SYDNEY MCLAUGHLIN JUST RAN 11.07

trackislife12 wrote:

What a talent, cannot say much else.

Shes a super human. Perfect genes(u know what im sayin), environment, mentality etc...

400m hurdle WR in her future?

+3.5 m/s wind. Still would be 11.1x with legal wind.

Move over, Alysun Felix. The next superstar for T/F

Adjustment wrote:

+3.5 m/s wind. Still would be 11.1x with legal wind.

Move over, Alysun Felix. The next superstar for T/F

Converts to 11.25 basic.

The Fokus wrote:

Adjustment wrote:

+3.5 m/s wind. Still would be 11.1x with legal wind.

Move over, Alysun Felix. The next superstar for T/F

Converts to 11.25 basic.

I disagree with using 0.0 m/s as "basic". Basic should be the best condition, which is +2.0.

Adjustment wrote:

The Fokus wrote:

Converts to 11.25 basic.

I disagree with using 0.0 m/s as "basic". Basic should be the best condition, which is +2.0.

No one cares what you think. Basic means no wind, that will never change.

basic = no wind wrote:

Adjustment wrote:

I disagree with using 0.0 m/s as "basic". Basic should be the best condition, which is +2.0.

No one cares what you think. Basic means no wind, that will never change.

Fine, call it "basic". I will call +2.0 "optimal", which is what it is.

11.13 optimal

Fine running for a 400H star in any case.

Who?

The reason to convert to 2.0 m/s is that is the fastest wind-legal, world record eligible time. It indicates how close they are to the world record.

Adjustment wrote:

The Fokus wrote:

Converts to 11.25 basic.

I disagree with using 0.0 m/s as "basic". Basic should be the best condition, which is +2.0.

You can disagree with whatever you'd like. The reason basic as used by the rest of those interested is to normalize everyone's race. So basic to everyone else is 11.25 but feel free to make up a number if you'd like.

zxcvxcvxc wrote:

The reason to convert to 2.0 m/s is that is the fastest wind-legal, world record eligible time. It indicates how close they are to the world record.

Somebody else gets it.

11.13 optimal.

wind assisted,but agreed,shes a massive talent.still,shes so young,and its not a good idea for anyone to call her the next big thing in athletics.let her progress naturally.she could go on to have a great career,but she could also go on to have a serious injury or two,and be out of the sport by her early 20s.for every usain bolt or alyson felix,theres huge numbers of teen phenoms who disappeared.

jeff tallon wrote:

wind assisted,but agreed,shes a massive talent.still,shes so young,and its not a good idea for anyone to call her the next big thing in athletics.let her progress naturally.she could go on to have a great career,but she could also go on to have a serious injury or two,and be out of the sport by her early 20s.for every usain bolt or alyson felix,theres huge numbers of teen phenoms who disappeared.

I doubt anything we say here will have an iota of impact on her career or decisions. What excites me is how well she has made the transition from prep superstar to top collegiate. She obviously has a great support system and tremendous mental strength. Knock wood, she also seems to be incredibly durable, I have never heard of injury issues.

I hope none of you arguing that the "basic" conversion should be the best case +2.0 m/s wind work in a science related field.

A race with 2 m/s actually counts, so it should be the conversion standard. In any case, wind conversions will be inexact because wind affects different athletes significantly differently to rule out precision to the claimed values.

no YOURE hilarious wrote:

I hope none of you arguing that the "basic" conversion should be the best case +2.0 m/s wind work in a science related field.

And hopefully you are not involved in a scientific or technical field where "optimality" is in any way quantified.

"basic" asa being 0.0 m/s is a meaningless and arbitrary conversion for practical purposes, as long as wind allowance is +2 m/s.. Might as well pick -1.346 m/s, it has as much intrinsic meaning as 0.0, whereas +2 has the maximum reference value.

11.13 optimal.

You have lost this one.

Adjustment wrote:

no YOURE hilarious wrote:

I hope none of you arguing that the "basic" conversion should be the best case +2.0 m/s wind work in a science related field.

And hopefully you are not involved in a scientific or technical field where "optimality" is in any way quantified.

"basic" asa being 0.0 m/s is a meaningless and arbitrary conversion for practical purposes, as long as wind allowance is +2 m/s.. Might as well pick -1.346 m/s, it has as much intrinsic meaning as 0.0, whereas +2 has the maximum reference value.

11.13 optimal.

You have lost this one.

Also note that I was the first on this thread to note the wind reading, it is not as if I am arbitrarily trying to give Sydney a statistical advantage, just being realistic.

don't care about times. just pictures of the honey.

all this talk of basic etc is an absolute waste of time.

The only thing that matters is her time. Making some guestimate abut time differential based on hw or tw is ridiculous.

No runner runs exactly the same in every circumstance. Temperatures, track, your period. All play a part.

Stick with the time given and go watch a movie or something. SMc is a special talent. She'll run a lot faster. You'll be able to see her real performance. Stop worrying about the imaginary mathematical bullshoot.