Rojo and Usain Bolt

trello wrote:

He is not as much of an outlier BECAUSE he has a typical sprinter build (and because he's slower). Pay attention here.

You don't understand statistics very well. Blake's 19.26 IS a crazy outlier. That is not up for debate. The argument is that Bolt can be so freakishly fast because he's physically different than all other sprinters. How did Blake do it?

Could be, but somehow he got caught so I wouldn't assume they were the same.

I should have said that they are BOTH on PEDs, not necessarily the same one. Also, Blake clearly mistimed his use since it was still in his blood for an in-competition test.

Just the fact that you're seriously trying to argue that stride length has nothing to do with the length of a person's legs already makes you a joke.

Of course it's possible to have a longer stride length with shorter legs, but it's energetically unfavorable. There is basically an optimal stride length that is directly proportional to your leg length. This has been shown and known for many years, so to argue differently is just ridiculous.

And in general, yes, taller people will have a slightly lower cadence when running at the same speed.

Now, if you train the push-off force you generate, then you might increase your optimal stride length and thereby gain an advantage on your opponents if you retain the stride frequency.

clarified wrote:

I should have said that they are BOTH on PEDs, not necessarily the same one. Also, Blake clearly mistimed his use since it was still in his blood for an in-competition test.

Yes, just to re-clarify, I don't think Bolt is clean and don't really know either way. However this is how I interpret Rojo's comments:

1. Lots of top sprinters are doped, maybe Bolt is too, he doesn't necessarily have an advantage there

2. Bolt is very tall, conventionally thought of as a big disadvantage in sprinting

3. Bolt still manages to demolish the rest of the world, meaning that either a) maybe he could be even more of an outlier if he was shorter, or b) maybe height is not a disadvantage or even an advantage. Either way he's a freak.

4. If Bolt is such a "freak" in spite of all this, then maybe, just maybe, a similar outlier could run ridiculously fast times clean, maybe 9.8x is not a human limit as some might think regarding the history of drug testing results

Maybe that's not what rojo meant but it makes sense that way to me.

not about the face wrote:

False - you totally miss the point. The point is that there is an optimum bat length for hitting power, and an optimum leg length for sprinting 100m. Deviations from the normal range from optimum is not a reason to be good.

"there has never been a tall sprinter" is not true. There are many - just none that are as tall as bolt and fast. There has never been a world class 100lb sumo wrestler either.

You fail at engineering and at statistics. Don't try to weigh in on things you don't understand, leave that to rojo.

I feel like you're unaware that you're arguing with multiple people. You seem to be attributing points others have made to my argument. Are you sober?

Chicagodude wrote:

Just the fact that you're seriously trying to argue that stride length has nothing to do with the length of a person's legs already makes you a joke.

Of course it's possible to have a longer stride length with shorter legs, but it's energetically unfavorable. There is basically an optimal stride length that is directly proportional to your leg length. This has been shown and known for many years, so to argue differently is just ridiculous.

And in general, yes, taller people will have a slightly lower cadence when running at the same speed.

Now, if you train the push-off force you generate, then you might increase your optimal stride length and thereby gain an advantage on your opponents if you retain the stride frequency.

Stride length does NOT have anything to do with how long a person's legs are. Stride is a measure of the distance covered with each push off. That is clearly only dependent on how much force is being produced and has nothing to do with leg length. This is basic physics.

It has not been shown and shown for years. It is an idea that you have invented in your head. F=ma. I see no variable that stands for leg length.

So yes of course if you train to increase the force of your push off then your stride length will be longer. That's why we train. That's the whole point.

The Single Voice of Reason wrote:

not about the face wrote:

False - you totally miss the point. The point is that there is an optimum bat length for hitting power, and an optimum leg length for sprinting 100m. Deviations from the normal range from optimum is not a reason to be good.

"there has never been a tall sprinter" is not true. There are many - just none that are as tall as bolt and fast. There has never been a world class 100lb sumo wrestler either.

You fail at engineering and at statistics. Don't try to weigh in on things you don't understand, leave that to rojo.

I feel like you're unaware that you're arguing with multiple people. You seem to be attributing points others have made to my argument. Are you sober?

Sober and the only bio-engineer who is about to defend a phd on human gait. Reading you and your bros try to make sense of this is like watching rats try to build a waffle iron.

not about the face wrote:

Sober and the only bio-engineer who is about to defend a phd on human gait. Reading you and your bros try to make sense of this is like watching rats try to build a waffle iron.

Again, I don't know what you mean about me and "my bros" or who you think you're talking with each time you post, but so far I've only argued A) that Babe Ruth hitting twice as many home runs as his contemporaries doesn't correlate to anything related to Usain Botl's sprinting and B) that your wise-ass comment about bat length was not analogous to what you were using it to make fun of. My post about all the stride length/height crap was merely an explanation of what the other poster was trying to argue, which you seemed to have misread, AND I added the disclaimer that I wasn't arguing he was right, only that he was saying something different from what you were making an analogy for.

Those are the only two points I've made, and neither of them require any engineering or phd background...analogies are a function of reading comprehension and logic, and yours is failing. I'm sure you know more about gait than I do, but that's really not relevant.

You may indeed be extremely intelligent, but argument is not your strong point. And adding in your academic qualifications hardly changes that. Sorry bro.

Signed,

Someone With Advanced Degrees of His Own

1. I agree, I think Bolt has a big advantage over other sprinters. I think he could have been the fastest ever clean sprinter and gone sub 9.80 with no stimulants of any kind.

2. One reason his big frame doesn't betray him is talent. But I think he uses PEDs to avoid injuries and endure intense training.

3. Agreed, Bolt is a freak. I just rather see him run clean and beat other clean athletes. His career would likely be shorter and more injury filled with out PEDs.

4. 9.8x might not be the limit. But it surely isn't 9.5x either. Bolt's 9.58 is worth 9.53 with +2.0 wind.

If Bolt were the fastest (clean) person ever by just a fair margin Rojo's point would make sense. But he's so far out there over every other clean athlete that it's just impossible.

I'll post a picture in a minute to show what I mean.

hhxh wrote:

Stride length does NOT have anything to do with how long a person's legs are. Stride is a measure of the distance covered with each push off. That is clearly only dependent on how much force is being produced and has nothing to do with leg length. This is basic physics.

It has not been shown and shown for years. It is an idea that you have invented in your head. F=ma. I see no variable that stands for leg length.

So yes of course if you train to increase the force of your push off then your stride length will be longer. That's why we train. That's the whole point.

I agree. The fact that you can improve your stride length would confirm this argument.

My stride-length is much shorter than other runners of my height but I have a much faster turnover (> 230 strides per minute when starting or sprinting).

I can't wait until the Brojos are made to look like fanboy idiots when Bolt is caught. And he will be caught eventually.

what is this Rojo? amateur hour?

you sound like my 12 yo sons talking about how Usain Bolt is taller than his competitors therefore he is faster

and yes hes a total freak, but so is basically everybody sub-10, and while he might be the biggest freak of them all (maybe 9.7s legal) the stats don't lie, and his 9.58 is comparable to the likes of FloJos 10.49 relative to the next best times (also doped)

LetsRun.com's Editor's Note: Robert Johnson has now written a full column with his views on this subject matter. This thread which was a reaction to one or two lines Rojo initially said on the HP about

today's Quote of the Day

. You can read the column Robert has written (without reading any of these posts) here:

How Can Usain Bolt Be Clean? He's the Lebron James and Babe Ruth of Track and Field

I took the list of the top 101 sprinters in history - actually 101 because numerous people are tied at 10.00

Then I removed everyone who appears on this list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_athletics

Except the 5 guys who tested for cannabis.

Only 79 remained. 20% doping rate in the top 100! And those are confirmed. Surely others on the list got away with it.

Then I plotted the best times. Take a look at this link.

http://ge.tt/3xfBe3m/v/0?c

Look at how much faster Bolt is than all the rest.

I haven't read any of these posts. I'm going to now but did want you let you know I've spent all day writing a column as to why I think Usain Bolt is clean.

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2013/07/how-can-usain-bolt-be-clean-hes-the-lebron-james-and-babe-ruth-of-track-and-field/

How Can Usain Bolt Be Clean? He's the Lebron James and Babe Ruth of Track and Field

hhxh wrote:

F=ma. I see no variable that stands for leg length.

Hey Newton, I don't see any variable that stands for stride length in there either...

The fundamental constituent of the universe - whatever it is - always existed. It had no beginning.

rojo wrote:

I haven't read any of these posts. I'm going to now but did want you let you know I've spent all day writing a column as to why I think Usain Bolt is clean.

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2013/07/how-can-usain-bolt-be-clean-hes-the-lebron-james-and-babe-ruth-of-track-and-field/

How Can Usain Bolt Be Clean? He's the Lebron James and Babe Ruth of Track and Field

See my post about Babe Ruth above, but wait wait...you're argument relies on LeBron also being clean to have any validity...LeBron is probably. Doping. Basketball players are randomly tested 3x throughout a season...at the time of their third test, they know they are free to do what they want. Often these tests are not well spaced out, so there are plenty of NBA players juiced as hell for the second half of the season. The best one of all of them? Yeah, right, I'm sure he's clean.

Jesus, Rojo. You're knowledgeable about T&F but don't kid yourself into thinking you know jack about the major sports. You obviously don't.

hhxh wrote:

It has not been shown and shown for years. It is an idea that you have invented in your head. F=ma. I see no variable that stands for leg length.

Count how long it takes Jason Hartman to take 10 strides vs. Lelisa. The difference is striking:

hhxh wrote:

Stride length does NOT have anything to do with how long a person's legs are. Stride is a measure of the distance covered with each push off. That is clearly only dependent on how much force is being produced and has nothing to do with leg length. This is basic physics.

Furthermore, as for the basic physics: Force is measured in kg*m/s^2... You can't simply equate that to stride length, measured in m (length) without taking into account mass (kg) and the amount of time (s) that that force is applied. Both of these vary with height.

trello wrote:

hhxh wrote:

F=ma. I see no variable that stands for leg length.

Hey Newton, I don't see any variable that stands for stride length in there either...

Do you not see the "a"? Are you blind?