Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bolt in NYT predicts 9.4

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #16
    Yes, I did.

    Here, I'll even tell you EXACTLY what I typed into the calculator (the one you are using, which coincidentally was the same one I was using, even though you didn't realize it, since you tried to introduce me to it (even though that is the one I was already using this whole time)).

    Ok.

    Here's what I did.

    So we start off the the number 9.77. Then we lower this to 9.71, because we are saying he normally reacts with a .16RT and not a .22RT (.22 was the RT he had in his bruxelles race)

    So we take that 9.71, and we put it in the time slot on the adjuster

    then we put -1.3 into the wind speed slot on the adjuster

    and then we select Bruxelles, Bel as location

    then we click "correct!" and it gives us a time of 9.63

    This would be his time in 0 wind.

    But we wanted his time with a 1.0m/s tailwind. Not 0m/s wind.

    So now we type 9.59 into the time slot

    we type 1.0 into the wind speed slot

    and we select Bruxelles, Bel as location

    then we click "correct!" and it gives us a time of 9.63.

    This shows us that a 1.0m/tailwind would have given us a time of 9.59. We just verified it by typing 9.59 (as our guess) with a 1m/s tailwind, and asked it to correct it to 0 wind. And since it corrected the 9.59 in 1m/s tailwind into a 9.63 in 0 wind, and we saw earlier than 9.63 was his 0 wind correction off the 9.71 into the headwind, this is how we know that his 1.0m/s tailwind time is a 9.59.

    Do you understand?

    I can explain again if you don't understand the last step (of figuring out that switching from 0 wind brings his 9.63 down by .04 to a 9.59) If you want I can explain that part again if it didn't make sense how I explained it in here just now. Let me know.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Bolt in NYT predicts 9.4

      Originally posted by Cojo
      Originally posted by ed gee
      http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/04/26/sports/sports-us-athletics-bolt.html
      9.4 ?!!! The air in Boston can make you lightheaded. I do not think 9.4 is possible. Is that 9.4 seconds? Naw - I don't see that in the realm of the possible.
      oh it's very possible, maybe not from usain bolt, but it will be broken, someone will come along one day and run these times

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by EPelle
        I think you're missing the greater point there. Did you plug in Bruxelles? That is where you are referring to your 9,77 (-1,3 m/s).

        NOOOO!!!!!

        You are doing it all wrong!

        SAJF)*SDjf089sdjg08fdjgouifdnglsdk

        Ok, I will show you WITH PICTURES how to do this.

        Seriously, this is getting ridiculous.

        I must get you to do this correctly before I go to bed.

        I will post with pictures in like 10 or 20 minutes after I take screenshots and upload them to photobucket.

        brb

        Comment


        • #19
          Ok, LOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          We start with 9.77. We take .06 off that cuz we are giving him a faster reaction time, so 9.71.

          So he is running 9.71 into a 1.3m/s headwind.

          But we want to know what a 9.71 into a 1.3 headwind becomes if you switch that 1.3 headwind to a 1.0 tailwind.

          Obviously we know it will be a lot faster than 9.71, since we know that we run faster when the wind is a tailwind than we do when the wind is a headwind. But we want to know just how much faster, exactly. So we use a wind adjuster calculator.

          So first we find out what the time would be in 0 wind, instead of a 1.3 headwind, by typing in the 9.71 time, and the wind of negative 1.3:



          So now we know that if the wind is 0, the 9.71 turns into a 9.63.

          But we don't want to know how fast he would run in 0 wind. No, we want to know how fast he runs with a 1.0m/s TAILWIND!!!!

          So how do we figure out how much lower the time goes if we push him with a little 1.0m/s tailwind?

          Well, we guess and check.

          So we type in 9.59 as our guess, and see what it corrects that to if we give that 9.59 a 1m/s tailwind, and ask it to correct it to 0 wind.

          And what happens?



          That happens! Just what we wanted. It corrects 9.59 with a 1m/s tailwind to 9.63 in 0 wind. Which is the time we were looking for, since 9.63 was the 0 wind result off the 9.71 correction.

          Do you understand what we are doing here?

          The first picture shows that switching the wind from a 1.3m/s headwind to a 0m/s wind will take .08 off his time, bringing it from 9.71 to 9.63.

          The second picture shows that switching the wind from 0 to 1m/s of tailwind will shave an additional .04 off his time, bringing the 9.63 down to 9.59.

          I was right!

          You were wrong!

          Bolt is faster than you realized!!!!!!!!!!!

          Comment


          • #20
            lol i used that calculator, i put in the same altitude and location as in the screenshot. but i went with the 0.12 reaction time, and if he had +2.0ms wind, and i got 9.47sec thats best possible conditions, but it is possible

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by The Atheist
              Obviously we know it will be a lot faster than 9.71, since we know that we run faster when the wind is a tailwind than we do when the wind is a headwind. But we want to know just how much faster, exactly. So we use a wind adjuster calculator. ...

              So now we know that if the wind is 0, the 9.71 turns into a 9.63.

              But we don't want to know how fast he would run in 0 wind. No, we want to know how fast he runs with a 1.0m/s TAILWIND!!!!

              So how do we figure out how much lower the time goes if we push him with a little 1.0m/s tailwind?
              9,63 at nill wind plus 1,0 metres/second. In Bruxelles. 9,68. Adjusted.

              Comment


              • #22
                thats because your typing it in as if he ran 9.63 and the wind was already +1.0

                you have to put in -1.0

                actually i think i'm doing it wrong because i get 9.57

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gordon18
                  thats because your typing it in as if he ran 9.63 and the wind was already +1.0

                  you have to put in -1.0
                  The 9,63 is basic off of nill wind. The +1,0 m/s is the wind speed requested on the 9,63 race (9,71s adjusted off negative wind (to correct to nill) and altitude). The result of the basic time (9,63s) and the aiding wind (+1,0 m/s) on 9,63 is 9,68s in Bruxelles - faster than 9,81, but slower than had the race just been left to negative wind and the 0,06s faster reaction time at that location.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by EPelle
                    Originally posted by Gordon18
                    thats because your typing it in as if he ran 9.63 and the wind was already +1.0

                    you have to put in -1.0
                    The 9,63 is basic off of nill wind. The +1,0 m/s is the wind speed requested on the 9,63 race (9,71s adjusted off negative wind (to correct to nill) and altitude). The result of the basic time (9,63s) and the aiding wind (+1,0 m/s) on 9,63 is 9,68s in Bruxelles - faster than 9,81, but slower than had the race just been left to negative wind and the 0,06s faster reaction time at that location.
                    na man sorry, if someone runs 9.63 with 0m/s wind, if they had been given a +1.0m/s wind, they are gonna run faster not slower. like bolts 9.69 imagine if he had a +1.0m/s in beijing what would he have run then, think about it like that

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Adjusted. Corrected. Amended. Revised. Rendered after wind and altitude have been taken into consideration.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by EPelle
                        Adjusted. Corrected. Amended. Revised. Rendered after wind and altitude have been taken into consideration.
                        you don't need to amend anything, you don't need the calculator to wrok out tailwind means his time will be faster not slower

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          epelle

                          honestly

                          how on EARTH do you not understand this????

                          Ok

                          I wil exaggerate the conditions enormously to force you to understand this.

                          Lets say usain bolt was running into a hurricane.

                          So there is a 150 mile per hour headwind blowing straight into his face, pushing against his body.

                          So because of this enormous hurricane force wind blowing against his chest, he runs the 100m dash in 30 seconds.

                          ok?

                          Why was his race time so slow?

                          BECAUSE HAVING A HEADWIND MAKES YOU RUN SLOWERRRR!!! NOT FASTERRRRR!!!!! YOU KNOW THIS!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU HAVE 18,000 POSTS!!!!!! I KNOW YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





                          Ok




                          Now let's say instead of having a hurricane pushing AGAINST him, he has a hurricane BEHIND HIM pushing his back, so it is pushing him FORWARD, it is pushing him TOWARD the finish line. It is HELPING him.

                          So now there is this 150 mph hurricane force tailwind pushing his back making him way faster, like he is being shoved from behind by someone the whole way.

                          So with this hurricane pushing him forward, he runs the 100m in 8 seconds

                          Ok, so he ran FASTERRRR because he had a TAILWIND!!!!!!!!!!!! Tailwinds don't slow you down, they speed you up!!!!!!!!!!!! I know you know this!!!!!!! Come on man!!!!!!!!!!!



                          Okay, so now that we have established that a headwind makes you run SLOWER

                          and a tailwind makes you run FASTER


                          We take a look at his race.

                          The 9.71 is him running INTO A HEADWIND.

                          And as we have just explained in this post, a headwind makes a person run SLOWER.

                          So if we get rid of that headwind, and turn it into just 0 wind, it will make his time FASTER, becuase you got rid of the headwind, which was slowing him down, so that speeds him up. RIGHT?

                          Okay, but we aren't trying to see how fast he runs in 0 wind. We are trying to see how fast he could run if he would have a tailwind.

                          So now we give him a tailwind and this makes his time EVEN FASTER.

                          Because you run FASTER when you have a tailwind than when you have 0 wind. Right?


                          So why was your calculation wrong?

                          Because what you asked the computer to do was to figure out what his time would be if you TOOK AWAY HIS TAILWIND. We are NOT trying to do that. We aren't trying to take away a tailwind, we are trying to GIVE HIM ONE!!!!

                          If you type 9.63 and give him a 1m/s tailwind, it will give you a 9.67. OBVIOUSLY, because you just asked it to take away his 1m/s tailwind.

                          But that isn't what we are doing. We aren't saying he runs 9.63 with a 1m/s tailwind, so what is that in 0 wind.

                          No.

                          We are saying he runs a 9.63 in 0 wind, so what would he run if he instead had a 1m/s TAILWIND. Well, we know it would be faster, but how much faster?

                          Would it be .01 faster?

                          .02 faster?

                          .03 faster?

                          .04 faster? <----- YES!!!!! it would be exactly .04 faster.

                          And how do we know it would be .04 faster? Because if you type 9.59 into the box and give a +1.0 tailwind, and ask it what that is in 0 wind, it answers with 9.63. THEREFORE we know that if he runs 9.63 in 0 wind, it means he runs 9.59 when he has a 1.0m/s tailwind. Do you understand!?!?!????

                          Come on man, this is not that difficult.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Headwind, tailwind, no wind... I'm not lost on any of it.

                            Ok, so he ran FASTERRRR because he had a TAILWIND!!!!!!!!!!!! Tailwinds don't slow you down, they speed you up!!!!!!!!!!!! I know you know this!!!!!!! Come on man!!!!!!!!!!!
                            So why was your calculation wrong?

                            Because what you asked the computer to do was to figure out what his time would be if you TOOK AWAY HIS TAILWIND. We are NOT trying to do that. We aren't trying to take away a tailwind, we are trying to GIVE HIM ONE!!!!

                            If you type 9.63 and give him a 1m/s tailwind, it will give you a 9.67. OBVIOUSLY, because you just asked it to take away his 1m/s tailwind.
                            I've actually requested the calculator to project a time based on an assumptive still-wind race at 9,63 seconds. The 9,63 with nill wind at Bruxelles would be a 9,63, no? Introduce a positive wind of 1 metre per second to that 9,63 (basic) time, and the adjusted time -- not his final finishing time (the two are not inherently equal) outputs a 9,68.

                            On the surface, the tailwind helps Bolt. Deeper digging, however, one realises (or should) that Bolt's positive wind sprinting over 100m on the same track as one where he had a negative one is actually inferior in effort given two data points: a -1,7 m/s and a +1,0 m/s with a basic time of 9,63s.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Ok, there is no way I am going to be able to explain this to you by typing. Apparently you really don't understand what we are doing here.

                              Therefore

                              I am going to make a youtube video where I explain this to you.

                              That is how much I refuse to let you not understand this.

                              Anyone with 18,000 posts, in my opinion, MUST be required to understand how to do this. I refuse to let you not understand this.

                              I will post a youtube video which will show you what we are trying to do here, and how to do it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Your question: We are saying he runs a 9.63 in 0 wind, so what would he run if he instead had a 1m/s TAILWIND. Well, we know it would be faster, but how much faster?

                                I have followed your logic, and don't disagree whatsoever with the absolute truth that he would have run faster; there is no question he would have tripped the accutrak in a +1,0 m/s race before he would have in a still-wind race. You are intent on proving that he will have run 9,59 (an improvement of 0,04s with a +1,0 m/s tailwind) off of a 9,63s converted time with still wind from a race of 9,77s in a stiff wind (-1,7 m/s). Not much problem. Yes, it is nearly a certainty that Bolt would have run faster than an adjusted 9,63 (nill wind) with an aiding wind in Bruxelles.

                                You stated that dropping the reaction time would automatically shave 0,06 from his time, leaving Bolt at 9,71 into a 1,3 m/s headwind. Then you suggested that a switch from -1,3 m/s to a + 1,0 m/s would bring his time to a 9,59. However, the basic time from his 9,71 at nill wind is 9,63. This is why I have maintained that the adjusted time on the 9,63 race would be slower at +1,0 m/s than the 9,77 (-0,06; -1,3 m/s) on the same track. You're interested in how fast he would have run.... 0,04s is your answer.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X