I thought there must have been a mistake with the 10.64. Well spotted. It just goes to show that even the IAAF make statistical mistakes.
I still think there have been some elite 800 guys capable of running 11 flat from blocks, e.g Juantorena when he was running 44 for 400, but very few.
Deanouk and sprintgeezer,
What are your definitions of elite 800m and milers? 1:50 and 4:00? Or also, what in your opinion is the fastest 800m and mile time that a 11.00 FAT guy could run?
I dunno - he was running 1:43. I bet his anaerobic-processing centers would have held that OLY champ 400m man to like 11.8.
Who is the American 800 guy with the beard? Just out of college. I don't even know his name but I've seen him run 10.xx for 100m. True story.
here's a 10.6 hand-timed athlete who could run a bit.
ryan martin?
ovett ran 11.5 100m out of blocks while clearly messing around.
sorry I should have bundled this with the previous posts, but cruz lists a PR of 10.86 @100m.
http://thegreatdistancerunners.de/PaulEreng.htmlereng ran 21.9 for 200
seems definitive.
deanouk wrote:
I thought there must have been a mistake with the 10.64. Well spotted. It just goes to show that even the IAAF make statistical mistakes.
I still think there have been some elite 800 guys capable of running 11 flat from blocks, e.g Juantorena when he was running 44 for 400, but very few.
Deano, an 800 runner would be more effective using correct starting technique for distance runners (standing start) than using starting blocks. Starting blocks would actually slow him/an 800 runner down.
1) He was not "clearly messing around". He ran PLENTY of 200's, as well as 400's.
2) He ran 11.5 once, and usually around 12
3) THOSE ARE HAND TIMES TO WHICH YOU MUST ADD ANYWHERE FROM 0.50 - 0.75 SECONDS.
4) HE THEREFORE RAN AROUND 12-12.5 AS HIS PR, AND WAS MOST OFTEN AROUND 12.5-13.0, RIGHT WHERE ONE WOULD EXPECT HIM TO HAVE BEEN.
5) NOTHING TO SEE HERE, MOVE ON...
Harbig was no faster at that time, in the 100m, than I am now, in my mid-40's.
Hardly an impressive 100m.
I guess I should stop responding to these things, they speak for themselves.
Harbig!
I'd love to see how you tihnk people should be adding 0.75s for hand times. Did Jim Hynes record a 9.3s 100m that I didn't see?
sprintgeezer
you seem to be having a very very hard time staying relevant.
1) 0.24 is the generous conversion, this was developed by much smarter people than you based on years of hand/electric comparisons.
2) Nobody cares about your running.
3) Halberg ran well under 11 even assuming FAT conditions.
4) Ovett ran well under 12 using FAT conditions.
5) 800m OLY gold+silver medalist cruz ran 10.86 FAT.
You have been proven wrong many times by many people here.
socal--
lol
In Vent's words, "you offer nothing but drivel...moron"
I won't even go into Cruz, because I already accounted for him, elsewhere on this board.
Read, socal...read, and learn.
old official wrote:
I'd love to see how you tihnk people should be adding 0.75s for hand times. Did Jim Hynes record a 9.3s 100m that I didn't see?
.24 - 25 was the 'addition' from hand to auto.
Not .75
And no JH didn't run 9.3 for meters
Sprintgeezer is smoking something.
actually--
You seem like a reasonable guy.
We all know that .25 is around what you add now, if you have excellent timers.
Harbig ran in the stone age, with stone age hand timing. I don't remember the guy's name, but some Kinesiology PhD student did a study in the early 1990's to determine just this issue--whether old hand times were any worse than newer hand times.
IIRC, they were substantially worse, up to something like .50-.60
Give me a year, and I will find out if he published, and if so, where.
Also, were those few of Harbig's great times timed by multiple timers, or by just one? If they were by just one, you can probably throw them out.
I have had some amazing hand times myself, but you learn to ignore them. They only sort out the order of finish when something goes wrong with the FAT system.
Beach's a good example of a guy who can run well under 11 flat FAT around the same time he can run 1:46 and he'll improve both of those unless he concentrates too much on the weights which are his biggest weakness as a decathlete. I'd still like to see what he can do training full time as a middle distance runner. He beat Andrews at 8 in hs.
socal crushed wrote:
ryan martin?
Yep that's the one. He's sub 11 for sure.
Someone find him on twitter and he'll confirm.
dropped a turd outta blocks