Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anyone know the splits on Oregon's 9:27.02 DMR win?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Anyone know the splits on Oregon's 9:27.02 DMR win?

    Just curious re: the splits...

  • #2
    I saw them on Twitter.
    I remember Cheserek led off with 2:52.9.
    Eric Jenkins anchored 1600 in 3:56+.
    The other two I cant remember.

    Comment


    • #3
      Unofficial splits via flotrack:

      Edward Cheserek: 2:52.79
      Marcus Chambers: 46.80
      Johnny Gregorek: 1:50.64
      Eric Jenkins: 3:56.78

      Comment


      • #4
        which, as so often happens with "modern" timing systems, don't add up properly

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gh View Post
          which, as so often happens with "modern" timing systems, don't add up properly
          If the differential was 0.04 or so, this comment would make sense, when the total is 9.27.01 the remark seems at a minimum 'besides' the point. If you were rounding up all of your 0.0xy marks to 0.0x+1 (like you should), your splits should added to 0.01 to 0.02 more than the aggregate time, and it is 'exactly' right. If rounded to the nearest digit, you can get the same expected value, with a +/- range; if you round up you are adding 0.0045 on average and should get, 0.018 - 0.0045 (the average amount that the final time is rounded up), or about 0.0135 seconds more for individual, 'rounded-up' splits.

          Comment


          • #6
            In the track statistician's world, splits add, period.

            No averages, no +/- range, no rounding. That's just not the way it's done.

            The 4 increments, to whatever decimal place you're using (10ths for hand, 100ths for auto) add to what the final time is.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ATK View Post
              Unofficial splits via flotrack:

              Edward Cheserek: 2:52.79
              Marcus Chambers: 46.80
              Johnny Gregorek: 1:50.64
              Eric Jenkins: 3:56.78
              Thanks ATK.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by gh View Post
                In the track statistician's world, splits add, period.
                No averages, no +/- range, no rounding. That's just not the way it's done.
                The 4 increments, to whatever decimal place you're using (10ths for hand, 100ths for auto) add to what the final time is.
                And yet you accept hand timed splits.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bruce Kritzler View Post
                  And yet you accept hand timed splits.
                  If hand timed splits are the best available, of course we "accept" them.

                  Which leads to a question I have . . . Is there a standard when recording a split? Does the time for the 2nd leg begin when the leadoff runner's torso passes the line? Or when the baton passes the line? Since I ran distances in the hand timed era, it never made much of a difference in the 4x880 or 4 x mile.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by gh View Post
                    In the track statistician's world, splits add, period.

                    No averages, no +/- range, no rounding. That's just not the way it's done.

                    The 4 increments, to whatever decimal place you're using (10ths for hand, 100ths for auto) add to what the final time is.
                    Well, sort of, but when they are within a certain tight range, you can only make them 'add up' in some instances by arbitrarily adjusting the 'best' number for each split. That is not a sign of purity of profession, it is a compromise hiding as precision. I do not like that form of "precision"; I would like to see them add correctly only when they actually do, and would prefer them to be off by 0.01 when that is really the more correct value.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X