Food for Thought: The 1500m at the Olympic Level

Wow....

Adam Locked, if that link is your website, you should be commended.

There is one, and only one way for Silva to cover that last 800 meters in 1:46.3. That would be for him to hit the line at 1:48.4, which means he'd have to cover the next 7.665486+ meter stagger in 0.8s, translating to less than 10.43 100m pace.

NO, in order for the TFN split to be considered correct, he has to be either 1:46.3 or 1:46.4 because of rounding issues.

I have looked at the video five times now, and your analysis suffers from the error that you simply CANNOT see Silva. And you have to make guesses on where he might be, and then a second guess on how fast he might be going. That's an awful lot of assumptions, no matter how "refined" you try to make it with some math since the paces you are plugging in are not instantenous velocities but averages in the first place.

All we can barely tell in the video is that Kaouch (the guy who you thought was Silva (!!!!), passes the finish line around 1:48.1-1:48.2 Silva was weaving behind him so he may be 0.1 behind. Which gives us the 1:48.3. No matter how much you freeze frame it, this is as accurate as you can ever get, there is simply not enough information from that clip to disprove TFN's split, which is again rounded to the tenth so there is wiggle room to begin with. The math you throw up here is based on so many shaky assumptions that you are just trying to get the math to fit your conclusion, which isn't very convincing.

I suggest first figuring out who the athletes are before high jacking this thread. Do you even remember why that 0.1 difference was even important in the first place?

I dont really care about whether it was 1:48.1 or 1:48.0, but its obvious TNF splits are wrong. you can clearly see at the 1:48.4 shot that silva IS past the line.

You're still wrong. There aern't many assumptions to make at all. If Silva is beyond the hash mark, you cannot get him at 700m any later than 1:48.2, and that's at 53.0 pace -- which they weren't going yet. The only instantaneous velocity that does that is 41.74 400 pace. That didn't happen. In fact the split for that 100m segment was 14.4, then followed with a 13.8, 13.4, and 12.3. It's clear in the video, the field is still jogging until 1:53, when El Guerrouj steps on the gas.

You are also wrong with Karouch's time, he's clearly past the line at 1:48.0, while Silva's white shoe just about to hit the line.

Only a 12 year old would think the range provide was "full of shaky assumptions"

1) You know where Silva is at 1:49.2 NOT DISPUTABLE

2) you know the distance from the start to the hash mark. NOT DISPUTABLE

3) you know the range of velocities he could have possibly been running. DISPUTABLE ONLY IF YOU'RE CLAIMING SILVA WAS RUNNING FASTER THAN 53.0 PACE AT THAT POINT. He wasn't.

Quit throwing out red herrings. I've identified Silva in many photos that I posted, just mislabeled the one at 700m, which doesn't change the point or the analysis. There are no mistaken rounding assumprions, nor math errors, nor have I distorted the photos, and you know it. This crap is getting old.

The difference is not 0.1 as you keep claiming, it's 0.3 to 0.4, that's a big difference. Silva ran the last 800 in 1:46.6 to 1:46.7, not 1:46.3.

It's a physical impossibility for him to be past the 400m start 1:49.2 and also the start line at 1:48.4. End of story.

you are assuming that the display clock on the TV production = the official timing?? Surely this is just an indication for Tv viewers?? I'm iclined to go with the pro's splits from the official clock taken live by people in the right position.

I have to change my analysis here...I was led down the rabbithole by malmo's pictures and splits and thought Kaouch was Silva. But since he isn't, that changes things. If you freeze the video right when the clock is at 1:48.2 you can see kaouch's head and his foot just over the finish line. So he probably passed over the line a few hundredths before. Since Silva is in back of him I'd put Silva around 1:48.2(high) to 1:48.3(high). My hunch is that he passed through in 1:48.28-1:48.35. So at the worst case, TFN would be off by a tenth.

The whole thing about video angles is an important point Malmo. Given the angle and the obstruction, the camera uninentionally creates a visual effect where it is unclear by the finish line how much distance has been traversed since the lines appear so close to each other. This kind of effect was used intentionally in movies all the time (such as Lord of the Rings to make people bigger or smaller right next to each other even though in reality they are far away).

Anyway, I know my analysis is just that - an educated guess by spotting where the people ahead of Silva was. But it's grounded in common sense. But I'll admit, I won't make any bets on the time because 1. we're basing this off the NBC clock which may or may not be accurate, and 2. you never can really see Kaouch. 3. everything is in tenths, which another poster said, introduces some fudge factor there.

I would say there is a chance that TFN is wrong, but not nearly to be the 0.3-0.4 you make it out to be. I just can't see that as possible based on where the rest of the field is in the race.

Guys, the clock on the TV screen is NOT OFFICIAL, it is for entertainment purposes only.

classic wrote:

The whole thing about video angles is an important point Malmo. Given the angle and the obstruction, the camera uninentionally creates a visual effect where it is unclear by the finish line how much distance has been traversed since the lines appear so close to each other. This kind of effect was used intentionally in movies all the time (such as Lord of the Rings to make people bigger or smaller right next to each other even though in reality they are far away).

"Classic," you have a good point, but the compressed depth of resolution can be easily dealt with by time stamping from known marks, such as when and where the foot touches, and that's why one can easily determine Silva's 700 time with only an image of him at 1:49.2, 7.6655+ meters down the track. The only issue here is the valid point that Muger Cement just brought up -- is the time stamp, scrolling in tenths, accurate? The answer is no, it's off by about a tenth of a second.

Not that the screen clock is not official; the official 400, 800, 1200, splits are being stamped in real time on the screen (you can see in the photo below that the clock on the infield matches the clock on the screen) and they're one tenth of a second slower than the scrolling images on the screen -- 2:01.8 becomes 2:01.94, 2:55.1 becomes 2:55.21, and 3:34.1 becomes 3:34.19. The clock doesn't hit 3:34.1 until El Guerrouj's chest gets just past (about 6 inches) the line, suggesting that the screen/clock difference is just over 0.1, perhaps as much as 0.15. The difference between the screen 3:34.19 and the final results 3:34.18 is settled from the photos.

With that information we can say that Silva was 1:49.3 (not 1:49.2) at 707.665486+ meters and work backwards from there to the 700m mark.

From the video it's clear they're still 'jogging' at that point, but lets go ahead and figure the range of velocity was anywhere from 7.5471m/s (53.0 pace) to 6.6667m/s (60.0 pace) and the probable pace 6.9444m/s (57.6 pace). The fastest he could have covered the stagger is 1.016s (at 53.0 pace), the slowest 1.15 (at 60.0 pace)

This now puts Silva at 700m anywhere from

fast: 1:48.3 (1:48.4 final 800)

probable: 1:48.2 (1:48.5 final 800)

slow: 1:48.1 (1:46.6 final 800)

1:48.5 to 1:48.6 is now the best estimate for Silva.

I too was under the impression that Hicham's last 800 was 1:45.2. Apparently not.

Speaking as one who has a thousand races under him, I have a comment. I was fast enough to be All-American at several middle and long distance events but never anything close to this caliber. Even at my slow pace, roughly 15 seconds behind this, it is MUCH easier to run behind other runners. People think wind drag only counts in cycling but that is untrue. To run 1:46 or 1:47 from the front is on the order of 5-10% harder than doing in from behind.

It's not like 5% translates to 5% more speed of course but we're discussing times that are 1/10th of that ratio (.5%) and I'll guarantee it translates to more than that. Hicham's front effort cannot be compared 1 to 1 with Silva's and Hicham's is better IMO.

Regardless it was good to see him get his much earned and long awaited gold medal.