Run-Down Forums Forum Index Run-Down Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Run-Down Forums Forum Index
Sprint Central
10m Splits
Post new topic   Reply to topic

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 14, 15, 16  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Sprint Central
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I assume when you say "near" you mean the 9.62 not the 9.47? I meant to comment on that... Wouldn't the 0-10m segment already include the reaction time for that particular athlete? I would have thought so... Even if it doesn't, then adding 0.15 for an average reaction time isn't the most accurate indicator of the "perfect" race, as "average" and "perfect" generally don't enter into the same discussion. Wink Should be the legal limit of 0.10, which has been attained.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes I mean the 9.62 ... Although my own personal feeling is that man can run 9.50 ...
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with Conway's post a few posts back concerning FloJo and Mo. And think how hard it will be for Marion to get close to FloJo's record. And can you imagine how FloJo at her best would have buried MJ at her best in the last 60m??

Paul
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FloJo (as opposed to Florence who preceeded her) was a monster in the second half of the race ... I have almost all of her 88 races on tape - from Jack in the Box thru the Olympics - and she just killed people in the second half of the race !!! I don't think I have ever seen another athlete, male or female, with such second half domination at anything under 400 ... And it was pure power ...

Most everyone has written off Mo ... But when was the last time you saw anyone who could have "their worst season ever" at 100 and run 9.89 and rank #3 in the world ???? Thank you ... No one .. I see 9.70 being challenged and I see Mo being the one ... Tim had his perfect race ... And quite frankly if Mo had been in the race it wouldn't have happened cause he is too intimidated by Mo ...

Mo beats him in their first encounter next year and all is back to normal ... No matter what the time is ... To date Tim is a one race wonder (in spite of his two sub 9.90s ... Dwain has had the one good season and has to prove it wasn't the best season of his life ... Mo is the only one who had a down year ... Everyone else had their best ever ... Which means Tim and Dwain can't lose an inch ... Mo just has to get back to normal ... Wink
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My reaction time/1st 10m increment question still withstanding -- I'm almost certain the reaction times are already included in the 1st split, given FloJo's reaction time would have had to be < 0.10, thus illegal, for that "all-star" composite to be under her final time -- there isn't much margin of error for Marion to dip under...

In addition to the above reasoning, I say the reaction times have to already be included because that 0.7-0.8 second split difference is very close to what would be expected from a stationary start vs. the running start for subsequent splits.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On top of that, on the men's side, TM's coaching-training situation is in shambles!! Dwain has solid training on his side and good support. My question is where do you think Lewis will figure into the 2003 season??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lewis? I could've sworn he's been retired for some time now...

:question:

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry! Mark Lewis-Francis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2003 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MLF will be a factor in the second escelon of sprinters ... The guys somewhere between 10.00 & 9.95 ... Should be 3 or 4 guys there ... But the top 3 will be sub 9.95 with a couple of dips for Chambers and Montgomery and Mo having a few over the season ... But if anyone has a bad day MLF will be right there ... I think he is a season or two away ... I thought he was going to surplant Dwain last season as Britain's #! but Dwain remained solid ... MLF is the future of the event ... But the past is not yet ready to relinquish ... He will be king by 08 ... But 03 and 04 will belong to the old !!!
_________________
Conway
Speed Thrills
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
X King
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 11 Jan 2003
Posts: 431
Location: Great Britain

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry people,I made a very small mistake,the Women's should of looked like this.
WOMEN
0-10m:1.80s M.Jones(USA) '00
10m-20m:1.06s M.Jones(USA) '98
20m-30m:0.99s C.Arron(FRA)'98 & M.Jones(USA) '98 & '99
30m-40m:0.95s Flo-Jo(USA)'88
40m-50m:0.92s Flo-Jo(USA) '88
50m-60m:0.90s Flo-Jo(USA) '88
60m-70m:0.90s Flo-Jo(USA) '88
70m-80m:0.91s Flo-Jo(USA) '88
80m-90m:0.91s Flo-Jo(USA) '88
90m-100m:0.92s Flo-Jo(USA) '88
Total:10.26s(World Segment Best/WSB)
Total+ Average RT of the races in which the 10m Segment best was set:
(Average RT,0.144s/0.143666s reoccurring,Rounded-up)=10.41s
10.40s
I personally think that only until someone(a Man or Women) beats those times in thier sex category that then,and only then they shall be know as 'The Perfect Sprinter'.
X King
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Still no one wants to address my two points/questions? Sad

1) It doesn't make any sense to use an average reaction time when computing a "perfect" race. You're adding 0.05 (a huge amount in the 100m) beyond what would constitute a perfect start.

2) It seems highly unlikely that reaction times are not already included in those 0-10m splits. Not only do the splits look like they already include the reaction time, but I doubt anyone would have subtracted them off before recording the splits.

So, no disrespect intended Wink , but I dare say you can't skip over these two points and assume that what follows is correct. The final outcome does not hold up to scrutiny if it is built on incorrect assumptions...

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Justin
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 08 Oct 2001
Posts: 312
Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 0-10m splits X-King lists exclude reaction times, they are travel time from moment of first recorded movement.

Since we are looking for perfection I agree with this approach, but I also agree that we could just assume a 0.100 reaction time since this is the fastest allowed. And we know that people have reacted that fast so we can assume it's possible.

Still, averaging the reaction times for the races from which the best segments are taken gives a picture of what has actually been achieved rather than what might be, which is consistent with the other data.

Justin

PS Just booked my tickets for all 9 days of the WC! Happy Days!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Finally, a taker. Smile

Quote:
they are travel time from moment of first recorded movement.

My head is spinning with all the possible ways that could lead to iffy numbers... Are you positive that's what the splits reflect? I don't see any reason why statisticians would factor the reaction time out of the 0-10m split, as that is very much part of the split.

Quote:
Still, averaging the reaction times for the races from which the best segments are taken gives a picture of what has actually been achieved rather than what might be, which is consistent with the other data.

I disagree. The rest of the data is assembling a race from the best 10 portions ever recorded, which has very little to do with what has actually been achieved. It shows merely what the best ever done for each given stage is, which should be no different for the start.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Justin
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 08 Oct 2001
Posts: 312
Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am absolutely sure that the 0-10m times exclude reactions. Why is that worrying? Reaction times and 10m times are recorded, take one from the other and you have travel time.

This makes sense because it splits the two distinct parts of a start - reaction time and explosiveness from the blocks. There are 11 parts to consider in our perfect race quest - reaction time and 10 x 10m splits.

All our 10m split data is what has actually been recorded. We should add to that the best reation time recorded by any sprinter. Since we don't know that (although we could assume 0.100), X-King did the next best thing by using reaction times from the Champs races he has 10m splits for. This makes perfect sense, but it is equally valid just to assume a 0.100 reaction and add that to the ten best 10m splits.

Either way, the men's time is 9.60 and the women's 10.40. Those times make perfect sense to me. I think Mo would have run 9.70 had he not been injured in 2001; that's only 1.04% from the optimum time. Flo-Jo's 10.49 is 0.87% slower than the optimum.

Justin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2003 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, for one thing, a big part of the first 10m is overcoming the stationary start. This is evidenced by how little the 10-100m stretch varies pace-wise. As such, all aspects of the start should, in my mind, be included in that first 10m segment. I doubt you will ever see a great first 10m without a great start, so I see no value in separating them. To view the reaction time separate from the start, in effect, treats it as not part of the race (which I believe it shouldn't be, but that's another matter).

As for why it concerns me that they would be separated, the first reason that comes to mind is the shaky reputation of reaction time measurement accuracy and reliability. Things like equipment malfunctions down to uncertainty as to what's actually being measured (pressure differences are measured, not movement; how's this affect what you believe should be attained in the travel time calculation for the first segment?). I assume any race with the equipment available to measure 10m splits would also have pressure sensing blocks, but it would seem to open up the possibility of some races being excluded from consideration.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Sprint Central All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 14, 15, 16  Next
Page 2 of 16

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group