Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bolt Bejing 100M 10M Splits ...

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Bolt Bejing 100M 10M Splits ...

    Anyone else notice the 10M split breakout in the Globe article on Usain's Beijng 100M run? Well we know he could have posted a faster time. But this kind of shows how much faster. Link and 10m splits below.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/u ... le1172162/

    Bolt - Beijing 10M Splits

    1.85
    1.02
    0.91
    0.87
    0.85
    0.82
    0.82
    0.82
    0.83
    0.90


    -----------------
    The social news site for T&F fans:
    http://runzoom.com
    The Social News Site For T&F - http://runzoom.com

  • #2
    A little different from the ones listed here:
    http://mb.trackandfieldnews.com/discuss ... hp?t=33003


    TFN link then Globe
    1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85
    1.00 2.85 1.02 2.87
    0.94 3.79 0.91 3.78
    0.86 4.65 0.87 4.65
    0.82 5.47 0.85 5.50
    0.82 6.29 0.82 6.32
    0.83 7.12 0.82 7.14
    0.84 7.96 0.82 7.96
    0.86 8.82 0.83 8.79
    0.87 9.69 0.90 9.69

    I'm thinking that our friends to the north are trying to drum up business.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bolt Bejing 100M 10M Splits ...

      Originally posted by Cojo
      Anyone else notice the 10M split breakout in the Globe article on Usain's Beijng 100M run? Well we know he could have posted a faster time. But this kind of shows how much faster. Link and 10m splits below.

      http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/u ... le1172162/

      Bolt - Beijing 10M Splits

      1.85
      1.02
      0.91
      0.87
      0.85
      0.82
      0.82
      0.82
      0.83
      0.90


      -----------------
      The social news site for T&F fans:
      http://runzoom.com
      From the list given, in the article, if you take the best 10m splits of each runner it adds up to 9.58 so Bolts improvement would not have been greater than .10 and if he performed the best 10m splits for all of the 100m race he would have not done better than 9.58. Throw in a tailwind and I suspect the best he will ever do is no greater thatn 9.60 and if perfect 9.50-58. Of course this is absent any improvemnent, altitude, and is without AP's 9.72 splits. UB had, I believe, one of the best starts and 60m splits ever to boot. I do not see him going below 9.60 very easily if at all. IMHO.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bolt Bejing 100M 10M Splits ...

        Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
        Originally posted by Cojo
        Anyone else notice the 10M split breakout in the Globe article on Usain's Beijng 100M run? Well we know he could have posted a faster time. But this kind of shows how much faster. Link and 10m splits below.

        http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/u ... le1172162/

        Bolt - Beijing 10M Splits

        1.85
        1.02
        0.91
        0.87
        0.85
        0.82
        0.82
        0.82
        0.83
        0.90


        -----------------
        The social news site for T&F fans:
        http://runzoom.com
        From the list given, in the article, if you take the best 10m splits of each runner it adds up to 9.58 so Bolts improvement would not have been greater than .10 and if he performed the best 10m splits for all of the 100m race he would have not done better than 9.58. Throw in a tailwind and I suspect the best he will ever do is no greater thatn 9.60 and if perfect 9.50-58. Of course this is absent any improvemnent, altitude, and is without AP's 9.72 splits. UB had, I believe, one of the best starts and 60m splits ever to boot. I do not see him going below 9.60 very easily if at all. IMHO.

        What???

        Ok, suppose as a suuuuuuuuper conservative estimate, suppose he would have run a 9.65 instead of a 9.69 if he ran to the tape, so only lost .04 with all his running sideways and leaning backwards through the tape.

        if he ran 9.65-basic, it would have meant that if he had a tailwind of anything over 1.2m/s he would have been sub 9.60

        So basically, you are saying you don't think it would ever happen that he gets a tailwind of 1.3m/s, or 1.4m/s, or 1.5m/s, or 1.6m/s, or 1.7m/s, or 1.8m/s, or 1.9m/s, or 2.0m/s

        Sounds like you might want to rethink that whole not going under 9.60 thing man...

        Comment


        • #5
          First, the whole point of those numbers was to show that he did not lose that much by his antics so it is not conservative to say he lost .04.

          1.85 / 1.02 / 0.91 / 0.87 / 0.85 / 0.82 / 0.82 / 0.82 / 0.83 / 0.90

          Do you really think he would have been able to maintain .83 through the last 100m? If so he would have only gained at max .07. Looking at the other great times and their splits suggest that maintaing the last 10m at the same pace as their 50m - 90m is rare and never faster. So .04 is just right not conservative and if we give him the .07 that is only 9.62 throw in a little tailwind and yes I said the best was 9.58. Seeing that UB had the best 60m ever recorded and the 2nd best (from the list) 1st 10m it would be unlikely that he would better that start or the first 60m - he may repeat it but that does not help him in bettering his WR. His improvent in that race would only come from maintaing that pace for the last 40m, which as noted would only gain him .07 = 9.62.

          Second, I did not say NEVER , but I SUSPECT and BELIEVE that it would be not VERY EASILY DONE. So he would have to have his pefect race with a tailwind which is why I said this - but notice I did say that His pefect race and conditions would yield between 9.50 -9.60.

          This is quit different than all the hype your giving him like he gonna run 9.4 or some stuff like that. Also please read carefully my post before misrepresenting my thouhts.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
            First, the whole point of those numbers was to show that he did not lose that much by his antics so it is not conservative to say he lost .04.

            1.85 / 1.02 / 0.91 / 0.87 / 0.85 / 0.82 / 0.82 / 0.82 / 0.83 / 0.90

            Do you really think he would have been able to maintain .83 through the last 100m? If so he would have only gained at max .07. Looking at the other great times and their splits suggest that maintaing the last 10m at the same pace as their 50m - 90m is rare and never faster. So .04 is just right not conservative and if we give him the .07 that is only 9.62 throw in a little tailwind and yes I said the best was 9.58. Seeing that UB had the best 60m ever recorded and the 2nd best (from the list) 1st 10m it would be unlikely that he would better that start or the first 60m - he may repeat it but that does not help him in bettering his WR. His improvent in that race would only come from maintaing that pace for the last 40m, which as noted would only gain him .07 = 9.62.

            Second, I did not say NEVER , but I SUSPECT and BELIEVE that it would be not VERY EASILY DONE. So he would have to have his pefect race with a tailwind which is why I said this - but notice I did say that His pefect race and conditions would yield between 9.50 -9.60.

            This is quit different than all the hype your giving him like he gonna run 9.4 or some stuff like that. Also please read carefully my post before misrepresenting my thouhts.

            Have to disagree with your analysis when I look at the numbers for Powell and Green in the article I see where their final 10M was between .01 and .02 off their top speed. So Usain goofing around the last 15-20m definitely cost him. Looking at the numbers for the other sprinters it would not have been out of the question for him to maintain 0.83 through the finish which was .01 off his top speed.

            -----------------
            The social news site for T&F fans:
            http://runzoom.com
            The Social News Site For T&F - http://runzoom.com

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cojo
              Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
              First, the whole point of those numbers was to show that he did not lose that much by his antics so it is not conservative to say he lost .04.

              1.85 / 1.02 / 0.91 / 0.87 / 0.85 / 0.82 / 0.82 / 0.82 / 0.83 / 0.90

              Do you really think he would have been able to maintain .83 through the last 100m? If so he would have only gained at max .07. Looking at the other great times and their splits suggest that maintaing the last 10m at the same pace as their 50m - 90m is rare and never faster. So .04 is just right not conservative and if we give him the .07 that is only 9.62 throw in a little tailwind and yes I said the best was 9.58. Seeing that UB had the best 60m ever recorded and the 2nd best (from the list) 1st 10m it would be unlikely that he would better that start or the first 60m - he may repeat it but that does not help him in bettering his WR. His improvent in that race would only come from maintaing that pace for the last 40m, which as noted would only gain him .07 = 9.62.

              Second, I did not say NEVER , but I SUSPECT and BELIEVE that it would be not VERY EASILY DONE. So he would have to have his pefect race with a tailwind which is why I said this - but notice I did say that His pefect race and conditions would yield between 9.50 -9.60.

              This is quit different than all the hype your giving him like he gonna run 9.4 or some stuff like that. Also please read carefully my post before misrepresenting my thouhts.

              Have to disagree with your analysis when I look at the numbers for Powell and Green in the article I see where their final 10M was between .01 and .02 off their top speed. So Usain goofing around the last 15-20m definitely cost him. Looking at the numbers for the other sprinters it would not have been out of the question for him to maintain 0.83 through the finish which was .01 off his top speed.

              -----------------
              The social news site for T&F fans:
              http://runzoom.com
              Yes I noticed that to but that was only two of the guys not the norm and I also said that if he was able to maintain he would be .07 better which is not under 9.60 and far from anything in the low 9.5s or below which some on here are suggesting would be what he is capable of doing - I do not see that yet even with the great start, no pounding chest, and a slight tailwind.

              Comment


              • #8
                What about Lausanne?

                In that race, he ran a 9.77 into a 1.3m/s headwind on a cold rainy wet track off a 0.22 second reaction time.

                Now, the best reaction time Bolt has ever had in a race so far is 0.12 seconds, though he typically average more like .16 or .17.

                Anyway, so let's see what Bolt's time would have been in Lausann in perfect conditions, meaning, .12 reaction, and 2.0m/s tailwind, shall we?:

                .12 reaction time is .1 seconds faster than what his actual reaction time was in that race of .22 seconds (by the way, that .22 RT might have been his very worst RT ever lol)

                Okay so just that alone gives him a whole tenth, so he's down from 9.77 to 9.67 right there, just from that.

                But, that's a 9.67 into a 1.3m/s HEADWIND.

                We wanted to see how fast the time would be with a 2.0m/s tailwind, not a 1.3m/s headwind.

                When we convert the 1.3m/s headwind to a 2.0 tailwind, it brings the 9.67 down to 9.50. No that's not a typo. Nine point five zero.


                THAT, my friend, technically, is what Bolt was capable of last season in the 100 meters if he had optimal conditions. Although, we never took into account the fact that it was cold and rainy with him running that on a soaking wet track. Take that into account, and that 9.50 would probably dip down a little into the nausiatingly fast 9.4's. And there you have it. Bolt, last season, in perfect conditions, could have run 9.4x.

                Of course, perfect conditions like that don't usually even happen once in an athlete's entire career, let alone in a single season, so in reality he will get good, but not perfect conditions at some point, and run deep into the 9.5's, but not into the 9.4's unless he just plain straight up gets even faster, as a runner.

                But limiting him to 9.60 is absurd, considering in prefect conditions we already know he was capable of a high 9.4, based off his Laussane race.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by The Atheist
                  Anyway, so let's see what Bolt's time would have been in Lausann in perfect conditions, meaning, .12 reaction, and 2.0m/s tailwind, shall we?:
                  Wouldn't a perfect condition race entail 0,10/+2,0, dvs maximise all allowances in the race?

                  Again, as left unanswered previously, I think you'll find that Bolt is actually closer to 0,18 than 0,16 on his RT. 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.

                  So, as "perfect conditions like that don't usually even happen once in an athlete's entire career, let alone in a single season," in reality, "he will get good, but not perfect conditions at some point." Good conditions for Bolt would be in the neighbourhood of 0,177s - a reaction time with which he is accustomed to jumping from the blocks. Anything faster (0,157) would be in the neighbourhood of great (nearer perfection) and anything less would be less optimal.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by EPelle
                    Originally posted by The Atheist
                    Anyway, so let's see what Bolt's time would have been in Lausann in perfect conditions, meaning, .12 reaction, and 2.0m/s tailwind, shall we?:
                    Wouldn't a perfect condition race entail 0,10/+2,0, dvs maximise all allowances in the race?

                    Again, as left unanswered previously, I think you'll find that Bolt is actually closer to 0,18 than 0,16 on his RT. 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.

                    So, as "perfect conditions like that don't usually even happen once in an athlete's entire career, let alone in a single season," in reality, "he will get good, but not perfect conditions at some point." Good conditions for Bolt would be in the neighbourhood of 0,177s - a reaction time with which he is accustomed to jumping from the blocks. Anything faster (0,157) would be in the neighbourhood of great (nearer perfection) and anything less would be less optimal.
                    Back when I was at trackshark, some guy fished out a race where Bolt had a .12 RT, but I don't remember what race (must have been earlier in his career).

                    The reason I didn't put .10 as his "perfect conditions" RT is that you can only put the best they have ever done, since, as far as you know, they might literally not be physically capable of reacting any faster than whatever their fastest RT ever was. So, you can only use the best acheived to date ever, which in his case is .12

                    Also, I think its true his avg RT, at least these days looks to average around .17, not .16 probly.

                    Anyway, still, I think my analysis of him being capable of a high 9.4 in perfect conditions was solid, as was my analysis that these perfect conditions would most likely NEVER happen for him, so in reality a mid or high 9.5 would be a lot more likely to occur in the near future than a high 9.4. Unless of course, he just genuinely gets faster at running, which is always a possibility.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by The Atheist
                      What about Lausanne?

                      In that race, he ran a 9.77 into a 1.3m/s headwind on a cold rainy wet track off a 0.22 second reaction time.

                      Now, the best reaction time Bolt has ever had in a race so far is 0.12 seconds, though he typically average more like .16 or .17.

                      Anyway, so let's see what Bolt's time would have been in Lausann in perfect conditions, meaning, .12 reaction, and 2.0m/s tailwind, shall we?:

                      .12 reaction time is .1 seconds faster than what his actual reaction time was in that race of .22 seconds (by the way, that .22 RT might have been his very worst RT ever lol)

                      Okay so just that alone gives him a whole tenth, so he's down from 9.77 to 9.67 right there, just from that.

                      But, that's a 9.67 into a 1.3m/s HEADWIND.

                      We wanted to see how fast the time would be with a 2.0m/s tailwind, not a 1.3m/s headwind.

                      When we convert the 1.3m/s headwind to a 2.0 tailwind, it brings the 9.67 down to 9.50. No that's not a typo. Nine point five zero.


                      THAT, my friend, technically, is what Bolt was capable of last season in the 100 meters if he had optimal conditions. Although, we never took into account the fact that it was cold and rainy with him running that on a soaking wet track. Take that into account, and that 9.50 would probably dip down a little into the nausiatingly fast 9.4's. And there you have it. Bolt, last season, in perfect conditions, could have run 9.4x.

                      Of course, perfect conditions like that don't usually even happen once in an athlete's entire career, let alone in a single season, so in reality he will get good, but not perfect conditions at some point, and run deep into the 9.5's, but not into the 9.4's unless he just plain straight up gets even faster, as a runner.

                      But limiting him to 9.60 is absurd, considering in prefect conditions we already know he was capable of a high 9.4, based off his Laussane race.
                      I think you just proved my point. The max I gave him in PEFECT conditios and perfect race was 9.50 - go read my first post. Since having a perfect race and conditions is so rare this is why I said VERY UNLIKLY he would do it hence 9.58 if he could run the same race and maintain his speed through the line with a slight tailwind. I am talking about what he is likely able and going to do with normal conditions not PERFECT. Furhtermore the 10m splits were pointed out to diminish the hyperbole - as noted he would have gained only .07 not some magical OH MY GOD LOOK HE SLOWED DOWN 20M BEFORE THE LINE HE COULD HAVE RAN LIKE 9.4ISH crap. Also as pointed out a .12 reaction time would be highly unlikely from him or anyone. Although he is close to being SUPRMAN

                      I do not know what you meant by 'We wanted to see what the time would be w/ a 2.0mps tailwind.' I was not interested in that but the 10m splits and the potential if he maintained his speed through the line. Seeing that he ran a nearly perfecr race up till his antics I do not see him getting to 9.4s.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        [quote=proofs in the pudd'in]
                        Originally posted by "The Atheist":1smlsz47
                        What about Lausanne?

                        In that race, he ran a 9.77 into a 1.3m/s headwind on a cold rainy wet track off a 0.22 second reaction time.

                        Now, the best reaction time Bolt has ever had in a race so far is 0.12 seconds, though he typically average more like .16 or .17.

                        Anyway, so let's see what Bolt's time would have been in Lausann in perfect conditions, meaning, .12 reaction, and 2.0m/s tailwind, shall we?:

                        .12 reaction time is .1 seconds faster than what his actual reaction time was in that race of .22 seconds (by the way, that .22 RT might have been his very worst RT ever lol)

                        Okay so just that alone gives him a whole tenth, so he's down from 9.77 to 9.67 right there, just from that.

                        But, that's a 9.67 into a 1.3m/s HEADWIND.

                        We wanted to see how fast the time would be with a 2.0m/s tailwind, not a 1.3m/s headwind.

                        When we convert the 1.3m/s headwind to a 2.0 tailwind, it brings the 9.67 down to 9.50. No that's not a typo. Nine point five zero.


                        THAT, my friend, technically, is what Bolt was capable of last season in the 100 meters if he had optimal conditions. Although, we never took into account the fact that it was cold and rainy with him running that on a soaking wet track. Take that into account, and that 9.50 would probably dip down a little into the nausiatingly fast 9.4's. And there you have it. Bolt, last season, in perfect conditions, could have run 9.4x.

                        Of course, perfect conditions like that don't usually even happen once in an athlete's entire career, let alone in a single season, so in reality he will get good, but not perfect conditions at some point, and run deep into the 9.5's, but not into the 9.4's unless he just plain straight up gets even faster, as a runner.

                        But limiting him to 9.60 is absurd, considering in prefect conditions we already know he was capable of a high 9.4, based off his Laussane race.
                        I think you just proved my point. The max I gave him in PEFECT conditios and perfect race was 9.50 - go read my first post. Since having a perfect race and conditions is so rare this is why I said VERY UNLIKLY he would do it hence 9.58 if he could run the same race and maintain his speed through the line with a slight tailwind. I am talking about what he is likely able and going to do with normal conditions not PERFECT. Furhtermore the 10m splits were pointed out to diminish the hyperbole - as noted he would have gained only .07 not some magical OH MY GOD LOOK HE SLOWED DOWN 20M BEFORE THE LINE HE COULD HAVE RAN LIKE 9.4ISH crap. Also as pointed out a .12 reaction time would be highly unlikely from him or anyone. Although he is close to being SUPRMAN

                        I do not know what you meant by 'We wanted to see what the time would be w/ a 2.0mps tailwind.' I was not interested in that but the 10m splits and the potential if he maintained his speed through the line. Seeing that he ran a nearly perfecr race up till his antics I do not see him getting to 9.4s.[/quote:1smlsz47]

                        The purpose of all that was to mathematically figure out what Bolt could have run last season if he had gotten perfect conditions.

                        And we did figure it out. In cold rainy weather on a soaking wet track, he would be capable of exactly a 9.50 with a .12 reaction time and a 2.0 meter per second tailwind. If the track was dry and the weather was warm, it's likely to be a high 9.4, instead of 9.50.

                        So, that showed he was capable of running 9.4x last season if he got optimal conditions. It's always good to know what someone could do in perfect donitions.

                        However, with a tailwind of anywhere between 1 and 2 meters per second, and a mediocre .17 reaction time, he is still going to be going under 9.60. Which is why I don't understand why you said it would be very difficult for him to go sub 9.60. I mean, that's almost certainly going to happen... and on multiple occasions.

                        Going sub 9.60 shouldn't be very difficult for Bolt. Going sub 9.50 should be a lot tougher though, if he doesn't get any faster.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I thought the purpose of the thread was to use the 10m splits to see how much faster he would have ran in his WR run.

                          I disagree with the .12 reaction time - very unlikely and that with a +2.0mps - even more unlikely. I am not sure but anything below .11 is considered a false start - I maybe wrong on that.

                          Bolt ran the fastest 60m ever in that WR run so I do not see him improving that by much at all. The last 10m is where he can reduce the time - and as noted if he maintained it would only be .07. That gives us 9.62. This with a slight tailwind would get below 9.60 and that is what I said in giving him a 9.58. Anything below that is in the realm of peferct which I thought unlikely and too speculative but I gave him the max just in case at 9.50.

                          All mine opinions were never absolute in my mind nor in the posts so I do not know why your so adamant. I even said the factors of improvment and altitude were not considered in my analysis.

                          I think that race could have been no better than a 9.58 w/ a slight tailwind and I think he will never get below 9.50. That is just the way I see it - I do hope I am wrong - It would be a delight.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Looking at this calculator http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/wind/index.html 9.50 would be the max - damn I good.

                            9.69 at 0.0 wind

                            minus .07 for maintaing through the line = 9.62

                            minus .09 for a +2.0mps = 9.53

                            minus .03 for a 999m altitude = 9.50

                            And we know that aint goin to happen. Let say he gets the best 10m splits for every 10m of the 100m race he would still start out at 9.58, minus .09 (wind) = 9.51, minus .03 (altitude) = 9.49 and thats if all his stars lined up (The best damn splits ever, 2.0 wind, and 999m altitude). This is exactly why he aint gona do it in my book.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
                              Looking at this calculator http://myweb.lmu.edu/jmureika/track/wind/index.html 9.50 would be the max - damn I good.

                              9.69 at 0.0 wind

                              minus .07 for maintaing through the line = 9.62

                              minus .09 for a +2.0mps = 9.53

                              minus .03 for a 999m altitude = 9.50

                              And we know that aint goin to happen. Let say he gets the best 10m splits for every 10m of the 100m race he would still start out at 9.58, minus .09 (wind) = 9.51, minus .03 (altitude) = 9.49 and thats if all his stars lined up (The best damn splits ever, 2.0 wind, and 999m altitude). This is exactly why he aint gona do it in my book.
                              His reaction time in Beijing was actually .16

                              The fastest reaction he's had ever in his whole career is .12

                              Meaning, I guess technically with everything perfect he could have gone 9.46.


                              The fastest he coulda gone in Beijing though woulda been about 9.49, since beijing obv doesn't have a 999m altitude.

                              Anyway, I still personally think .07 is a bit much to give him for not running to the tape. I think it was probably .05. So really all things perfect he goes 9.51 in Beijing, and 9.50 in Laussanne (though in reality more like 9.49 or 9.48 in Laussanne cuz he ran that race in the cold on a soaked track which slowed him a little).

                              Personally I consider his Laussanne race to be his best 100m performance so far. Not his Beijing race.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X