For the 1968 Olympics Hines had several advantages: 0.01 sec. timing, the altitude = to 1.5 m/s wind assistance plus a 1.6 m/s wind reading. First Calvin Smith broke the record in 1983 by 0.02 sec. How close is that if you turned on a light for 0.02 sec. (eg.Led) you wouldn't see it. the combination of altitude and wind assistance equals a stunning 3.1 m/s advantage!!What does this convert to 10.12 that's an .17 sec. advantage now you see why i think 0.01 sec. timing is stupid . Not to mention wind and altitude not being adjusted what do you think?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Collapse
Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
X
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by MarlowOriginally posted by thedodgewhy i think 0.01 sec. timing is stupid
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by AvanteThe sad thing about that whole situation is that Bob Hayes would have been around 26 or so in 1968. If he'd been there.....9.85.
If I'm not mistaken, Didn't Hayes run 9.94w in the semis on that dirt track in Tokyo, before his 10.06 final?
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by CookyMonztaOriginally posted by AvanteThe sad thing about that whole situation is that Bob Hayes would have been around 26 or so in 1968. If he'd been there.....9.85.
If I'm not mistaken, Didn't Hayes run 9.94w in the semis on that dirt track in Tokyo, before his 10.06 final?
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by CookyMonztaOriginally posted by AvanteThe sad thing about that whole situation is that Bob Hayes would have been around 26 or so in 1968. If he'd been there.....9.85.
If I'm not mistaken, Didn't Hayes run 9.94w in the semis on that dirt track in Tokyo, before his 10.06 final?
It' s a shame Hayes got the start he did in that 100m final in 64. If he'd gotten out poorly and had to have made up ground we probably would have seen a 9.98ish or so.
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by Avante
It' s a shame Hayes got the start he did in that 100m final in 64. If he'd gotten out poorly and had to have made up ground we probably would have seen a 9.98ish or so.
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by AvanteHow old was Wilma in 1960? I'm thinking 1968 might be a bit of a strecth.
Wilma Rudolph 23 Jun 40 (28) retired aged 21 after winning 3 Olympic gold
Edith McGuire 03 Jun 44 (24) retired aged 21 after winning Olympic gold
Betty Cuthbert 20 Apr 38 (30) retired aged 26 after winning 4 Olympic gold (1st retired at 22)
Judy Pollock 25 Jun 40 (28) came back to run at Montreal in 1976
Marilyn Black 20 May 44 (24) retired aged 20 after winning Olympic bronze
Ann Packer retired 08 Mar 42 (26) retired aged 22 after winning Olympic gold/silver
And those who did:
Wyomia Tyus 29 Aug 45 (23) retired after Mexico Games
Barbara Ferrell 28 Jul 47 (21)
Raelene Boyle 24 Jun 51 (17)
Irena Szewinska 24 May 46 (22)
Chi Cheng 15 Mar 44 (24)
Diane Burge 09 Oct 43 (25) retired after Mexico Games
Colette Besson 07 Apr 46 (22)
Lillian Board 13 Dec 48 (19)
Maureen Caird 29 Sep 51 (17)
Pam Kilborn 12 Aug 39 (29)
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by Per AndersenOriginally posted by Avante
It' s a shame Hayes got the start he did in that 100m final in 64. If he'd gotten out poorly and had to have made up ground we probably would have seen a 9.98ish or so.
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by Vault-emortOriginally posted by AvanteHow old was Wilma in 1960? I'm thinking 1968 might be a bit of a strecth.
Wilma Rudolph 23 Jun 40 (28) retired aged 21 after winning 3 Olympic gold
Edith McGuire 03 Jun 44 (24) retired aged 21 after winning Olympic gold
Betty Cuthbert 20 Apr 38 (30) retired aged 26 after winning 4 Olympic gold (1st retired at 22)
Judy Pollock 25 Jun 40 (28) came back to run at Montreal in 1976
Marilyn Black 20 May 44 (24) retired aged 20 after winning Olympic bronze
Ann Packer retired 08 Mar 42 (26) retired aged 22 after winning Olympic gold/silver
And those who did:
Wyomia Tyus 29 Aug 45 (23) retired after Mexico Games
Barbara Ferrell 28 Jul 47 (21)
Raelene Boyle 24 Jun 51 (17)
Irena Szewinska 24 May 46 (22)
Chi Cheng 15 Mar 44 (24)
Diane Burge 09 Oct 43 (25) retired after Mexico Games
Colette Besson 07 Apr 46 (22)
Lillian Board 13 Dec 48 (19)
Maureen Caird 29 Sep 51 (17)
Pam Kilborn 12 Aug 39 (29)
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by CookyMonztaOriginally posted by Vault-emortOriginally posted by AvanteHow old was Wilma in 1960? I'm thinking 1968 might be a bit of a strecth.
Wilma Rudolph 23 Jun 40 (28) retired aged 21 after winning 3 Olympic gold
Edith McGuire 03 Jun 44 (24) retired aged 21 after winning Olympic gold
Betty Cuthbert 20 Apr 38 (30) retired aged 26 after winning 4 Olympic gold (1st retired at 22)
Judy Pollock 25 Jun 40 (28) came back to run at Montreal in 1976
Marilyn Black 20 May 44 (24) retired aged 20 after winning Olympic bronze
Ann Packer retired 08 Mar 42 (26) retired aged 22 after winning Olympic gold/silver
And those who did:
Wyomia Tyus 29 Aug 45 (23) retired after Mexico Games
Barbara Ferrell 28 Jul 47 (21)
Raelene Boyle 24 Jun 51 (17)
Irena Szewinska 24 May 46 (22)
Chi Cheng 15 Mar 44 (24)
Diane Burge 09 Oct 43 (25) retired after Mexico Games
Colette Besson 07 Apr 46 (22)
Lillian Board 13 Dec 48 (19)
Maureen Caird 29 Sep 51 (17)
Pam Kilborn 12 Aug 39 (29)
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by RogBoyle didn't go to Moscow because of the boycott - she was also given financial incentive by the Australian government not to go. By 1982 she had suffered numerous injuries, but she rallied herself to compete on home soil and won the Commonwealth 400 title in unhelpful windy conditions in around 51.2, later returning to anchor the Australian relay team to silver with a 50.1 split off a slow first 200. I think she would have been capable of around 50.5 that year, and at her peak 49.5, so it's a pity she didn't specialise in the event earlier - didn't she run one of the fastest legs in the 4x400 in Munich?
Comment
-
Re: Why Jim Hines 9.95 stood for 15 years!
Originally posted by CookyMonztaOriginally posted by RogBoyle didn't go to Moscow because of the boycott - she was also given financial incentive by the Australian government not to go. By 1982 she had suffered numerous injuries, but she rallied herself to compete on home soil and won the Commonwealth 400 title in unhelpful windy conditions in around 51.2, later returning to anchor the Australian relay team to silver with a 50.1 split off a slow first 200. I think she would have been capable of around 50.5 that year, and at her peak 49.5, so it's a pity she didn't specialise in the event earlier - didn't she run one of the fastest legs in the 4x400 in Munich?
Comment
Comment