Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Men's Performance Of The Year

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #16
    I gave my considered answer a few posts ago.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by eldrick
      then consider the performance

      "9.69 whilst easing down"

      that more impressive than 19.30 ?
      Let it go e man, your dog can't hunt on this one.

      Comment


      • #18
        200
        i deserve extra credit

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by mump boy
          200
          The 100 was won soooooo easily and in a world record time. The 200 record was seemingly more out of reach and he got that too. Too close to call.

          I wonder if they didn't give it to Bolt as a show of disapproval of his celebrations? I only say that because there id no way Robles, as amazing as his year was, holds a candle to the brilliance of those two performances. Two races in a spectacular year by Bolt and poof.....the best sprinter ever no question.

          Well, back to my beer.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by steve
            The 100 was won soooooo easily
            The soooooo easily factor was why I'd have to choose the 100 (if I had to choose). He ran his 19.30 all out, clearly going for the record and breaking it by .02. He broke the 100 record by .03 shutting down near the end!

            The point isn't that he could have run faster--clearly he could have. The point is that he ran faster than anyone else ever did without a wind and made it look easy. Looking at the 100 performance as a whole--not just the time but everything about it, what he did and how he did it--I thought it was more impressive than the 200, which itself was extraordinarily impressive.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by tandfman
              Originally posted by steve
              The 100 was won soooooo easily
              The soooooo easily factor was why I'd have to choose the 100 (if I had to choose). He ran his 19.30 all out, clearly going for the record and breaking it by .02. He broke the 100 record by .03 shutting down near the end!

              The point isn't that he could have run faster--clearly he could have. The point is that he ran faster than anyone else ever did without a wind and made it look easy. Looking at the 100 performance as a whole--not just the time but everything about it, what he did and how he did it--I thought it was more impressive than the 200, which itself was extraordinarily impressive.
              I'd argue that the 200 was a much tougher record to achieve and that therefore achieving it was more significant than doing so in the 100.

              Comment


              • #22
                I thought of that. But I wonder what the profile of 200 statistics would look like if, in the past 12 years, the event had been run by the top sprinters in GL/GP level meets as often as the 100. I think the Johson might have still held the record going into Beijing, but 19.32 wouldn't have looked so much like an outlier.

                Comment


                • #23
                  But, really, now.... The 200 was run into a 0.9 (!!!!) wind, while the 100 was 0.0. Sure the 100 was easy, and Bolt had to actually work to do 19.30...but there's no question in my mind that the 200 was a considerably superior performance...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Instead of records that are broken almost every year let's look at some that aren't, Like Brad Walker setting the new American record after being held for 8 years. And quite frankly not that far from the WR?????

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Jumpman
                      Instead of records that are broken almost every year let's look at some that aren't, Like Brad Walker setting the new American record after being held for 8 years. And quite frankly not that far from the WR?????
                      That's nonsense. The last year the 200m World Record was broken before this year was 1996. And the year it was last broken before that was 1979.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Should the Jamaican 4x100 WR be considered also?

                        Did smash previous mark by 3/10s of a second!!!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          That was a fine performance, but in an event that is rarely run at a high level outside of major championships. You can't compare it with the 100m, or even the 200m, in that respect.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by tandfman
                            That was a fine performance, but in an event that is rarely run at a high level outside of major championships. You can't compare it with the 100m, or even the 200m, in that respect.
                            But the record had stood for 16 years (tied once 14 years ago). Only 6 teams have come with half a second of the mark EVER (but another 74 teams have run in the next 0.5 sec window).

                            The previous auto timing progressions had been considerably less:
                            0.10s
                            0.17s
                            0.12s
                            0.04s
                            0.03s
                            0.17s
                            0.16s

                            I think it warrants some consideration...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by kuha
                              But, really, now.... The 200 was run into a 0.9 (!!!!) wind, while the 100 was 0.0. Sure the 100 was easy, and Bolt had to actually work to do 19.30...but there's no question in my mind that the 200 was a considerably superior performance...
                              None in mine either.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                In terms of an actual race, i.e. competition, the 100m was most impressive, but in terms of athletic brilliance the 200m is the harder WR and therefore the better performance.

                                I'm not convinced that anyone thought the 200m WR would actually go, and the fact that Bolt had to go all out to get it makes it more worth while. 19.3 is still far out there with only 2 men in history ever achieving it. Even through the dark days of the 70s and 80s, along with some of the fastest sprinters in history, the record never went faster than 19.7. I thought one day I'd see 9.6x, especially after Powell, but I never thought I'd see someone break 19.32.

                                I think giving Robles the award is definitely spreading the wealth, because I'd put both Bolt's runs and then Sammy Wanjiru's marathon above the hurdles WR.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X