Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2009 Reebok GP: M-400m [Merritt 44,75]

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • The Atheist
    replied
    Originally posted by trackdug
    Originally posted by The Atheist
    They are not close in the 200m, trackdug.

    Merritt's 20.07 was about the fastest 20.07 humanly possible. He was running it into a headwind, and he got out slow, and he shut down before the tape.

    As far as I'm concerned, Merritt is a good HALF SECOND faster than Wariner in the 200m, which is not "close."

    That said, I think Wariner might beat Merritt in the 400m, if Merritt keeps goofing around like this, even though he's not as fast at the 200. It's not a 200m race. It's a 400m race. And Wariner is good at running the 400.
    WTF??
    I'm saying, it would be nearly impssoble for Merritt to have run much slower of a time than he did in his 200m run in Carson. Go watch a youtube video of his race, and you'll see what I mean. With even halfway optimal scenario, Merritt would have run sub 19.9 in that race, and with perfect everything, he probably would've been sub 19.80.

    Leave a comment:


  • trackdug
    replied
    Originally posted by The Atheist
    They are not close in the 200m, trackdug.

    Merritt's 20.07 was about the fastest 20.07 humanly possible. He was running it into a headwind, and he got out slow, and he shut down before the tape.

    As far as I'm concerned, Merritt is a good HALF SECOND faster than Wariner in the 200m, which is not "close."

    That said, I think Wariner might beat Merritt in the 400m, if Merritt keeps goofing around like this, even though he's not as fast at the 200. It's not a 200m race. It's a 400m race. And Wariner is good at running the 400.
    WTF??

    Leave a comment:


  • scratchman
    replied
    Originally posted by trackdug
    What's interesting (to this point) is that Merritt and Wariner are pretty close in both races.

    Merritt: 200m - 20.07 / 400m - 44.50
    Wariner: 200m - 20.30 / 400m - 44.66

    Their first race against each other should be pretty fun to watch.
    Indeed.
    I think JW will do much better.
    Not saying he'll win, but better.
    I always said it'll take somebody with sub 20 speed to beat him- and thats what happened (loving when I'm right). But he's gotta work to keep that up. JW's hungry again. Merritt will need to beat him the first meeting and not let him get confident. Damn I wish Xman would focus on the 400. He "used" to be faster than Merritt and JW in the 200. If he ever gets that back...... :shock:

    Leave a comment:


  • The Atheist
    replied
    They are not close in the 200m, trackdug.

    Merritt's 20.07 was about the fastest 20.07 humanly possible. He was running it into a headwind, and he got out slow, and he shut down before the tape.

    As far as I'm concerned, Merritt is a good HALF SECOND faster than Wariner in the 200m, which is not "close."

    That said, I think Wariner might beat Merritt in the 400m, if Merritt keeps goofing around like this, even though he's not as fast at the 200. It's not a 200m race. It's a 400m race. And Wariner is good at running the 400.

    Leave a comment:


  • trackdug
    replied
    What's interesting (to this point) is that Merritt and Wariner are pretty close in both races.

    Merritt: 200m - 20.07 / 400m - 44.50
    Wariner: 200m - 20.30 / 400m - 44.66

    Their first race against each other should be pretty fun to watch.

    Leave a comment:


  • 502CD
    replied
    Originally posted by trackdug
    Originally posted by 502CD
    Originally posted by trackdug
    If the wind was so strong down the back straight, why did the women's 1500, 5000, 400 & 800m all produce the fastest times in the world this year? Face it, his time was pretty mediocre for this point in the year. JW beat Quow by .4 a couple of weeks ago and Merritt only beat him by .14 in this race.
    That doesn't mean anything at this point.
    Keep convincing yourself of that. Merritt had run MUCH faster at this point last year.
    Again, that doesn't mean anything at this point. His SB is faster than JW's and that doesn't mean anything at this point either. It's May, granted its the end of May but it's still May.

    Leave a comment:


  • trackdug
    replied
    Originally posted by 502CD
    Originally posted by trackdug
    If the wind was so strong down the back straight, why did the women's 1500, 5000, 400 & 800m all produce the fastest times in the world this year? Face it, his time was pretty mediocre for this point in the year. JW beat Quow by .4 a couple of weeks ago and Merritt only beat him by .14 in this race.
    That doesn't mean anything at this point.
    Keep convincing yourself of that. Merritt had run MUCH faster at this point last year.

    Leave a comment:


  • 502CD
    replied
    Originally posted by trackdug
    If the wind was so strong down the back straight, why did the women's 1500, 5000, 400 & 800m all produce the fastest times in the world this year? Face it, his time was pretty mediocre for this point in the year. JW beat Quow by .4 a couple of weeks ago and Merritt only beat him by .14 in this race.
    That doesn't mean anything at this point.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Atheist
    replied
    Originally posted by AthleticsInBritain
    How does anyone go from 20.07 in the 200m one week, to sluggish the next? OK, viruses, etc, but I've not heard of anything like that. I think he just took it easy in the first 200m because of the headwind in the back straight? The time is a bit slower than you'd expect though.
    SWINE FLUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    EVERYBODY RUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!

    ::runs aimlessly around bedroom, bouncing off bookshelves and walls until finally collapsing unconscious to the ground::

    Leave a comment:


  • trackdug
    replied
    If the wind was so strong down the back straight, why did the women's 1500, 5000, 400 & 800m all produce the fastest times in the world this year? Face it, his time was pretty mediocre for this point in the year. JW beat Quow by .4 a couple of weeks ago and Merritt only beat him by .14 in this race.

    Leave a comment:


  • lilwayne1814
    replied
    MERRITT was just fine. He said the wind on the backstretch was very strong (hence his first 2) and he was in control down the straight. He had the race in hand and no reason to press.

    Leave a comment:


  • gm
    replied
    Tough crowd...

    Leave a comment:


  • AthleticsInBritain
    replied
    How does anyone go from 20.07 in the 200m one week, to sluggish the next? OK, viruses, etc, but I've not heard of anything like that. I think he just took it easy in the first 200m because of the headwind in the back straight? The time is a bit slower than you'd expect though.

    Leave a comment:


  • einnod23
    replied
    He looked "floppy" the first 200.

    Leave a comment:


  • trackdug
    replied
    He didn't look easy at all...he looked slow over the first 200 and struggled down the homestretch

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X