Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bolt's 9.91 'WL'

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    Re: Bolt's 9.91 'WL'

    Originally posted by Marlow
    Interesting.

    Tilastopaja (and T&FN) recognizes Bolt's en route 100m time on his Manchester 'Road 150' as the World Leader. But IAAF does not.

    I assume there was no elev drop, and there was a wind gauge, so why am I having a prob with this? Rationally, I know I shouldn't, and yet . . .

    OK, there, I'm over it! Congrats to UB for the WL.

    What would the IAAF have to do to see it as a valid mark?
    Didn't I say this before, that his 100 split en route should be regarded as the WL? I thought it was 9.90. Whatever the case, as I said before, if the street was perfectly flat, it should be regarded in the same fashion as a race on a regular oval track.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Speedfirst
      I'm both flabbergasted and appalled, (I wanted to use both those words in one sentence) :lol: ....

      That this is even considered a time for the 100m, let me add I'm not appalled with Bolt. What's going to be next, if you have enough speed on your approach in the triple jump you can have a world leading time for 60m? :shock:
      No, because the TJer didn't take off from starting blocks with a gun going off.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by gh
        There were cameras at the 50, 100 and 150 points.

        Dual wind gauges were set up; one for the 100, one for the 150.

        Surface was good old Mondo, laid over decking, just like indoors.

        What's to question?
        Exactly my point when I first saw this race.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by terry_brooks35
          I don't see the arguement here.Bolts not the world leader in the hundred because he ran a 150, not a hundred.enroute please.why not say some one is the world leader in the hundred after you get a split for him while he's running a 200,or 400, 800 or whatever?Bolt will probably take the world lead on his next attempt, but even thats not promised considering his next hundred isn't his first of the season,and he didn't have the world leader after his first.as fast as bolt is he can't escape the elements no more than the next guy.
          That 100 split counts because it was a straightaway 100, just as it is on a regulation track. Furthermore, the construction of that straightaway follows regulations laid out for the average track, indoors or out.

          For races around a turn, if there's an automatic timer taking splits en route, and a record is broken en route (for instance, the 1,500 split in a mile race), that split will count.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by gh
            T&FN's "official resolution" is that it counts!
            Interesting way to put it, GH. I would count it even if it had been run raw, on the street itself. There are still tracks out there that are made of asphalt. So long as it was flat and there was no downward incline whatsoever, the race counts for world list purposes.

            Comment


            • #36
              I find it particularly amusing that so many people are up in arms over whether or not a mark far from Bolt's proven abilities should be accepted, with people wanting certificates of authentication beyond what you'd expect on some legal document, yet 99.9999999% of the time are perfectly willing to accept at face value every other mark they read about without having any idea what the conditions were like.

              Comment


              • #37
                Looking at these posts I now wonder if the 60m portion of 100m races should be ratified as 60m marks?

                Comment


                • #38
                  except the 60 is only ratified indoors and there aren't a lot of 100s undercover!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by CookyMonzta
                    Originally posted by Speedfirst
                    I'm both flabbergasted and appalled, (I wanted to use both those words in one sentence) :lol: ....

                    That this is even considered a time for the 100m, let me add I'm not appalled with Bolt. What's going to be next, if you have enough speed on your approach in the triple jump you can have a world leading time for 60m? :shock:
                    No, because the TJer didn't take off from starting blocks with a gun going off.
                    You don't need starting blocks as a prerequsite, you don't have to use starting blocks in any particular race, that's by choice. Now we can get the starter over to the runway, no problem.
                    on the road

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Speedfirst
                      You don't need starting blocks as a prerequsite, you don't have to use starting blocks in any particular race, that's by choice.
                      No it's not. In the sprints, the rules require that starting blocks be used.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by tandfman
                        Originally posted by Speedfirst
                        You don't need starting blocks as a prerequsite, you don't have to use starting blocks in any particular race, that's by choice.
                        No it's not. In the sprints, the rules require that starting blocks be used.
                        You're right about the blocks which certainly wasn't always the case, however that is only ruled by the IAAF.
                        on the road

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Speedfirst
                          however that is only ruled by the IAAF.
                          As opposed to?
                          Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by gh
                            people wanting certificates of authentication beyond what you'd expect on some legal document, yet 99.9999999% of the time are perfectly willing to accept at face value every other mark they read about without having any idea what the conditions were like.
                            I don't know who's 'up in arms' here. I just had a few questions that were answered to my satisfaction.
                            For competitions in a stadium of any note, we can be pretty sure the track is legal, can't we? And if wind speed is given, we know it's for the 100 meter straight. This race had such an unusual setup that some questions had to be asked.
                            Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              nothing wrong with your questions at all; i'm referring to those for whom the answers werent' good enough.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Powell
                                Originally posted by Speedfirst
                                however that is only ruled by the IAAF.
                                As opposed to?
                                Obviously in the vain of this thread, IAAF is the ruling body, but every organization does not fall under the IAAF. Again the rules for using blocks wasn't always in place, even under the IAAF.
                                on the road

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X