Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

20.13..forever?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • eldrick
    replied
    list of fastest splits i know off in 200

    - 9.96 bolt

    - ?10.06 tyson in his 19.63

    - 10.12 mj

    - 10.16 ff

    - 10.18 marsh in his 19.73 ( ran 9.93 that year )

    - 10.18 ato

    next fastest iirc are

    10.23 - King in his 19.80 og win ( it wasn't in his 19.75 - that was 10.3+ )

    10.3+ x-man in his 19.63

    ( never seen a split for wally's 19.65 or dix's 19.69 - latter on vid, but clarity not good enough to get you within +/- 0.1s )

    use the benchmark of 10.20 :

    6 men have broken it

    5 of them have never broken 45s , with the slowest 100pb is 10.09 ( mj ), next being marsh with 9.93

    5 of the 6 have pbs ( all set in same year as 200 split, but some subsequently broken ) well below 10, slowest being 9.93

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by Kishan Gill
    eldrick is a big carl lewis fan and can't accept that a 200m/400m guy is superior to a 100/200 sprinter in the 200m. MJ has said countless times it is all about speed endurance...
    i was looking for your refutation to above arithmetic argument ( it was on the last page which you didn't read ? )

    thank you for not providing one...

    still, here's another one you can kindly provide us with a non-refutation i can await with non-bated breathe

    list of guys' splits in the 200/open 100m time same meet

    - frankie 10.16/9.89 = 0.27s

    - ato 10.18/9.90 = 0.28

    - bolt 9.96/9.69 = 0.27

    but bolt was worth more like 9.65 as didn't run hard to end -> 0.31

    therefore, range of 0.27 - 0.31s split differential between split & open 100

    applying to mj's 10.12 ->

    9.81 - 9.85

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    I'm glad someone had the patience and the interest to actually reach a conclusion as to which of the two is more likely to be right.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kishan Gill
    replied
    I followed most of that topic but even I couldn't manage to finish the last page despite being a great track fan.

    My conclusion is this, both guys have a gigantic arsenal of knowledge but eldrick does speculate whereas Texas sticks to what actually happened.

    eldrick is a big carl lewis fan and can't accept that a 200m/400m guy is superior to a 100/200 sprinter in the 200m. MJ has said countless times it is all about speed endurance.

    Eldrick, I respect your knowledge but you are one stubborn guy, you just don't have the ability to admit when your argument is flawed and gracefully concede. I've met people like you many times, it's frustrating, reality can be staring them in the face but they won't back down.

    Texas won that by a landslide.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    i asked if anyone sees any fundamental flaws in some basic arithmetic treatment of the subject & you offer...nothing

    if you have a viable arithmetic refutation to an easy-layed out proposition then show it, otherwise don't waste my time

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    no

    mj himself made comments to fact he thought he coud go about 19.5 after 19.66wr - 19.32 shocked him as well as everyone

    he ran exactly same race as he did the previous year with fast curve & holding on but coud only manage 19.79 with superior 400 ability that year

    he coudn't run 19.32 in '95 off 43.39, so you better look somewhere else for explanation of his 19.32 - increased raw speed

    let's do some arithmetic:

    suppose he had 10.09 ability in '95 ( actually ran that in '94 ) & managed 19.79 & 43.39

    in '96, his 400 is slower/same at 43.44 ( no endurance improvement ), but his 19.79 goes to 19.32, an improvement of 0.47s

    now, using relationship of 100m improvement = 2*improvement in 200 ( 10.00 = 20.00, 9.95 = 19.90, 9.90 = 19.80, etc ), then his 100 had to improve theoretically by

    0.5*0.47 = 0.235s between '95 & '96

    = 10.09 - 0.235 = ~ 9.855s

    find a flaw...
    The flaw is obvious. Two 100/200 guys met up with a 200/400 guy and got their butts kicked because after their jets began to cool his kicked in. All the math in the world, all the calculations, all the formulas, all that stuff makes no dent at all and it never will. I grew up watching guys with 400m ability winning the Olympics and setting WR s in the 200m. I saw it in HS and I'm still seeing it today with Bolt. There is absolutely nothing you can say that will erase a lifetime of watching a guy with speed endurance whipping up on a faster sprinter in a 200m. You're not changing my mind because you're wrong. I know that and so does everyone who understands the 200m. This is an event where great speed will only take you so far then you'd better be able to sustain and mantain, the guy with more speed in reserve does have the advantage and it should be obvious. That's why we saw a Tommie Smith beat a Jimmy Hines, that's why we saw Henry Carr beat Bob Hayes, that's why we saw MJ beat Fredericks/Boldon, that's why Mennea beat Wells.

    Ok look, you can continue to chart it all out and and do all the math you wannna do. I'm going with real life and what I've seen over the last 45 years or so.

    If I told you...

    I have a feeling some junior in high school is going to tie the WR in the 100 soon. What would you have told me? Enter...Houston McTear.

    If I said....

    I see a..hmmm...19.32 this year out of Michael Johnson. What would you have said?

    If in 2007 I would have told you..

    I think if Bolt did run the 100m he'd probably run a,...hmm..9.69 and be looking at the crowd and jivin' around when he did it. What would you have said?

    This is athlectics eldrick, things happen all the time that can't be worked out with math and formulas....ok?

    Ok I'm done with this. We can argue/debate/talk about something else but I'm not dealing with you anymore on this particular topic. You really don't get it and you're not going to.

    Done!~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    no

    mj himself made comments to fact he thought he coud go about 19.5 after 19.66wr - 19.32 shocked him as well as everyone

    he ran exactly same race as he did the previous year with fast curve & holding on but coud only manage 19.79 with superior 400 ability that year

    he coudn't run 19.32 in '95 off 43.39, so you better look somewhere else for explanation of his 19.32 - increased raw speed

    let's do some arithmetic:

    suppose he had 10.09 ability in '95 ( actually ran that in '94 ) & managed 19.79 & 43.39

    in '96, his 400 is slower/same at 43.44 ( no endurance improvement ), but his 19.79 goes to 19.32, an improvement of 0.47s

    now, using relationship of 100m improvement = 2*improvement in 200 ( 10.00 = 20.00, 9.95 = 19.90, 9.90 = 19.80, etc ), then his 100 had to improve theoretically by

    0.5*0.47 = 0.235s between '95 & '96

    = 10.09 - 0.235 = ~ 9.855s

    find a flaw...

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    conclusion : ato & frankie committed suicide by trying to go out with mj, who ran almost a perfectly paced 200
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~

    BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Right there is what I've been saying from the very beginning. MJ knew he could run all out and still maintain a larger % of the speed due to his superior speed endurance being a 400m runner. Both Fredericks and Boldon while having superior speed, couldn't match MJ in the latter phases of the race because of inferior speed endurance being 100/200 sprinters.

    I think that about does it :lol:

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by Texas
    It just hit me...

    Let's say MJ did have 9.8 speed just like Fredericks and Boldon possesed. How come he could run a 19.32 and they were nowhere in the picture...hmmm? They all had that 9.8 speed so what seperated MJ from his speed bro's?
    because sometimes you have to do a little basic arithmetic to tell you the answer

    looking at splits of great 200s & a little thinking, a formula that works well for ideal 200 race is :

    200m time = 2*(100m split) - 0.95

    you decide what 200m time you target & use that to tell you what split to aim for for an "ideally" paced 200

    mj ran - 19.32, split required from above is 10.135 - almost spot on with his 10.12

    frankie ran 10.18 : that is the split aiming for ~ 19.41

    ato ran 10.20 : that is the split aiming for ~ 19.45

    conclusion : ato & frankie committed suicide by trying to go out with mj, who ran almost a perfectly paced 200

    10.18 - 10.20 splits are for those aiming at a 19.41 - 19.45 clocking which turned out to be impossible for guys with previous pbs of 19.82 & 20.00+

    if they had held back by 0.1s on the curve, they probably wouda run 19.5 & 19.6 respectively - still not close to 19.32, but better clockings

    summary - don't aim for a 10.1+ split unless 19.3/19.4 is your capability on the day

    Leave a comment:


  • scratchman
    replied
    If I could go back to the original topic for just a second....(eventhough I'm enjoying this too)
    Roy's 20.13 at the '85 state meet is diluted. The stadium clock had Roy well under 20, as did many coaches and fans. He also ran it into a headwind. I really believe he ran closer to the 20.0 hand-held they initially gave him. Thank God he ran another 20.13 at the Junior Nationals a month later, or it'd only be 20.24.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by EPelle
    Originally posted by eldrick
    He could have ran on Jamaica's 4x4 team, what 100m sprinter has ever done that?
    they must have an extremely poor squad if a 45+ guy can get on it

    it'd never happen if he was an american & trying to get on their squad
    Allen Johnson, anyone? And he wasn't even trying to get on the team.
    true, but that was in prelim, not the final as far as i recall

    i can't recall the rules those days & whether they allowed only 2 subs between prelim & final or if you coud have 2 completely different squads for both races

    it was more a chance to get him an extra gold rather than anything else - 3 guys of high-44/low-45 & a 46 hurdler coud still top qualifiers without breaking sweat

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    It just hit me...

    Let's say MJ did have 9.8 speed just like Fredericks and Boldon possesed. How come he could run a 19.32 and they were nowhere in the picture...hmmm? They all had that 9.8 speed so what seperated MJ from his speed bro's?

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by Texas
    Originally posted by tandfman
    The subject matter interests me. What you two guys have made of the thread does not.
    Well do you have an opinion, if so let's have it.
    Been there, done that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Texas
    replied
    Originally posted by tandfman
    The subject matter interests me. What you two guys have made of the thread does not.
    Well do you have an opinion, if so let's have it.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    The subject matter interests me. What you two guys have made of the thread does not.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X