Centrowitz/Sowinski target 1000m AR

wrong

it was substantial extra distance

go look at previous 2 wrs

in the 2'13, coe is also in an outer lane but within lane 1 in 2 or 3 s

no

the vid only shows him dipping into lane 1 at ~ 12s in

he came into that position from outer lane 4

wrong calculation

he started in outer lane 4

to run all of bend in that position is ~13.5m

to run all of bend in outer lane 1 is ~ 2.6m

the average of these is 8m

knock off 0.5m for reaching outer lane 1 at ~ 100m in instead of full 116m

knock off another 1.25m for the distance the waterfall start in outer lane 4 is ahead of the perpendicular at 200m line ->

6.25m

eh ???

waterfall start is clearly visible

failing that, go download iaaf track marking scheme & get a diagramatic answer

nonsense

the extra distance is in region of 6m

i last looked at the vid about 6/12 ago until now

what i remembered was take home message of 6+m

no

the important fact i remembered from 6/12 ago was that he ran 6m extra

that doesn't change when considering he dips into outer lane 1 at 12s in vid

because the difference in distance between inner lane 2 & outer lane 1 is trivial

it reduces 6++ to 6+, which if you have the comprehension capability, is still 6m

you clearly have no clue about maths

point me to your 2'11 clocking

where is it ???

ventolin^3 wrote:

in his 2'13, he is in outter lane like noah, but still gets into lane 1 in something like 2 or 3 sec

work out the "cut in" distance ???

If Coe reaches the circle faster than requiered (I don't want to check since it's with absolutely no interest for the question) it just would proof that he has run some extra distance.

Maybe you can just explain what's an "cut in" point on a straight line?

You have also said that all the tangents from the starting line would reach the circle 15m inside the race. Well, every point has just one tangent. Two different tangents can't reach the circle in the same point.

Don't you really get the point of a straight line being shortest connection between two points?

To your untrained eye, having never run a track race in your life, when you see NN's feet at 12 seconds into the video, you conclude that's when NN ENTERED lane one.

To those who have actually run in a track race, when we see NN's feet for the first time at the 12 second point, it CONFIRMS he was in that position for most of that bend.

You are out of your depth on this board because it's so painfully clear to everyone you've never stepped foot on an athletics track. Imagine posting on a mountaineering message board, filled with experienced mountaineers, and spouting on about watching mountaineering on TV, math formulas and maps. You'd be considered a joke right. Well that's you on this site.

This thread is nothing but a dumb math problem.

Sowinski is barely an 800m runner?

Progression.

Erik Age Symmonds

2010: 1:48.00 20 1:50.87

2011: 1:47.83 21 1:48.82

2012: 1:45.90 22 1:45.83

2013: 1:45.21 23 1:44.54

2014: 1:44.58 24 1:44.10

2015: ???? 25 1:43.86

2016: ???? 26 1:43.76

2017: ???? 27 1:43.83

2018: ???? 28 1:42.95

Not really understanding where your knowledge base is coming from.

Symmonds times are slower in 2010 and 2011 because of racing only D3 competition. Point being is consistent progress as you getting older and stronger, developing your aerobic fitness. It's one things to have the physical tools, but it's an entire thing having the work ethic and mentality to get it done. Erik has the added advantage of having much faster flat speed as well.

Ok, lets get to the meat of this whole thing: Can Sowinski or Casey or Centro break the record?

According to the video

http://www.flotrack.org/coverage/250996-Boston-University-Last-Chance-2014/video/737378-M-1000-H01-American-Canadian-NCAA-Record

Torrence's AR Splits (estimated due to handtime) were:

27.59

54.27 (26.68)

1:21.25 (26.98)

1:49.08 (27.83)

2:16.76 (27.68)

Now, this to me says that the record has a higher chance of going down. Torrence's slow first lap says to me that in the race on Saturday they can also afford to have a slower lap somewhere in the mix. The key however, will be that somebody pushes the pace after the rabbit steps off.

Here, the rabbit steps of at 450m, and Torrence knows he has to push so he does. In a professional race in front of tons of fans, not everybody wants to be the sacrificial lamb. So who will be the one to push when the rabbit steps off? That will determine if the record goes down or not.

Watch the video. NN gets to the outside of lane one, with a runner on his inside, almost immediately. He runs on the outer side of lane one, in this same position, for the entire bend. He does not come anywhere close to running an extra six meters on that first bend!

"Imagine posting on a mountaineering message board, filled with experienced mountaineers"

-sadly, your analogy collapsed here. There are very few experienced track racers here. It is, however, rife with wannabes, armchair quarterbacks, and complete posers.

You're wrong. The vast MAJORITY of middle and long distance running fans, and posters to this board, are former or current competetors of every level. This sport does not have traditional fans who've never played the sport, like football. The point is that most people on here have laced up a pair of spikes and raced on the track at some point in their lives. They have competitive experience and bring that knowledge to the discussion. Ventolin clearly does not.

Ritz Raff wrote:

This thread is nothing but a dumb math problem.

but is there any other kind of math problem?

utterly clueless about maths

the waterfall start means the tangent from it, the shortest path, reaches inner lane 1 at 15m

if he cut in earlier, he woud no longer be running a straight line to reach this 15m point but approximately on 2 sides of an isosceles triangle

extra distance compared to straight-line/tangent

if you don't know what the "cut in " comment means in respect to this problem, you have absolutely no clue about this topic

it beggars belief how little you seem to know about maths

can't you comprehend that any tangent from any part of the waterfall start reaches inner lane 1 by 15m ???

can't you comprehend that in this problem there exists a convergence point of an infinite number of different tangents from the arc representing the waterfall start???

you do know that spouting your 3rd grade mantra doesn't make you look smart when the problem actually involves finding the convergence point of an infinite number of tangents from an arc ???

& where is your 2'11 for 1k ???

that is "trained of eye" that impresses

you cannot clearly see his feet compared to lane line earlier

the 1st instance you know he definitely dips into lane 1 is 12s in

utter nonsense

all you conclude is that at 12s in he dips into lane 1

you cannot clearly see his path prior to that, just a rough gauge from other runners

you clearly no nothing about track or logic

eh ???

you are the one posting illogical nonsense

where is your 2'11 to show you have the impressive credentials to aggrandize your opinions ???

utterly clueless

howard cosell was greatest boxing commentator of all time

how many times did he fight for the heavyweight title ???

you think you know more about boxing than he did, even if you had a boxing career ???

spouting illogical nonsense offers you that soubriquet hands down

In terms even I can understand-

Every point on the waterfall starting line is equally distant from the point at the convolution of the straightaway and the turn that sits 30cm away from the curb-(or 20cms out if there is no curb). This holds true for all waterfall starts anywhere on the track.

the shortest distance between two points is a straight line.

I have eyes and a brain wrote:Watch the video

i have now again & a lot

NN gets to the outside of lane one, with a runner on his inside, almost immediately

no

even at 7s in he has 2 runners inside him, albeit 1 is behind, but still 2 runner widths from inner lane 1

He runs on the outer side of lane one, in this same position, for the entire bend

no

you can't see the lane markings clearly & number of guys inside this makes that impossible

He does not come anywhere close to running an extra six meters on that first bend!

yes he does

watch the vid properly & do some maths

Trackman1 wrote:They have competitive experience and bring that knowledge to the discussion. Ventolin clearly does not.

please tell the board when & where you ran a 2'11 for 1k ?

that is level of "competitive experience" & concomitant "knowledge" that woud offer you some superior insight to anyone else posting on this topic

where is your 2'11 ???

Ventolin, what do you predict for the 1000m tomorrow?

the 2'16.7 nr is a solid time, imo worth 2'15-low outdoors, worth about 1'45-flat outdoors for a "pure" 800 guy, meaning you probably aren't going to beat 2'16.7i without that current basic outdoor 800 speed for a 800 guy attacking it

it usually little matter how good your current 1500 is ( as in centro's case ), 1k is basically an extended 800, but in centro's case his 1500 strength allows him a few tenths leeway for current outdoor 800 speed

just a rough case specific formula for centro

try & guess his current outdoor 800 shape & multiply by 1.295 for 1k indoor

brief search leads me to think he woud be doing well to be better than 1'46.5 outdoors currently, so i give him limit of

~ 2'18.0

in a "perfect" race

realistically i expect no better than

2'18-low/mid

The 200m stager for lane two is less than 4 meters. NN was in the outside of lane one for most of that first bend. How the hell do you figure he ran an extra 6 meters on that first bend?

You're wrong and unwilling to admit it because you're a stubborn fool.

Eveyone who watches that video clearly sees that NN did not run an extra 6 meters on that first bend.