Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LJ to TJ conversion ?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • LJ to TJ conversion ?

    i've looked for years for a formal conversion for a guy/guyess to take every bit of ability/athleticism/speed/power from one to the other, retaining everything ( & not improving ) but just concentrating on maxing technique of event & obviously not found anything worth posting ( you woud need sophisticated computer analysis analysing speed/angle/etc - which is far beyond me )

    however, it's fairly obvious ( even to me ! ) what sort of ballpark you are looking for, but again, no justification in posting

    i still have no justification in posting this, but i've done this long enough to sense "junkyard dog smelling a bone"

    the events are trajectory related, which is an arc, which is part of a circle

    pattern recognition & beauty are best in science

    this is beautiful ( but possibly worthless, but i'll throw it out there )

    - 1

  • #2
    Re: LJ to TJ conversion ?

    Originally posted by eldrick
    i've looked for years for a formal conversion
    - 1
    I've always used LJ x2+2'. Doesn't work all the time, but it comes close with my charges. A 20' LJ boy jumps 42'. A 16' LJ girl jumps 34' . I rather doubt J. Edwards was a 29'' LJer or Powell a 60' TJer, but it works a lot of the time. The simple truth is that there's NO good conversion, because not all good TJers can LJ well and vice versa.

    Comment


    • #3
      Anyone who has ever been a practitioner of the events (at any level) can quickly tell you that no conversion of any remote accuracy is possible. A big lumbering Jadel Gregório is never going to be a world-beating long jumper no matter what he does. I wonder how many other 2m-tall guys have jumped over 8m?

      Bottom line is that you can be a world-class triple jumper with far less speed than a long jumper has to have.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: LJ to TJ conversion ?

        Originally posted by Marlow
        I rather doubt J. Edwards was a 29'' LJer or Powell a 60' TJer
        you obviously didn't bother to try it

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gh
          A big lumbering Jadel Gregório is never going to be a world-beating long jumper no matter what he does. I wonder how many other 2m-tall guys have jumped over 8m?
          eh ?

          8.22 -1.20 São Paulo 03/06/2004

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by gh
            Bottom line is that you can be a world-class triple jumper with far less speed than a long jumper has to have.
            you can be a world class long jumper with less speed than alot of world class triple jumpers have.
            ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: LJ to TJ conversion ?

              Originally posted by eldrick
              Originally posted by Marlow
              I rather doubt J. Edwards was a 29'' LJer or Powell a 60' TJer
              you obviously didn't bother to try it
              ??!! I've done both and LJx2+2' was almost exactly what I did/do.

              If you mean 'them' - Edwards MIGHT have been a 27'er if he had 'tried', but I even doubt that. Powell could have been a pretty good TJer (57') if he had focused on it.

              Comment


              • #8
                how on earth do you presume to be categorised with edwards/powell ?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: LJ to TJ conversion ?

                  Originally posted by Marlow
                  ??!! I've done both and LJx2+2' was almost exactly what I did/do.
                  no wonder you like the equation

                  Originally posted by Marlow
                  If you mean 'them' - Edwards MIGHT have been a 27'er if he had 'tried', but I even doubt that. Powell could have been a pretty good TJer (57') if he had focused on it.
                  If Edwards were not physically capable of LJing 27 feet I would eat my shoe. Likewise if Powell could not have TJed near 57 Id be shocked. These two guys were freaks of nature, anyone that ever watched them perform knows this to be the case. Powell at 22 years of age trained as a TJer jumps would certainly produce a few 57fters per year. As for Edwards, hard to see his LJ pr of 7.4x as representative of what his capabilities. In fact what was his final phase of the TJ, had to be over 6m. As a 10.4 guy one has to see that 7.4 number as independent of his real potential.
                  ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    These are both interesting ballpark concepts (ignore the fractions) The difference in predicted performance widens,as LJ standard increases.
                    Examples:
                    2.1416 x 27 = 57-9
                    2 x 27 =54 + 2 = 56

                    (pi-1) 2.1416 x 7.32 (24-0) = 15.6 (51-5)
                    2 x 24 = 48 + 2 = (50-0)

                    2.1416 x 20 = 42-9
                    2 x 20 = 40 + 2 = 42

                    Personally, my experience is closer to Marlow's. I was primarily a Broad Jumper/Sprnter and only competed Hop Step Jump in Olympic year 1952 , sandwiching it between other events.

                    Or, maybe I was just a HSJ under achiever.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      worth noting 2m/s adds ~ 2% to lj or tj

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I was wondering what Greg Louganis would have High Jumped.

                        Hell he was doing 3 m going in the other direction.

                        And all sorts of tricky things too. :wink:

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mal
                          I was wondering what Greg Louganis would have High Jumped.
                          Hell he was doing 3 m going in the other direction.
                          And all sorts of tricky things too. :wink:
                          Yeah, if there were a springboard at the end of the runway, I guess the records would be better. :wink:

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            You mean like in Torino? (can't believe you fed me that softball!) :twisted:

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by gh
                              You mean like in Torino? (can't believe you fed me that softball!) :twisted:
                              I don't have command of the physics involved, but I have been given to understand that unless the runway was 'sprung' (as in gymnastics, where there IS something under the floor to give it a springboard rebound), any kinetic energy one would put into the runway would NOT be returned at full output and that the best runways are the stiffest, which still would not return anything approaching 100%. So all the talk of jumpers hitting the 'sweet spot' and getting some aid is bunk. A runway like that used in Tokyo 1991 - hard as rock - is the best you can hope for. [and yes, gh, I know you were kidding, but it seems as though some people think there's a free lunch out there somewhere in the Jumps world]

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X