Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bolt in NYT predicts 9.4

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • wineturtle
    replied
    Re: using a minus sign ( -1.3m/s) in JMs calc

    Originally posted by The Atheist
    Originally posted by wineturtle
    sealevel values
    9.77w-1.3 wind JM s calc says =9.69 basic
    9.49our goaltime w+ 2.0 wind=9.58 basic
    9.69minus 9.58=0.11 increase in basic speed need to break 9.50
    Can UB run 9.58 this season?
    WWWWRRRRROOOOOONNNNNNGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Bolt's reaction time in his 9.77 run was 0.22 seconds.

    His fastest reaction time so far has been 0.12 seconds

    His typical reaction time is about 0.16 seconds.

    You should shave 0.06 seconds off his 9.77 run, since his reaction time was .06 slower than usual in that race.

    Thus you should belooking at that race as a 9.71 into a -1.3 wind, which comes out to 9.63 basic. His fastest 100m run ever (faster than beijing, even if you take his shutting down in beijing into account).


    my take on using a calc like JMs-
    reaction is part of your basic speed- wind/alt are outside forces you do not control.

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    Re: using a minus sign ( -1.3m/s) in JMs calc

    Originally posted by The Atheist
    His fastest reaction time so far has been 0.12 seconds

    His typical reaction time is about 0.16 seconds.
    I've seen you state that a few times now and would like to know how you have drawn that conclusion.

    Typical could be defined as "usual", which, for the sake of argument, could be determined after a number of observations made of Bolt and the time it takes for him to react to the firing of the gun at the start of the 100m dash. I think you'll find that he is actually closer to 0,18 than 0,16. Of his top-10 times recorded last season - with Beijing performances book-ending those marks, I have been able to locate seven with reaction times (from 0,157 to 0,22).

    Bolt's average reaction time in Beijing was 0,169, or 0,17 if one rounds up/down.

    With his seven known reaction times available to this point (a majority of his top-10 times), he's averaging 0,177 -- or typically reacting at 0,18 to the gun. His four reaction times in the 200m in Beijing averaged 0,180, with his 19,30 on a 0,182.

    Based on the majority of his 100m races, which lack three reaction times - one (Port-of-Spain) which is stated to be in the neighbourhood of atrocious, it would be safe to assume that Bolt's typical reaction time is 0,18 seconds. If that is accepted, then the 9,77 (-1,3 m/s) becomes 9,65 basic, not 9,63.

    Thus you should belooking at that race as a 9.71 into a -1.3 wind, which comes out to 9.63 basic. His fastest 100m run ever (faster than beijing, even if you take his shutting down in beijing into account).
    Beijing is assumed to have cost 0,05s, thus making his finishing time 9,64, and this Bruxelles race slower than Beijing.

    Neither of these races is here or there, however.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Atheist
    replied
    Re: using a minus sign ( -1.3m/s) in JMs calc

    Originally posted by wineturtle
    sealevel values
    9.77w-1.3 wind JM s calc says =9.69 basic
    9.49our goaltime w+ 2.0 wind=9.58 basic
    9.69minus 9.58=0.11 increase in basic speed need to break 9.50
    Can UB run 9.58 this season?
    WWWWRRRRROOOOOONNNNNNGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Bolt's reaction time in his 9.77 run was 0.22 seconds.

    His fastest reaction time so far has been 0.12 seconds

    His typical reaction time is about 0.16 seconds.

    You should shave 0.06 seconds off his 9.77 run, since his reaction time was .06 slower than usual in that race.

    Thus you should belooking at that race as a 9.71 into a -1.3 wind, which comes out to 9.63 basic. His fastest 100m run ever (faster than beijing, even if you take his shutting down in beijing into account).

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    I was excited as everyone else by what Bolt did in Beijing, and I'd love to see him do more. But that may not happen this season.
    Zackly. I really can't see him getting the motivation to repeat his workload from last year, and despite his otherworldly talent, ya gotta work your butt off to be the world's best in the current sprint game.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sportsfanx1
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    Originally posted by DentyCracker
    o ye of little faith
    What I have little faith in right now is his capacity or willingness to be as tough, disciplined, and focused as he was last year at this time. He's an awfully young man to have so much money and fame thrown at him, and he seems to enjoy living the good life. I don't blame him, but I doubt that he ran 9.69/19.30 on pure talent, and I suspect he's never going to run any faster if he doesn't work hard. He got a late start with his training this year, and the auto accident set him back at least a few days, perhaps more.

    I was excited as everyone else by what Bolt did in Beijing, and I'd love to see him do more. But that may not happen this season.

    He did admit, he train hard last season. This season didnt start as early as last year. But, if he can run 9.94 (even though wind was +2.3) looking out of shape, I can imagine what he is going to do later on in the season being injury free when World Championships comes.

    As Usain Bolt mentioned a couple weeks ago, anyone lining up against him, is lining up to get beat!! Obviously him being a little behind in training, hasn't change anything and that is the way to go.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by DentyCracker
    o ye of little faith
    What I have little faith in right now is his capacity or willingness to be as tough, disciplined, and focused as he was last year at this time. He's an awfully young man to have so much money and fame thrown at him, and he seems to enjoy living the good life. I don't blame him, but I doubt that he ran 9.69/19.30 on pure talent, and I suspect he's never going to run any faster if he doesn't work hard. He got a late start with his training this year, and the auto accident set him back at least a few days, perhaps more.

    I was excited as everyone else by what Bolt did in Beijing, and I'd love to see him do more. But that may not happen this season.

    Leave a comment:


  • TrackDaddy
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    At the rate he's going, Bolt won't run 9.69 this season, or anything close.
    See...

    That's my concern.

    There's been a lot going on with Bolt (and the JA team) this season, but I'm not sure how much of it can be considered positive.

    You can't just turn it off and on...you know?

    That said, I'd like to see him (and Gay, etc, :wink: ) do something spectacular.

    Leave a comment:


  • DentyCracker
    replied
    o ye of little faith

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    At the rate he's going, Bolt won't run 9.69 this season, or anything close.

    Leave a comment:


  • wineturtle
    replied
    using a minus sign ( -1.3m/s) in JMs calc

    sealevel values
    9.77w-1.3 wind JM s calc says =9.69 basic
    9.49our goaltime w+ 2.0 wind=9.58 basic
    9.69minus 9.58=0.11 increase in basic speed need to break 9.50
    Can UB run 9.58 this season?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Atheist
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by EPelle
    Originally posted by Sportsfanx1
    It's also, scientifically proven that he would've ran mid 9:5 secs if he didn't shut it down with 20 to 25 meters to go.
    I'm sorry, but I missed the scientific study. Do you have a link? Does it contrast with evidence from this link?

    http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09 ... right.html
    The most damning part of that "scientific analysis", and exposed in Epelle's link, was their assumption that Bolt would have continued to speed up to the end of the race. Very very sloppy work, actually, it's embarrassing that they call themselves scientists.
    This is why you should analyze Bolt's race in Brussels, and not his race in Beijing. Since he actually ran to the tape in Brussels. And since, analytically speaking, he actually ran faster in Brussels than in Beijing. Go read page 2 to find an analysis of Bolt's Brussel's race...

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by EPelle
    Originally posted by Sportsfanx1
    It's also, scientifically proven that he would've ran mid 9:5 secs if he didn't shut it down with 20 to 25 meters to go.
    I'm sorry, but I missed the scientific study. Do you have a link? Does it contrast with evidence from this link?

    http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09 ... right.html
    The most damning part of that "scientific analysis", and exposed in Epelle's link, was their assumption that Bolt would have continued to speed up to the end of the race. Very very sloppy work, actually, it's embarrassing that they call themselves scientists.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Henry
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Let's get to 9.68 first, shall we, Usain? :roll:
    I like that he's confident, and I especially like that he's calling himself out in what could be an off-year (year after the OG is traditionally down), but 9.4x? If and only if he worked very, very hard for 3 more years, could he have a shot at that in the lead-up to London, but that's still a tall order, even for the GOAT-to-be of the 100.
    This coming from the guy predicting 9.7 for DIX. :roll:
    9.7x, to be precise, and yes, I still think it'll happen . . . we'll see.

    We should bookmark this and come back to it at the end of the summer. But . . . if his management problems persist and he CAN'T run in the $$$ meets, all bets are off.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Henry
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Let's get to 9.68 first, shall we, Usain? :roll:

    I like that he's confident, and I especially like that he's calling himself out in what could be an off-year (year after the OG is traditionally down), but 9.4x? If and only if he worked very, very hard for 3 more years, could he have a shot at that in the lead-up to London, but that's still a tall order, even for the GOAT-to-be of the 100.
    This coming from the guy predicting 9.7 for DIX. :roll:

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    Originally posted by Sportsfanx1
    It's also, scientifically proven that he would've ran mid 9:5 secs if he didn't shut it down with 20 to 25 meters to go.
    I'm sorry, but I missed the scientific study. Do you have a link? Does it contrast with evidence from this link?

    http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09 ... right.html

    Where in this race are you going to find 0.14 seconds to help Bolt run 9.55 seconds?

    Answer, you can't find that time at the end of the race. Unless you assume that Bolt is going to run a 0.79 second 10m interval somewhere in the race. But that, I'm afraid, is not possible, and therefore, you cannot conclude that he would have run 9.55 seconds without celebrating.
    The author does offer support of a 9,56 with an ideal start, a legal aiding wind (+1,0 m/s) and minus the celebration. However, you're pointing to something which, in that particular race, sans two of the three aforementioned, would not have been possible.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X