Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Michael Carter

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Dave
    replied
    Originally posted by Cooter Brown
    Originally posted by Dave
    No one was surprised by Skipper.
    I think it was surprising when you look at the stats. His 2nd best jump in HS was 17'7" from his junior year. Only jumps in 3 or 4 meets as a senior, none very high until Golden West when he pops 18'3".

    He did have hype since like 4th grade that he was going to the the vault savior so I think that played more into the lack of surprise than any performances he put up.
    14'6" as a 7th grader will get one noticed....

    Indoors as a senior, he was taking shots at the record. Then he broke a pole and some bone(s) in his hand and missed almost all of the outdoor season. Given the previous years and his indoor season, it was no surprise that he would make it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cooter Brown
    replied
    Originally posted by Dave
    No one was surprised by Skipper.
    I think it was surprising when you look at the stats. His 2nd best jump in HS was 17'7" from his junior year. Only jumps in 3 or 4 meets as a senior, none very high until Golden West when he pops 18'3".

    He did have hype since like 4th grade that he was going to the the vault savior so I think that played more into the lack of surprise than any performances he put up.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave
    replied
    Originally posted by johnclevohio
    Originally posted by Dave
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Dave
    Is it likely that the 77' thrower has many areas left to improve? I would call that performance a fluke.
    When you're already out there at 77', it doesn't take that much more (mechanically) to goose it to 81'. His finger-tip snap at the end could probably do it! I'm in the no-fluke camp when it comes to muscling 12-pound shots around. Hohn throwing the Jav 340+ feet - freak wind - fluke. Schult, 240+ in the DT, likewise. SP, not so much.
    I am not buying your argument. 4/77 = 5.19%. Let's imagine that in other events.

    J'Mee Samuels goes from 10.1 to 9.6 in HS?

    Webb runs 3:48 after running his 3:53 at Pre in 2001(I think it was).

    Tommy Skipper goes from 18'3" to 19' 3" in one day.

    Dion Bentley pops an unexpected 28' jump.

    A 5% improvement for someone who is the best there has ever been is a fluke. It doesn't detract from their accomplishments but it still a complete outlier.

    While carter was a consistent mid 70's SP'r so it would be expected to have an outlier, the people you named you are using their outlier performance and then improving it by 5%.

    Webb never ran consistent sub 4 in HS, nor did any other other athletes you mentioned routinely ran/jumped the times you quoted. The correct way to do this would be to take those athletes routine performances and then add the 5% improvement. For example, In Webb's instance, going from the 4:01-4:03 range to 3:53 is probably comparable to Carter. Probably the same for Bentley and the others you mentioned.
    Paging an historian!

    No one was surprised by Skipper. Samuels had more than one race in the 10.1 range, agreed in Webb, and no idea about Bently.

    That in itself poses an interesting question: How often does a HS record holder have multiple marks near the record?

    Leave a comment:


  • bambam1729
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    i've got the 2 fermat books - singh then azcel, but one on reimann ??

    please post any info as i'll have to order it immediately
    Never saw this, Eldrick. Try the one by John Derbyshire. I liked that one the best. Away from home now and cannot remember the author of the other two, but one was by a guy who later wrote Symmetry - on groups and stuff.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnclevohio
    replied
    Originally posted by Dave
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Dave
    Is it likely that the 77' thrower has many areas left to improve? I would call that performance a fluke.
    When you're already out there at 77', it doesn't take that much more (mechanically) to goose it to 81'. His finger-tip snap at the end could probably do it! I'm in the no-fluke camp when it comes to muscling 12-pound shots around. Hohn throwing the Jav 340+ feet - freak wind - fluke. Schult, 240+ in the DT, likewise. SP, not so much.
    I am not buying your argument. 4/77 = 5.19%. Let's imagine that in other events.

    J'Mee Samuels goes from 10.1 to 9.6 in HS?

    Webb runs 3:48 after running his 3:53 at Pre in 2001(I think it was).

    Tommy Skipper goes from 18'3" to 19' 3" in one day.

    Dion Bentley pops an unexpected 28' jump.

    A 5% improvement for someone who is the best there has ever been is a fluke. It doesn't detract from their accomplishments but it still a complete outlier.

    While carter was a consistent mid 70's SP'r so it would be expected to have an outlier, the people you named you are using their outlier performance and then improving it by 5%.

    Webb never ran consistent sub 4 in HS, nor did any other other athletes you mentioned routinely ran/jumped the times you quoted. The correct way to do this would be to take those athletes routine performances and then add the 5% improvement. For example, In Webb's instance, going from the 4:01-4:03 range to 3:53 is probably comparable to Carter. Probably the same for Bentley and the others you mentioned.

    Leave a comment:


  • williamwindhamjr
    replied
    I was glad to see his daughter Michelle win!

    Leave a comment:


  • williamwindhamjr
    replied
    10.49 by FJ so legit :roll:

    Leave a comment:


  • runforlife
    replied
    Re: Michael Carter

    Originally posted by puddys12
    I just cant believe 30 years later and no one is even close .
    I don't think I've grasped the purpose of this whole thread. Face facts: Mike Carter was the best HS SP'er there ever was. Case Closed!!
    As well as his daughter.
    No, I don't think his record will be beaten. Watching his record throw is awesome with the power generated.

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    But that was an improvement of less than 2 feet, and as you said, he backed it up later in the season. What would you have though if after the two 65ers he suddenly popped a 69-6 and then didn't break 66 again for the remainder of the season?
    Recall that earlier in this thread I wrote that Hayden Baillio, a 66-1.25 shot-putter in 2008, threw 72-2.25 at Texas Relays. His previous lifetime best was set the week prior -- 68-07.50. He put the shot 67-1.50 indoors this year, an improvement over 58-8,50 in 2008. Since that 72-2.25, he has only reached 69-4.5. He "suddenly popped" a huge mark but hasn't broken within two feet of that mark again (even on saturday, when those heavy hitters were up at NON). It can happen as per the original premise of Carter's improvement in his final round.

    Leave a comment:


  • EPelle
    replied
    http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/in ... 19674.html

    You've been around the block before.

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    very good

    try the last one ( you can try deriving range from for a projectile from an elevated height & optimum angle later )

    "2 ladders 20 & 30 feet long, lean in opposite directions across a passageway. They cross at a point 8 feet above the floor. How wide is the passage ?"

    Leave a comment:


  • rainy.here
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick

    If the total weight of the of gold in the ball was 1 kg, what was the least weight of swarf his friend could make in turning a true cylinder from the golden ball ?

    N.B. You need to look up the formulas of the volumes of a sphere & a cylinder - it's in wiki

    A virtual 5 pints to anyone who can solve it ( JRM is initially banned from entering a solution ( because it's meant for us laymen to have some fun ), but after a coupla days, it would be nice for him to post the most "elegant" solution for us )

    solve that & you are doing as well as any 16y ole good maths student

    next/last puzzle after, is the horrendous "ladder puzzle" ( post after you solve above )
    I suspect that anyone who can solve that already knows (or can derive) the formulae for the volume of spheres and cylinders. My solution to the above is probably the "standard" calculus response. I'll have to think of a better way of doing it when I get some time.

    Assume our sphere has radius 1. Let r represent the radius of the cylinder we're creating.

    Then:
    V_sphere = 4Pi/3
    V_cylinder = Pi r^2 h
    (1) V_cylinder = 2 Pi r^2 Sqrt(1-r^2) (pythagoras to find half the height of the cylinder)

    We want the largest value of V_c / V_s
    V_c / V_s = [ 2 Pi r^2 Sqrt(1-r^2) ] / [4Pi/3]
    (2) = 3/2 r^2 Sqrt(1-r^2)

    The 3/2 is irrelevant, so we want to maximize the value of r^2 Sqrt(1-r^2).
    It's considerably easier to maximize the value of x = r^4 (1-r^2) instead, and doesn't change anything.

    x' = 4r^3 - 6r^5
    gives r = 0, +- Sqrt(2/3), and obviously r = Sqrt(2/3) is the value of r we want.

    Plugging this value of r back into equation (1) above, gives a cylinder volume of
    V_cylinder = 4Pi/3Sqrt(3), and plugging this into equation (2) above tells us the relative volume/mass of the cylinder to the sphere.

    V_cylinder / V_sphere = (3/2) * (2/3) * Sqrt(1-2/3)
    which = 1/sqrt(3)

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    i've got the 2 fermat books - singh then azcel, but one on reimann ??

    please post any info as i'll have to order it immediately

    Leave a comment:


  • bambam
    replied
    Originally posted by eldrick
    Originally posted by bambam
    The equations with air resistance are related to the hyperbolic inverse tangent
    very special abilty

    i see now how you got to 38th

    you never struck me as a numbercruncher, but doing that outgeeks me, as at school, that was in "advanced" maths syallabus & for me to do that i'd have to drop chemistry, which for some unknown reason was most widely needed science subject - only subject mandatory for any med school applicants ( not biology ( ?! ), which i dropped at 16y )
    Math major in college - loved math - still read popular books about it - Fermat's Theorem, Riemann Hypothesis. Good stuff. I buy them at B&N with my wife, and she usually says something like "You must be the only person who has ever bought that book!"

    Leave a comment:


  • eldrick
    replied
    Originally posted by bambam
    The equations with air resistance are related to the hyperbolic inverse tangent
    very special abilty

    i see now how you got to 38th

    you never struck me as a numbercruncher, but doing that outgeeks me, as at school, that was in "advanced" maths syallabus & for me to do that i'd have to drop chemistry, which for some unknown reason was most widely needed science subject - only subject mandatory for any med school applicants ( not biology ( ?! ), which i dropped at 16y )

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X