Fantastic Four

[Texas]

There has never been a 4x1 team with a 9.6, 9.7 and two 9.9 guys on it. No doubt all four Jamaites will also be world ranked in the 100m. Could the best USA 4x1 team have hung with them? I doubt it!

[az2004]

ok, big question here...

how much time is accounted by superior passing of the baton...

when 4 guys pass with minimal slowing in the pass, versus time lost when 4 fast guys hem and haw thru the passing zone...

is it a tenth each pass...

more than a tenth...

[Texas]

ok, big question here...

how much time is accounted by superior passing of the baton...

when 4 guys pass with minimal slowing in the pass, versus time lost when 4 fast guys hem and haw thru the passing zone...

is it a tenth each pass...

more than a tenth...

Let's go with..."all things being equal"...when it comes to stick work...ok?

[George P.]

ok, big question here...when 4 guys pass with minimal slowing in the pass, versus time lost when 4 fast guys hem and haw thru the passing zone...

Seems like we're entering Renaldo Nehemiah territory (i.e., Liu has an advantage because he's slow).

I see no reason why 4 fast guys couldn't learn to exchange the stick just as well as 4 slow guy. Tyson Gay is an excellent relay man, and he's not very slow. :?

[az2004]

i'm just trying to get a barometer for superior baton passing versus average baton passing...

historically, we'd say usa is at best, average...

how much time does a japan save...doing it the right way

[Texas]

Let's not too wrapped up in baton passing...ok? Boring!

[George P.]

Let's not too wrapped up in baton passing...ok? Boring!

Huh? Who was it that started this thread? :shock:

[tandfman]

Re: Fantastic Four

There has never been a 4x1 team with a 9.6, 9.7 and two 9.9 guys on it.

No, there hasn't. 9.69 ≠ 9.6.

[George P.]

Re: Fantastic Four

No, there hasn't. 9.69 ≠ 9.6.

Seems kind of chicken sh*t, don't ya think? That's common shorthand used here all the time for someone who's run a legit 9.6x. It shouldn't be confusing, certainly not to someone with 9000 posts. :roll: The sprinters themselves refer to each other that way.

[tandfman]

Re: Fantastic Four

No, there hasn't. 9.69 ≠ 9.6.

Seems kind of chicken sh*t, don't ya think?

No, I don't. If I did, I wouldn't have written it.

That's common shorthand used here all the time for someone who's run a legit 9.6x. It shouldn't be confusing, certainly not to someone with 9000 posts. :roll: The sprinters themselves refer to each other that way.

I don't know why you think it's appropriate to round 89xx posts up to 9000, but it's not appropriate to round 9.69 up to 9.7.

As far as what the sprinters say, I don't doubt that many sprinters do refer to each other that way. And it's not just sprinters. Milers do the same thing. A guy who runs a mile in 3:55.99 is a 3:55 miler, by the same reasoning (or lack of reasoning).

Sorry, but I am neither a sprinter nor a miler. I and most of my friends who are serious track fans and statisticians are more precise in our use of numbers. We'd refer to 9.6x as 9.6x or, in speaking, we might say he ran in the 9.60's. We might say the miler ran in the 3:55's, or he ran a three-fifty-five-point (the "somethiing" being implied), or he ran a sub-3:56 mile. Most likely, though, if the guy ran 9.69, we'd just say that. Why round it down to 9.6, which is not the way auto times are properly rounded anyway.

The original post would have been more accurate, and would have been understood just as well, if he had referred to a 9.6x, a 9.7x and two 9.9x's. It's the accuracy part that concerns me. As I said, 9.69 is not the same as 9.6. And because it is not the same, it should not be referred to as if it were.

Edited to fix typo. (We pedants do that sometimes. )

[George P.]

Wow!

I'd be tempted to say, "Lighten up, tandfman." But that wouldn't be your style, so I'll just leave you to your pedantic endeavors.

[Texas]

Let's not too wrapped up in baton passing...ok? Boring!

Huh? Who was it that started this thread? :shock:

Yet here you are once again with that....DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dude, obviously you know....0....about this stuff so why even bother?

[Texas]

Re: Fantastic Four

There has never been a 4x1 team with a 9.6, 9.7 and two 9.9 guys on it.

No, there hasn't. 9.69 ≠ 9.6.

If a guys runs a 4.46, he's a ...4.4 guy. Then there's...he's a sub10.00 guy. You understood the point....right?

When I first heard about Beamom's 1968 leap it was...."over 29 feet!!!!!!!!!!!!"......getting it?

[eldrick]

Re: Fantastic Four

I and most of my friends who are serious track fans and statisticians are more precise in our use of numbers. We'd refer to 9.6x as 9.6x or, in speaking, we might say he ran in the 9.60's. We might say the miler ran in the 3:55's, or he ran a three-fifty-five-point (the "somethiing" being implied)

you need to find some less anal-retentitive friends :P

[Paul Henry]

Well back to the topic at hand. I think because the world was robbed from seeing proper relay passing for so long we believe that it is almost questionable to execute pinpoint passing at fast speeds. These elite athletes owe to us to demonstarte that with trianing and practice, passing can become so accurate that it needs not not be a topic for discussion whether at slow or fast speeds. Its like controlling (trapping) the ball in football (soccer) which is only an issue for concern at the kindergarten level.