Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A far out look at the 100m

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • A far out look at the 100m

    http://condellpark.com/kd/sprintlogistic.htm - excerpts from this long piece below.

    An average sprinter is 5000 times lighter than a 747

    Bolt's 9.69 almost beat the 1999 predicted limit, and his 9.58 smashed it to pieces.

    even for Bolt, there is a limit to the maximum speed a human can reach (0.82 s per 10 meters or approx 44 km/hr)

    For the London Olympics in July 2012, athletes blood samples will be kept for 8 years to allow retrospective testing.

    The difficulty with a straight line fit is that it predicts that one day the 100m will be run in 0 seconds

    Some coaches have suggested that looking at the average times of the top ten runners might give a better representation of the trends.

    "for someone to run 10.03 one year and 9.69 the next, if you don't question that in a sport that has the reputation it has right now, you're a fool. Period."

    An ultimate limit of 9.37 sec is predicted by F. Péronnet and G. Thibault in``Mathematical analysis of running performance and world running records'', Journal of Applied Physiology,

    Biomechanist Gideon B. Ariel Ph.D may have hypothesized in the late '70's that .: 9.60 would be the limit of the human body mechanically, that to exert the forces and limb velocities necessary to exceed this would crack bones and pull tendon from connection points.

    What we found out when we looked at the 100 meter dash for men was that the average performance improvement was 0.01 second per year [~1% per decade] based on world championship and Olympic finals performances (average time of top 6 finalists) since 56 (corrected for wind and altitude). This improvement was linear and showed no sign of leveling off as of the end of the 20th century.

    "The human is not, from the point of view of construction, a particularly good thing to start with and be an athlete," Dr. Rooney said. "But the horse is born to be an athlete. And the more they learn about horse physiology, the more people begin to realize that this animal has evolved to a certain point and you can't change it very much."

    Will Hopkins commented on the paper in Scientific American
    . He noted that blood volume was more important than proportion of muscle-fiber type as a determinant of endurance performance. He was critical of the parallel the authors drew between detraining in previous sedentaries and tapering in elite sprinters. He was doubtful that turning on the expression of superfast Type IIb myosin in human muscles would lead to enhanced sprint performance, especially if top sprinters already have an optimum mix of Type IIa and IIx myosin.

  • #2
    Re: A far out look at the 100m

    Originally posted by gibson
    "for someone to run 10.03 one year and 9.69 the next, if you don't question that in a sport that has the reputation it has right now, you're a fool. Period."
    This goes under the heading of a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. Bolt's 19.9x as a junior was the quality of a 9.9x race. That he had not run numerous sub-10s by the point was because he was not racing any 100s at all. Maybe it should be pointed out that 10.03 was the slowest 100 race he had run in four years, which is similar to him over the last four years.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: A far out look at the 100m

      the author of the article obviously knows zero about the sport: another number-cruncher drawing all kinds of faulty conclusions in the belief that human beings can be somehow squeezed into numerical models.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: A far out look at the 100m

        Originally posted by 26mi235
        Originally posted by gibson
        "for someone to run 10.03 one year and 9.69 the next, if you don't question that in a sport that has the reputation it has right now, you're a fool. Period."
        This goes under the heading of a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. Bolt's 19.9x as a junior was the quality of a 9.9x race. That he had not run numerous sub-10s by the point was because he was not racing any 100s at all. Maybe it should be pointed out that 10.03 was the slowest 100 race he had run in four years, which is similar to him over the last four years.
        The author apparently didn't provide due credit to Carl Lewis for that statement.
        http://m.smh.com.au/olympics/athletics- ... 23yen.html

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: A far out look at the 100m

          Reminds me of that nonsense where women would soon be running the marathon faster than men.

          Lots of fancy colors on his site. Latin too. Though the mathematics are pretty sloppily written. The guy has definitely never heard of LaTeX.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: A far out look at the 100m

            An ultimate limit of 9.37 sec is predicted by F. Péronnet and G. Thibault in``Mathematical analysis of running performance and world running records'', Journal of Applied Physiology,
            Originally posted by gh
            the author of the article obviously knows zero about the sport: another number-cruncher drawing all kinds of faulty conclusions in the belief that human beings can be somehow squeezed into numerical models.
            Zackly. Here's my broken record: while there is indeed a limit to human speed, given the advances in genetics research, we are currently NOWHERE near the limit now. 8.xx seems impossible now, but it's not. Nor is 7.x. After that the human organism will have been transformed far from what it is today, but yes, even 5.x is out there in the dim Brave New World future . . . (Pego and Daisy notwithstanding! :wink: )

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: A far out look at the 100m

              A 5.00 100 meters? Zowie. Assuming 5 strides a second that means, including the start, each stride would have to be, on average, 4 meters long.

              Actually, with a stride that long the sprinter's maximum elevation above the ground would probably be high enough to enable our hero to go over a high hurdle without much trouble. So there goes the 110m HH record too.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: A far out look at the 100m

                Originally posted by Conor Dary
                A 5.00 100 meters? Zowie. Assuming 5 strides a second that means
                that you've mis-assumed something. You're thinking 21st century nervous system. :wink:

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: A far out look at the 100m

                  Originally posted by Marlow
                  Originally posted by Conor Dary
                  A 5.00 100 meters? Zowie. Assuming 5 strides a second that means
                  that you've mis-assumed something. You're thinking 21st century nervous system. :wink:
                  I think we drink enough coffee already.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: A far out look at the 100m

                    You ought to check out the time for the cheetah -- if you are well under that then it is not just genetics but things like Higgs giving only one-third effort...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: A far out look at the 100m

                      Originally posted by gh
                      the author of the article obviously knows zero about the sport: another number-cruncher drawing all kinds of faulty conclusions in the belief that human beings can be somehow squeezed into numerical models.
                      Well said.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: A far out look at the 100m

                        Originally posted by 26mi235
                        You ought to check out the time for the cheetah -- if you are well under that then it is not just genetics but things like Higgs giving only one-third effort...
                        Gentlemen, we can rebuild man. We will have the technology. We will have the capability to build the world's first sub-6 man. Someone will be that man. Better than man was before. Better, stronger, faster . . . the Six BILLION Dollar Man!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: A far out look at the 100m

                          Cheetahs are not close to 5.0, and we are not going back to the faster sprint mode of 4 legs....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: A far out look at the 100m

                            Originally posted by Marlow
                            Originally posted by 26mi235
                            You ought to check out the time for the cheetah -- if you are well under that then it is not just genetics but things like Higgs giving only one-third effort...
                            Gentlemen, we can rebuild man. We will have the technology. We will have the capability to build the world's first sub-6 man. Someone will be that man. Better than man was before. Better, stronger, faster . . . the Six BILLION Dollar Man!
                            :lol: :lol:

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: A far out look at the 100m

                              Originally posted by 26mi235
                              Cheetahs are not close to 5.0, and we are not going back to the faster sprint mode of 4 legs....
                              I recall seeing a cheetah run 5.12 on youtube one time. Legit timing if I recall correctly. And the cheetah didn't run in a straight line either, as it was chasing something and ran in a sort of zig zag pattern. Although now that I think of it it may not have been from a dead stop. I'll look in to it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X