Ashmeade 9.97, Bledman 9.89 in Orlando!!!!!

Ben Wrong wrote:

Ventolin...Keston Bledman has no chances to run sub 9.90 in another track.

He only can run 9.89 in Clermont, Eugene or Rieti. That's for sure.

Since he ran his time on a Track actually IN Orlando, ie. NOT Clermont, your comment is totally incorrect. Clermont's track is located in an area that can produce swirling winds and thus inaccurate wind readings at times. The TFA track where this race was run does not suffer from this situation.

David Katz wrote:2. The stadium is set in a beautiful setting

that's what i've suggested

- it is in country area with lot of trees providing much more local oxygen to the athletes than those running in a big city meet

- riet is also at 400m

that provides some less air resistance for runners but still low enough to still provide virtually the same oxygen saturation of haemoglobin as at sea-level

country area + 400m altitude is perfect combo for fast running ( woud also help sprinters as even the 100m has an ~ 5% areobic component ( worth ~ 0.5s ) to factor in )

David Katz wrote:The Rieti meet is timed by the Omega Team (same group that times all of the Diamond Leauge & the Olympic Games )

meaning doha as well

VenTARD: "country area + 400m altitude is perfect combo for fast running ( woud also help sprinters as even the 100m has an ~ 5% areobic component ( worth ~ 0.5s ) to factor in )"

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

more trees,more oxygen

B...B...B...BB...BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm laughing so hard I'm crying. Oh god, it hurts.

I fully expect to see all the 100m guys now taking oxygen in the warmup area! Anything in the rules?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

oh god, it hurts...

moron

clueless as usual

what part of your peabrain doesn't understand that heavily wooded areas woud have higher local oxygen concentration than an urban one with only concrete ???

what part of your numbskull doesn't understand that 100m has a ~5% aerobic component & therefore oxygen concentration is important to even the 100m ???

what part of your numbskull doesn't understand that once haemoglobin is fully saturated that the plasma can dissolve oxygen which can be used in running ???

supplemental oxygen is not prohibited, meaning giving oxygen after a hard race

no official is going to allow an athlete to spend 10 minutes breathing in pure O2 from a mask/cylinder prior to a 100 - it may improve performance by 0.05 - 0.1s

now moron :

give us your drivel for bogus times of eugene/rieti/doha ???

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Although he was an Adidas athlete at an Adidas event, that run looked VERY good. I would like to believe the time is legit

SG, you clearly know something about the sprints, but WTF are you ranting about here?

You think that Adidas-sponsored meets are able to selectively adjust the FAT for the lanes of Adidas athletes? Or do they just round down the whole field by 0.1 every time an Adidas guy is on the track?

Come on, now. This is just delusional.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

I showed last year how the times from Clermont and Eugene in the 100 were bogus. Many, including myself, believe that Rieti is also bogus, and suspect Doha as well.

You "showed" this? Please share.

All of us are interested, and since it's your "analysis" surely you can search for the thread quicker than us.

As V3 points out, this is uniformly calibrated timing equipment in uniformly measured facilities. The downhill thing is an interesting theory, but the fact is Rieti has many distance WRs, too - do you think it is DOWNHILL BOTH WAYS??

Bending space and time, now THAT a way to get A-standard.

David Katz wrote:

Rieti

Many have questioned the times and the track's accuracy for years. I have seen the measurement report and it's solid. Plus there are several other reasons why athletes perform well there:

1. The meet is always held at the end of August after the World Championships or Olympic Games. It's a great release for the athletes with the pressure behind them.

2. The stadium is set in a beautiful setting.

3. The Meeting Director has been involved in the sport for decades and is close friends with many of the agents and athletes. I can tell you from experience that athletes will often extend themselves with great performances when there is that special relationship with meet managment.

David Katz! Thanks for chiming in with some serious expertise!

This is why I love this board. There is a lot of garbage here (some from me), but at the end of the day it is really THE place where people who love and know about the sport come and chat.

ventolin^3 wrote:

David Katz wrote:2. The stadium is set in a beautiful setting

that's what i've suggested

- it is in country area with lot of trees providing much more local oxygen to the athletes than those running in a big city meet

- riet is also at 400m

that provides some less air resistance for runners but still low enough to still provide virtually the same oxygen saturation of haemoglobin as at sea-level

country area + 400m altitude is perfect combo for fast running ( woud also help sprinters as even the 100m has an ~ 5% areobic component ( worth ~ 0.5s ) to factor in )

Do you have science to back up your claims about the local oxygen being helpful to the athletes?

I don't have any scientific knowledge of the area around Rieti but I have had many conversations world class athletes and their agents and they look forward to competing there.

One thing of note though Ato Boldon said he didnt put much faith on times ran on Rieti and that they used to put a fat guy in front of the wind gauge, he was not joking (I think it was actually on newspaper article or whatever) but that totally sounded as a butthurt rant.

I comment only on 100m races and times, not distance races and times.

And I'm not saying anything in particular about meets in general, I'm saying something very specific about Eugene and Clermont in 2011, Rieti in 2010, maybe Eugene in 2009, I haven't looked closely enough.

I've been through Eugene and Clermont 2011 already.

Check out the Rieti 100m in 2010, where Carter ran his "9.78"

Look at the IAAF results for that year.

Of the 20 top 100m guys that year, an incredible 7 of those times were achieved IN A SINGLE RACE IN RIETI, the 100m final. This is all the more incredible when it is considered that only 9 of the top 20 even entered the meet. Even more shocking is that all of those 7 times were put up DURING THE FINAL...if you made the final, you were going to get rewarded.

Not only was the final responsible for the best performances of 7 individuals on the 2010 season--shocking in itself--but of those 7, only 2 were mere "season bests", the other 5 were even more impressive--2 PR's, 2 NR's, 1 PR/WL:

Frater, Rodgers - SB

Forsythe, Bailey R - PR

Lemaitre, Ndure - NR

Carter - PR & WL

NOT ONLY THAT, but Carter's time, when corrected, was a whopping .12 faster than he has ever run before or since.

NOT ONLY THAT, but Lemaitre runs under 10 without a huge wind, and with an abysmal .199 RT, in a corrected time that remains his PR to this day.

NOT ONLY THAT, but Rodgers--he has only bested his Rieti time in...you guessed it...Eugene and Doha.

NOT ONLY THAT, but Forsythe's run is STILL his PR, and by corrected times is better than his next-best time by an absolutely massive .16

NOT ONLY THAT, but Ndure's time REMAINS his corrected PR to this day.

NOT ONLY THAT, but Ryan Bailey's time REMAINS his corrected PR to this day, a whopping .12 faster than his next-best time.

NOT ONLY THAT, but there were no spectacular RT's reported that could have contributed to any of those spectacularly successful performances; actually, rather than having been excellent, many of the RT's sucked.

Full race results:

1 CARTER, Nesta JAM =WL 9.78 0.164

2 BAILEY, Ryan USA PB 9.88 0.150

3 FORSYTHE, Mario JAM PB 9.95 0.182

4 LEMAITRE, Christophe FRA NR 9.97 0.199

5 FRATER, Michael JAM SB 9.98 0.152

6 RODGERS, Michael USA SB 10.00 0.158

7 SAIDY NDURE, Jaysuma NOR NR 10.00 0.193

8 BAILEY, Daniel ANT 10.11 0.174

DO I REALLY NEED TO GO ON.

Apparently, Eugene 2011 copied the .13 Rieti fudge.

I don't need to examine others years of the same meets, as they don't really matter. I have done this sort of thing for Eugene and Clermont 2011, Rieti 2010, and others have done it for other meets and other years.

Bogus. Think about it. I don't want to hear any garbage about the partial pressure of oxygen at track level, or the bucolic scenery, or the magnanimous and convivial meet directors. Those kinds of rationalizations are laughable, they don't even deserve consideration as they can be so easily dismissed by comparing conditions at these particular meets to conditions at other meets, and to conditions at the same venues in different years. Please don't make me grind them into the dirt explicitly. I don't have time for it, in any case.

Again, only the relative peformances of the athletes in any particular race will likely be of interest this weekend, except perhaps in Rome.

ventolin^3 wrote:

moron

clueless as usual

what part of your peabrain doesn't understand that heavily wooded areas woud have higher local oxygen concentration than an urban one with only concrete ???

what part of your numbskull doesn't understand that 100m has a ~5% aerobic component & therefore oxygen concentration is important to even the 100m ???

what part of your numbskull doesn't understand that once haemoglobin is fully saturated that the plasma can dissolve oxygen which can be used in running ???

supplemental oxygen is not prohibited, meaning giving oxygen after a hard race

no official is going to allow an athlete to spend 10 minutes breathing in pure O2 from a mask/cylinder prior to a 100 - it may improve performance by 0.05 - 0.1s

now moron :

give us your drivel for bogus times of eugene/rieti/doha ???

I bet that your 100m PB is 13.8

Other way you can't say what you're saying here.

ventolin^3 wrote:

- it is in country area with lot of trees providing much more local oxygen to the athletes than those running in a big city meet

)

WHAT? Ventolin, I have MEASURED actual atmospheric oxygen in both urban and barely suburban (mostly rural) settings, indoors and outdoors, and always measured 20.9-21.3 percent O2. At sea level (~760 torr), that is a PO2 of 158.8-161.9 torr. At those PO2 levels, blood PO2 easily hits over 100, and Hb saturation easily hits 98-99% even in exercising individuals.

Have you actually looked at a Hb-O2 saturation curve lately? O2 saturation doesn't drop until blood PO2 is below about 60 (OK, 65)! In order to get blood PO2 that low, you need an atmospheric PO2 below ~120 torr (total atmospheric pressure ~600 torr), and that takes about 5000 ft altitude to achieve.

So, by your estimation, running in a big city lowers local oxygen enough to effectively create and artificial altitude effect? We should all train in cities!

More likely, any "city effect" on running would come from the presence of pollution in the air, not lack of O2.

Ventolin - there is no difference in local o2 concentration between cities and rural areas. Find us literature to the contrary and we can re-start this discussion. Otherwise please just stop saying this.

& it is drivel

clermont '11 :

tyson 9.79 - nothing special from guy who has gone 9.69/9.71

mullings 9.89 ( 2.0 ) - nothing special from a guy who has gone 9.80

bledman 9.93 - now gone 9.89

ashmeade - 9.96 - nothing special from a guy who's gone 19.91

your clermont assertion is drivel

eugene '11 :

mullings 9.80 - superb pb

rogers - 9.85pb - next best 9.94 from 2y before - no problem for a big breakthru for guy who reckoned best american 100 guy along with dix late last year

carter 9.92 - he ran 9.89 in brussels - IS BRUSSELS ALSO BOGUS ???

patton 9.94 - he has 9.89pb

frater 9.94 - ran 9.88 in lausanne

only top 2 ran exceptionally quick, next 3 ran nothing special

your eugene assertion is drivel

see above

your assertons are drivel

idiot

those stats are meaningless

look up what their career pbs are

see above

frater 9.98 - gone 9.88 in lausanne

rogers 10.00 - laughable - gone 9.85pb

forsythe 9.95 - 10th best of year - 9.95 from any guy in this era isn't special

bailey 9.88 - injured all of '11 so we had no idea how fast he couda been - only just returning

lemaitre 9.97 - gone 9.92pb ( tell us his rt for that one ) & run 19.80 - 9.97 is nothing special

ndure 10.00 - went 9.99 in '11 & has superb 19.89 in '07 for which a great 100 was expected ever since

carter 9.78 - exceptional time but went 9.85 ( 0.1 ) in brussels just before - he was in fantastic shape latter end '10

idiot

9.78 (0.9) v 9.85 (0.1) is barely more than 0.02s difference corrected

idiot

he's gone 9.92pb - dig out that rt & then compare them

he's also gone 19.80 which means he shoud be going 9.90

moron

he's gone faster than 10.00 in

zurich

zagreb

monaco

oxford

all these places now bogus ???

& that is 9.95 - nothing special - if his break thru was 9.85 - 9.90 then there is a story

moron

9.99 (1.0 ) lausanne v rieti 10.00 (0.9) is no significant difference

& if you'd followed this guy since seeing his 19.89 you woud know this guy shouda been going 9.95

idiot

he was injured all of last year & had no opportunity to show his further ability

nothing wrong with 3 rts of 0.15

the 2 slowest rts were from 2 tallest guys in lemaitre/bailey who've never been great starters

Full race results:

1 CARTER, Nesta JAM =WL 9.78 0.164

2 BAILEY, Ryan USA PB 9.88 0.150

3 FORSYTHE, Mario JAM PB 9.95 0.182

4 LEMAITRE, Christophe FRA NR 9.97 0.199

5 FRATER, Michael JAM SB 9.98 0.152

6 RODGERS, Michael USA SB 10.00 0.158

7 SAIDY NDURE, Jaysuma NOR NR 10.00 0.193

8 BAILEY, Daniel ANT 10.11 0.174

only if you want to keep spouting more drivel

what is this drivel ??

you didn't, as having examined some other clockings for these guys, it shows your "conclusions" are drivel

& it is drivel

because your numbskull coudn't understand it

moron

it may be easily done, but have you done it to be able to dismiss it ???

impress me idiot

eh ??

moron

you coudn't if you prayed

impress me & research atmospheric/weather conditions for all these meets

drivel

we going to ignore the clockings in these races ???

So SG, your argument for why these times are bogus is because it was a really fast race?

NO IDEA WHY OR HOW these times were illegitimate? You just consider these performances invalid because there were a lot of them?

Ventolin don't waste your time on this loser.

i'll try & find out some papers, but here is some fairly solid reasoned talk about the converse argument - lower levels of O2 in cities

although the figures look exaggerated, the principle looks sound

Ben Wrong wrote:I bet that your 100m PB is 13.8

moron

my pb may be anywhere from 9 - 20

what has that to do with topic ???

Other way you can't say what you're saying here.

i can