Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bolt in NYT predicts 9.4

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    To hopefully prevent further protracted and possibly fruitless debate, I think Epelle's 9.68 is the faster time converted to basic time as all races wind-aided above or below a 0.0 m/s eventually end up converted to on this forum ... Is that right?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by EPelle
      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.

      ARGHH!!! So you were just trying to waste my time this whole past 3 hours!!!!

      It's ok, I forgive you lol.

      Anyways, I thought I made the point of the WHOLE DISCUSSION I had brought up quite clear from the very beginning:

      Bolt ran 9.77 last year in Brussels.

      He had two things hurting him in that race:

      1. His reaction time. It was super slow.

      2. The wind. It was a headwind. Headwinds are bad, not good.


      So, if we, just for fun, pretend his reaction time was mediocre, instead of bad

      and

      we also pretend that instead of having a headwind, he instead had a tailwind

      we now want to figure out just how much faster he theoretically would have run, had these two things happened.

      so

      First we changed his .22 reaction time to .16, which makes him run the race .06 faster, since .16 is .06 faster than .22. So he would have run a 9.71 instead of a 9.77 if he would have had a normal .16 reaction time instead of a ridiculously horrible .22 reaction time.

      Second, we determine how much faster he would have run if ON TOP of the having a faster reaction time he ALSO had a tailwind instead of a headwind.

      Well, I think I have shown in my pictures and previous explanations how to do that.

      And it turned out, according to the adjustment calculator, that a 9.71 run into a 1.3m/s headwind would have been a 9.59 if it were run with a 1.0m/s tailwind.

      And that's it.

      That's his time.

      9.59

      9.59 is what he would have run in brussels last season, if his reaction time in that race would have been a very normal, typical for Usain, 0.16, and the wind would have been a very reasonable 1m/s. Neither the reaction time nor the tailwind are set at unreasonable levels. Both are very plausible. And what did we learn? We learned that with those two very plausible changed conditions of a .16 reaction and a 1m/s tailwind, his time would have been a 9.59 instead of a 9.77

      And we never even took into account the fact that it was cold, and raining, on a soaking wet track. If we take that into consideration, he is running closer to a mid 9.5 instead of a high 9.5.

      So ya. I was right when I said that he showed me he was capable of running mid 9.5s based off what I saw of his brussels race at the end of last season.

      So ya, I think it IS reasonable of me to say that if he is as fast as he was last season, that he will run a mid 9.5 at some point this season.

      That's how this whole mess started.

      I said that IF he is as fast this season as he was last season, that he is capable of a mid 9.5 in decent, but not perfect conditions, and a high 9.4 in perfect conditions.

      And I have proven this to be true. Though it did take close to 3 and a half hours to do it.

      So, I think I have shown here that my mid 9.5 good condition high 9.4 perfect conditions opinion was not just some random number I pulled out of my ass, rather, I actually did think it through, and according to mathematics, it would seem that my opinion is a rather logical one.

      Comment


      • #33
        So . . . exactly how many angels can dance on the point of a needle??!!

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Marlow
          So . . . exactly how many angels can dance on the point of a needle??!!
          Thousands

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Marlow
            So . . . exactly how many angels can dance on the point of a needle??!!
            Invisible or visible? Ones wearing white robes or red ones? ;-)

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by EPelle
              Originally posted by Marlow
              So . . . exactly how many angels can dance on the point of a needle??!!
              Invisible or visible? Ones wearing white robes or red ones? ;-)
              Where do all the halos go? Wouldn't thousands of angels' halos create a white-hot glow that would melt everything around it, or is the light bio-luminescent? It would still be blinding! Plus, are the Fundamentalists angry that they're all DANCING? And what dance are they doing. I hope it's not that disgusting 'grind' thing all the kids are doing today! I hope it's like the Texas 2-step. Line dancing, yeah, that's the ticket.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by The Atheist
                In perfect conditions, I think it is VERY very very possible.

                Here's why:

                Usain Bolt ran a 9.77 into a 1.3m/s with a 0.22 reaction time in septermber of last year.

                He has already had a 0.12 reaction time in one of his races, so we know that he is capable of this reaction time occasionally in the future, given that he has done it before.

                So, if he had had a 0.12 reaction time instead of a 0.22 reaction time, that would have already dropped his time from a 9.77 down to a 9.67 in that race.

                Next we look at the wind. It was a 1.3m/s headwind. If it had been a 2.0m/s tailwind his time would have dropped from a 9.67 (with the .12 reaction time) all the way down to a 9.50 flat.

                However, this does not take into account the fact that it was cold and raining during that race. Taking that into account, he easily could have run another one or two hundredths faster still, which would be in the very high 9.4's.

                So yes, in optimal conditions, he was capable of running very high 9.4's last season.

                So as long as he isn't slower than he was last season (he might be, or he might not be, we won't know till we find out, obviously), then yes, if the conditions are just right, and he snaps off a good reaction time, he will run a high 9.4 or better, in my opinion.

                It's just math.


                However, if the conditions aren't perfect, or he is injured, or he is slower than last season, then no, it will not happen, and he will end up with a low or mid 9.5 instead. Which is much more likely, since optimal conditions are rare, and he looks like he might be a little slower this season than last, if the rumors about him slacking are true.

                I can't wait for him to start running in some big races this season though, so we can figure it out the fun way (by watching it happen or not happen with our eyeballs and stuff!!!)
                Personally, I don't think it's quite that simple. I think you are assuming a little too much. We don't know for sure that a faster reaction time will automatically improve his time as much as the difference. We don't know the wind will automatically improve his time as much as assumed. Also, we don't know how his body will react to running that fast. This is uncharted territory, and we can't expect everything to go right when that much stress is put on a body. I'm not going to say it's impossible, but to say it is very very very possible is just a little much for me. I don't buy that it is just math, because there are other factors that could play a role.

                Comment


                • #38
                  [quote=Who_Cares]
                  Originally posted by "The Atheist":22q9uitu
                  In perfect conditions, I think it is VERY very very possible.

                  Here's why:

                  Usain Bolt ran a 9.77 into a 1.3m/s with a 0.22 reaction time in septermber of last year.

                  He has already had a 0.12 reaction time in one of his races, so we know that he is capable of this reaction time occasionally in the future, given that he has done it before.

                  So, if he had had a 0.12 reaction time instead of a 0.22 reaction time, that would have already dropped his time from a 9.77 down to a 9.67 in that race.

                  Next we look at the wind. It was a 1.3m/s headwind. If it had been a 2.0m/s tailwind his time would have dropped from a 9.67 (with the .12 reaction time) all the way down to a 9.50 flat.

                  However, this does not take into account the fact that it was cold and raining during that race. Taking that into account, he easily could have run another one or two hundredths faster still, which would be in the very high 9.4's.

                  So yes, in optimal conditions, he was capable of running very high 9.4's last season.

                  So as long as he isn't slower than he was last season (he might be, or he might not be, we won't know till we find out, obviously), then yes, if the conditions are just right, and he snaps off a good reaction time, he will run a high 9.4 or better, in my opinion.

                  It's just math.


                  However, if the conditions aren't perfect, or he is injured, or he is slower than last season, then no, it will not happen, and he will end up with a low or mid 9.5 instead. Which is much more likely, since optimal conditions are rare, and he looks like he might be a little slower this season than last, if the rumors about him slacking are true.

                  I can't wait for him to start running in some big races this season though, so we can figure it out the fun way (by watching it happen or not happen with our eyeballs and stuff!!!)
                  Personally, I don't think it's quite that simple. I think you are assuming a little too much. We don't know for sure that a faster reaction time will automatically improve his time as much as the difference. We don't know the wind will automatically improve his time as much as assumed. Also, we don't know how his body will react to running that fast. This is uncharted territory, and we can't expect everything to go right when that much stress is put on a body. I'm not going to say it's impossible, but to say it is very very very possible is just a little much for me. I don't buy that it is just math, because there are other factors that could play a role.[/quote:22q9uitu]

                  manhe's just saying it's possible, wow, yes it's very unlikely, but why are you bringing other things in it for, just accept that it is possible, u don't have to think about it the way you are,

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    subtracting reaction time is JV stuff, any track enthusiast knows that just because you reastion time is .1 faster than another one of your reaction doesnt mean your overall time is .1 second faster.

                    In reality a 'reaction time' is just that the time you react to the gun in the blocks, that doesnt garentee that your start will be faster than someone with a slower reaction time, while its more likely that be the case its not true.

                    Second wind is an unkown variable and coupled with altitude in certain cases the wind can be neglegiable or otherwise.

                    Bottom line is Usain Bolt isnt running anything NEAR a 9.4 during his career (and certainly not legally wind or otherwise). People never cease to amaze me 42s and now 9.4s. Let the guy run low 9.6s first and 43something.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      The_athiest is clearly correct he gets the 9.59 through trial and error as well from the 9.63. rather than it being a straight line from taliwind to headwind which i agree its not a perfect straighline correlation. So trial and error is whats needed. you have to try every number from say 9.55 to 9.62 with the +1 untill you get to the 9.63 adjusted.

                      If you have a tailwind you obviously go faster. so going from 9.63 with zero wind to 9.68 with +1 is clearly wrong.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Mikewats
                        If you have a tailwind you obviously go faster. so going from 9.63 with zero wind to 9.68 with +1 is clearly wrong.
                        9,68 was the adjusted time, not the actual finishing time. 9,63 with the addition of +0,1 to whatever should (and, eventually will) cause the finishing time to decrease, but the additional wind will slow the adjusted time, accordingly.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Adjusted time is the key phrase here ladies and gentlemen.
                          If you're ever walking down the beach and you see a girl dressed in a bikini made out of seashells, and you pick her up and hold her to your ear, you can hear her scream.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Dietmar239
                            Adjusted time is the key phrase here ladies and gentlemen.
                            This^^^^

                            thats why the trial and error was needed, you have to put a +1 wind in, as well as altitude and as you know with a +1 wind you will definitely be going quicker than compared to a zero wind. So you start off by putting 9.62 see what that changes to, ow look its not 9.63 you keep doing that untill you get to 9.59 which then had the adjustment at 9.63 meaning thats what it would be with a +1 wind.

                            TBH i've never used the calculator i'll go and double check it, but im pretty sure i am right and the_athiests right, his logic seems sound.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Just done it, with a 0.12 secs reaction time like someone said before that he had, i dont know if thats true and a +1 wind would get him 9.55. With a +2 wind he would get 9.50 according to the calculator

                              With a 0.16reaction time i got 9.59 with a +1 wind speed. So yeah the_athiest was correct.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Bolt should run faster with a tail wind. The faster the wind, the faster he will run up to a point (before he loses stride and steps). Increasing the allowable wind on a race where his reaction time has been improved WILL decrease his overall time... no question about it.

                                However, when one compares the value of two times -- one with a positive wind, one with a negative wind, there comes a point where the race with negative wind prevails over the one with the aiding wind in VALUE, not time.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X