Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Odd splits in W OG TN issue

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Odd splits in W OG TN issue

    In TN 2008_49 (Women's OG results, version i), there are some odd splits for the 1500's last 100 and 200, and they make a pattern.
    last 100 200 (100) 300 (100)
    Lagat 16.5 29.4 (12.9) 43.6 (14.2)
    Lishchynska 16.4 29.6 (13.2) 44.6 (15.0)
    Tobias 16.0 28.8 (12.8) 43.9 (15.1)
    Jamal 18.6 31.7 (13.1) 46.3 (14.6)

    These splits are not impossible, but it seems unlikely that they were running sub-13 around the last curve. It is often difficult to determine exactly where the last 100 begins.

    The splits given for the men's 1500 look correct.
    Cheers,
    Alan Shank

  • #2
    those look like last 110-200-300 to me if anything.

    Definitely not humanly possible for the women to run under 13" from 1300-1400

    Comment


    • #3
      I mentionned in an other thread that the last 100m for the women's 400m were too slow. It's now probable that the times were taken at the first relay exchange zone mark.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Odd splits in W OG TN issue

        Originally posted by Alan Shank
        In TN 2008_49 (Women's OG results, version i), there are some odd splits for the 1500's last 100 and 200, and they make a pattern.
        last 100 200 (100) 300 (100)
        Lagat 16.5 29.4 (12.9) 43.6 (14.2)
        Lishchynska 16.4 29.6 (13.2) 44.6 (15.0)
        Tobias 16.0 28.8 (12.8) 43.9 (15.1)
        Jamal 18.6 31.7 (13.1) 46.3 (14.6)

        These splits are not impossible, but it seems unlikely that they were running sub-13 around the last curve. It is often difficult to determine exactly where the last 100 begins.

        The splits given for the men's 1500 look correct.
        Cheers,
        Alan Shank
        If we decrease the last split by 9.09% and add that amount to the previous one, and then similarly repeat the process by taking the middle split and increasing it by 11.11% and then averaging the two estimates will this give us the right number?

        I would do it in Excel but right now it is working on a calculation (and has been doing so for over ten minutes -- big dataset, conditional algebra).

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Pierre-Jean
          I mentionned in an other thread that the last 100m for the women's 400m were too slow. It's now probable that the times were taken at the first relay exchange zone mark.
          Looks likely, and would explain all the unusually fast splits at 300m.

          Comment


          • #6
            Here is my suggested adjustments for the first listed split (i.e., last 100), the adjustment amount and the prior 100 (200 to 100 from finish)
            Method1..Adjusted Amount Adjusted
            Lagat.......... 15.000 1.500 14.400
            Lishchynska 14.909 1.491 14.691
            Tobias......... 14.545 1.455 14.255
            Jamal.......... 16.909 1.691 14.791
            Method2
            Lagat.......... 15.067 1.433 14.333
            Lishchynska 14.933 1.467 14.667
            Tobias......... 14.578 1.422 14.222
            Jamal.......... 17.144 1.456 14.556
            Average of methods
            Lagat.......... 15.033 1.467 14.367
            Lishchynska 14.921 1.479 14.679
            Tobias......... 14.562 1.438 14.238
            Jamal.......... 17.027 1.573 14.673

            However, for Jamal, she was probably there earlier and died more.

            Comment

            Working...
            X