83     9.82    -0.2  Maurice Greene 2001-05-08 Edmonton     680
                            14    9.84     9.86    -0.4  Ato Boldon     1998-06-17 Athens       110
                            15    9.84     9.74     1.7  Asafa Powell   2007-09-09 Rieti        400
                            16    9.84     9.85    -0.1  Usain Bolt     2008-08-16 Beijing        0
                            17    9.85     9.79     1.1  Ben Johnson    1988-09-24 Seoul        100
                            18    9.85     9.84     0.2  Bruny Surin    1999-08-22 Seville       10
                            19    9.85     9.86    -0.2  Maurice Greene 2000-01-09 Berlin        35
                            20    9.85     9.87    -0.3  Maurice Greene 2000-09-23 Sydney        45
                            Better? No tabs and the row of '=' to prevent it wrapping improperly.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Malmo: you've made your point here (and elsewhere). You don't like the concept of "basic" times. Fine, let it got. You've done enough pissing in somebody else's sandbox. This is harmless mental exercise that brings pleasure to others, and if you insist on ruining it you'll pay the proper price. For the last time I might add.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X