I'm sure it's not too tough to figure out or find...
I'm sure it's not too tough to figure out or find...
starmiler wrote:
I'm sure it's not too tough to figure out or find...
Okay, get to it!
Going off of
, if he kept a constant speed from 80m to 100m, he crossed 100 yards in 1.66*11.14/20 + 7.92 seconds, or about 8.85 seconds.
Not bad.
I got 8.86952 seconds. 100 yards = 91.44 meters, no?
Should be 1.66*11.44/20+7.92, using your assumptions.
Yep, using linear interpolation over the last interval gives you a 100 yard time (91.44m) of ~8.87s. This is slower than the actual split though, because at this late stage of the race he was slowing down.
To somewhat account for this you can fit a curve to the whole data set; using a 6th order polynomial gives a time of 8.82s. This probably isn't extremely accurate though due to the low number of splits.
This is an utterly primitive extrapolation:
Bob Hayes: 10-flat meters hand-timed/9.1 yards hand-timed (although not in the same race)
Usain Bolt: 9.58 meters... so 8.82 sounds conservative.
I'm not contesting the scientific approach you've taken at all, just pointing this out. Thanks for taking my inquiry seriously! F-A-S-T whichever way you cut it!
Yes, that's right, it's about 8.87. I put the parentheses in the wrong place in Excel, or something.
6th order? why?
starmiler wrote:
This is an utterly primitive extrapolation:
Bob Hayes: 10-flat meters hand-timed/9.1 yards hand-timed (although not in the same race)
Usain Bolt: 9.58 meters... so 8.82 sounds conservative.
I'm not contesting the scientific approach you've taken at all, just pointing this out. Thanks for taking my inquiry seriously! F-A-S-T whichever way you cut it!
Hayes has a 9.35 AT from 1962