Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • ATK
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by Conor Dary
    Originally posted by ATK
    In the Race you can actually see Gay dipped his head down at about 95m, so by the time the line came up he was already easying up which would explain him "leaning backwards".

    In Berlin he did the same thing where he basically eased up the last 5m and "leaned backwards".
    If you are accelerating you are going to lean forward. If you are decelerating you are going to lean backwards. That is physics.
    Yea that's the point. It wasn't him not leaning which cost him a possible bronze, it was him easing up before the race was over.

    Also I'm pretty sure everyone is decelerating at the end of the 100m.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by ATK
    In the Race you can actually see Gay dipped his head down at about 95m, so by the time the line came up he was already easying up which would explain him "leaning backwards".

    In Berlin he did the same thing where he basically eased up the last 5m and "leaned backwards".
    If you are accelerating you are going to lean forward. If you are decelerating you are going to lean backwards. That is physics.

    Leave a comment:


  • ATK
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    In the Race you can actually see Gay dipped his head down at about 95m, so by the time the line came up he was already easying up which would explain him "leaning backwards".

    In Berlin he did the same thing where he basically eased up the last 5m and "leaned backwards".

    Leave a comment:


  • toyracer
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by tracknut2012
    Originally posted by toyracer
    Originally posted by tracknut2012
    It is very simple why Gay failed to medal in London.

    He had two Jamaicans and an American that were faster than him.
    It is even more simple than that.

    The man that beat him by 0.01s for third placed leaned forward while Gay leaned backward.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/8/7/3 ... n-Bolt.jpg
    Based on the Tyson's position, even if he leaned, Gatlin would still have gotten bronze based on the torso.
    I'm not so sure. The lean back was part of a slowing down process, which is definitely not characteristic of Gay. If he had given the last 5m his usual "eyeball out" effort I think he would have gotten Gatlin on the line. Unfortunately, he didn't and we will never know for sure.

    Leave a comment:


  • j-a-m
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by ATK
    Besides his 1992 sickness MJ was pretty much injury free from 1991 through 1996.
    Exactly; he was only injury prone in his first few years of college, not after that. In his book, MJ gives a lack of weight training as the reason, and talks about how he changed his training regimen prior to his senior season.

    Leave a comment:


  • ATK
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Besides his 1992 sickness MJ was pretty much injury free from 1991 through 1996.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    The guy was undefeated in the 400 from 1988, in the Trials, until 1997 in Paris.

    PS. The only times I ever saw MJ run the 400 in person.

    Leave a comment:


  • berkeley
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by Marlow
    I remember another guy, injury-prone, probably because he ran so dog-gone UPRIGHT, a bio-mechanical nightmare. Micheal somebody.
    Hmm - I don't remember MJ being that injury prone by the standards of world class sprinters. If anything, the reverse. He pulled up during the ill-advised 150m match race with Bailey in 1997, and was not back to full strength by the WC that year - but still won comfortably in an uncharacteristically slow 44.3. In every other championship year of his long career, he pretty much came out firing on all cylinders, and proceeded to win the global title(s) in a landslide. Oh, he was sick in 1992, but that was before he really reached his zenith. Maybe I'm forgetting one or two injuries ?

    On Gay, IIRC, he has always been a bit non-linear at the start. IMO, he got the best he possibly could out of himself in London (with the possible exception of the lack of a lean, which might have given him bronze). I think that's why his post-meet comments have been somewhat philosophical. He knows there's nothing more he could have done.

    Leave a comment:


  • tracknut2012
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by toyracer
    Originally posted by tracknut2012
    It is very simple why Gay failed to medal in London.

    He had two Jamaicans and an American that were faster than him.
    It is even more simple than that.

    The man that beat him by 0.01s for third placed leaned forward while Gay leaned backward.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/8/7/3 ... n-Bolt.jpg
    Based on the Tyson's position, even if he leaned, Gatlin would still have gotten bronze based on the torso.

    Leave a comment:


  • toyracer
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by tracknut2012
    It is very simple why Gay failed to medal in London.

    He had two Jamaicans and an American that were faster than him.
    It is even more simple than that.

    The man that beat him by 0.01s for third placed leaned forward while Gay leaned backward.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/8/7/3 ... n-Bolt.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • ATK
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Back in 2009 when Gay and Powell were constantly racing eachother pre Berlin, there are a couple of head on shots of them showing Powell having the "speed skater" start and Gay with a more straight, linear drive phase.

    Leave a comment:


  • bignate88
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by tracknut2012
    It is very simple why Gay failed to medal in London.

    He had two Jamaicans and an American that were faster than him.

    I can't wait for the post Olympic matchups that will further reinforce this. I believe Tyson's days of being #2 behind Bolt are over.
    You're absolutely right, and they also had a complete season of training behind em. Something we can't readily say about Gay this year
    And those post Olympics matchups you speak of may very well prove you right, but may very well prove you wrong. I think a 2013 season would be a fairer and better litmus test however.

    Leave a comment:


  • tracknut2012
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    It is very simple why Gay failed to medal in London.

    He had two Jamaicans and an American that were faster than him.

    I can't wait for the post Olympic matchups that will further reinforce this. I believe Tyson's days of being #2 behind Bolt are over.

    Leave a comment:


  • bignate88
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Originally posted by 26mi235
    Blake gained minimally on Gay on the leg with two elements to support that. First, the apparent gain is due (at least primarily) to the 3+meters differential in the length of the lane around the curve. Second, Bolt pulled away from Bailey by a substantial margin, and yet the Jamaicans won by only 0.20. For Blake to have massively beaten Gay, the first two legs would need to have been several tenths of a second slower and all accounts having them run pretty even and that is consistent with where Gay and Blake got the batons.
    Yeah that's why it's good to see the race from different angles and to have official splits. Otherwise, the parallax will have us seeing things that aren't the case

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Re: Why I think Gay failed to medal in London

    Blake gained minimally on Gay on the leg with two elements to support that. First, the apparent gain is due (at least primarily) to the 3+meters differential in the length of the lane around the curve. Second, Bolt pulled away from Bailey by a substantial margin, and yet the Jamaicans won by only 0.20. For Blake to have massively beaten Gay, the first two legs would need to have been several tenths of a second slower and all accounts having them run pretty even and that is consistent with where Gay and Blake got the batons.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X