Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fastest 100m on cinders

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #16
    Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

    >At some point,
    >when this company was getting out of the track
    >business, I recall trying to see if there was an
    >archive that would include this information, and
    >I was told that all of the relevant company
    >records had been thrown away. So we'll never
    >really know.

    When I read this I felt a physical wrench in my stomach, like art lovers describe when they see a picture destroyed, or when books are burned.

    Is is fair to say that we now have all the auto-time results from the 70s that we are ever likely to find? What with Bob Hersh, Jean-Claude Patinaud and Bob Sparks' research, I guess I should stop holding out hope that there are still 100m auto-times to be found.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

      Very interesting and informative on the relative "fastness" of cinders vs. synthetic for 100 meters. What about for the middle distance and distance events? Were there any indications that one or the other was faster? (And isn't it true that a track built fast for sprinting may not be the best for the longer events?)

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

        Hines' 10.03 is still the stadium record at Hughes Stadium.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

          Citing as an urban legend that synthetics are as fast as cinders jla uses as an example Ron Clarke's 27:49.4 (a recent trivia question!) on Crystal Palace's synthetic surface in 1968--which was indeed slower than his 1965 Oslo race. However, jla fails to point out that it was a very windy evening for that race and Clarke himself thought the effort was only worth 28:20 and thought synthetic tracks were much faster. (Ron Clrake Talks Track, p.47.)

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

            If unofficial 'retroactive' auto-timed WRs were recognized, does anyone know if the following were not FAT or otherwise unacceptable: 10.29 (1.4w)Peter Radford (age 18!), 9/13/58 Paris ; 10.32(?w) Jocelyn Delacour & Ray Norton, 8/58 Thonon-les-Bains,Fr.; and, once and for all, was the 10.38 for Tolan & Metcalfe,'32 OG, FAT or hand/electric?(also, Tolan's 10.53 in heat, and 21.12 in 200 final)

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

              I can't believe no one has pointed out that Hines ran 9.95, not 9.96 in Mexico City.


              Not that it's directly related to the subject, but still.........

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                "PS. Correction to previous posts by me: Hines "re-covered" Mexico-time was of course 9.95, not 9.96 as I erroneously wrote." -jla

                "I can't believe no one has pointed out that Hines ran 9.95, not 9.96 in Mexico City."

                Neither can I!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                  >If unofficial 'retroactive' auto-timed WRs were
                  >recognized, does anyone know if the following
                  >were not FAT or otherwise unacceptable: 10.29
                  >(1.4w)Peter Radford (age 18!), 9/13/58 Paris ;
                  >10.32(?w) Jocelyn Delacour & Ray Norton, 8/58
                  >Thonon-les-Bains,Fr.; and, once and for all, was
                  >the 10.38 for Tolan & Metcalfe,'32 OG, FAT or
                  >hand/electric?(also, Tolan's 10.53 in heat, and
                  >21.12 in 200 final)

                  The 9.95 was recognised as the inaugaural auto-timed WR; no preceeding auto-timed marks were given WR status. The hand timed progression just stopped and the auto timed progresion started. All the times you list were the fastest auto-time ever at the time they were run but were not officially recognised as auto-timed WRs in retrospect.

                  Radford's 10.29 is sometimes listed (eg by Patinaud) as 10.31. That aside, as far as I know all the above are legitimate fully-automatic times.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                    hi, sorry to enter the debate at this late date.....but.......exactly which copy of TFN did you read that showed the auto times from Sacramento. My TFN for 68 (vol21 no10)show differentials between placers but do not show 1st place time to 100ths!!!!
                    As far as i know only Patinaud published the auto
                    times from the 68 AAU and then only times up to 10.50 ! Did Patinaud or some other ATFS member see
                    the Bulova film of the 68 AAU and interpret the times and was it all published.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                      I notice one correction that needs to be made. This thread specifies "cinders". Many of the non-synthetic times metioned here were not run on cinders. Dirt tracks, sometimes called clay, were generally regarded as faster than cinders.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                        Bob Hayes also ran a wind aided 9.91 in the Tokyo semi. It was interresting to see that the AAU in '68 was on cinders/dirt. Besides Hines 10.03 (9.9) both C. Greene and R.R Smith ran fast times (10.10 & 10.14). I guess Smith held the WJR record for many years with that time. The previous year (1967) Charlie Greene ran a couple of very fast 100 yards times at Provo with 9.21 & 9.23. Both times would convert to sub 10 second auto times for 100m (using my own convertion giving Greene a "medium fast" finish of the last 8.56m with 0.76sec) resulting in 9.97 and 9.99sec times! Was Provo also a non-synthetic track in 1967? Anyway, a good candidate for the first sub 10 sec 100m run (non-wind aided, since Bullet Bob already had his 9.91w).

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                          I'm pretty sure that Provo was synthetic by 1967... wasn't that the year and venue where the usc short relay set the still standing WR for 4x110yds (oj, mccollough, quarrie and fred kuller?)? If so, it was a synthetic track.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                            Wrong Jamaican. It was Lennox Miller, not Don Quarrie.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                              Lets not forget the guy that ran the third leg on that relay, O.J. Simpson.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Fastest 100m on cinders

                                >Lets not forget the guy that ran the third leg on that relay, O.J. Simpson.

                                SATCH SAYS, he always made fast getaway especially after using javelin.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X