Why must these threads always get sidetracked.
Aren't there enough threads making up times for what coe and ryan could have run or might have run?
Let's leave this one to talking about korir.
Why must these threads always get sidetracked.
Aren't there enough threads making up times for what coe and ryan could have run or might have run?
Let's leave this one to talking about korir.
Mr. Obvious wrote:
Why must these threads always get sidetracked.
Aren't there enough threads making up times for what coe and ryan could have run or might have run?
Let's leave this one to talking about korir.
C'mon man...it's better than calculo always highjacking these threads!
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:
calculo wrote:it's about stride length
now, this isn't just about leg length but obviously that does set an initial baseline - taller the guy, longer the stride
however, stride length isn't technically an anatomical measurement, it's a trajectory like those ole cannonball problems in
HS physics - projectile motion
the stride is the projectile motion of the guy or trajectory
now say, a 45.00 has 200cm stride & done no weights
if he does lot of weights, his leg length obviously stays same but his "muzzle velocity" increases from all that leg pressing
( assuming mass doesn't beef up too much - you can weight-train to increase strength without bulking up - otherwise weightlifters/powerlifters coudn't lift heavier weights & stay in same weight category ! )
he can push off the ground more powerfully & increases his trajectory
it may increase by say 2.5 - 5.0cm
this -> assuming his aerobic/anaerobic ability remains constant which shoud be possible for maturing/developing guy, his theoretical 45.00 quickens to
- 45.00 * ( 200 / 202.5 ) = 44.44 !!
- 45.00 * ( 200 / 205.0 ) = 43.90 !!!
these are rough'n'ready figures to demonstrate a principle
Weights just bulk you up and slow you down, Calculo. Too many weights just make you stiffer and ruin your range of motion. The next day you are always sore unless you are on a strength boosting/recovery aiding PED.
Have you ever been in side a weight room in your life?
zzyzz wrote:
Have you ever been in side a weight room in your life?
After seeing Semenya in the 1500 prelims, I bet she's been inside a few weight rooms.
calculo wrote:
it's about stride length
now, this isn't just about leg length but obviously that does set an initial baseline - taller the guy, longer the stride
however, stride length isn't technically an anatomical measurement, it's a trajectory like those ole cannonball problems in
HS physics - projectile motion
the stride is the projectile motion of the guy or trajectory
now say, a 45.00 has 200cm stride & done no weights
if he does lot of weights, his leg length obviously stays same but his "muzzle velocity" increases from all that leg pressing
( assuming mass doesn't beef up too much - you can weight-train to increase strength without bulking up - otherwise weightlifters/powerlifters coudn't lift heavier weights & stay in same weight category ! )
he can push off the ground more powerfully & increases his trajectory
it may increase by say 2.5 - 5.0cm
this -> assuming his aerobic/anaerobic ability remains constant which shoud be possible for maturing/developing guy, his theoretical 45.00 quickens to
- 45.00 * ( 200 / 202.5 ) = 44.44 !!
- 45.00 * ( 200 / 205.0 ) = 43.90 !!!
these are rough'n'ready figures to demonstrate a principle
But vent, wouldn't the longer trajectory have a longer duration, too?
Help me out.
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:
calculo wrote:it's about stride length
now, this isn't just about leg length but obviously that does set an initial baseline - taller the guy, longer the stride
however, stride length isn't technically an anatomical measurement, it's a trajectory like those ole cannonball problems in
HS physics - projectile motion
the stride is the projectile motion of the guy or trajectory
now say, a 45.00 has 200cm stride & done no weights
if he does lot of weights, his leg length obviously stays same but his "muzzle velocity" increases from all that leg pressing
( assuming mass doesn't beef up too much - you can weight-train to increase strength without bulking up - otherwise weightlifters/powerlifters coudn't lift heavier weights & stay in same weight category ! )
he can push off the ground more powerfully & increases his trajectory
it may increase by say 2.5 - 5.0cm
this -> assuming his aerobic/anaerobic ability remains constant which shoud be possible for maturing/developing guy, his theoretical 45.00 quickens to
- 45.00 * ( 200 / 202.5 ) = 44.44 !!
- 45.00 * ( 200 / 205.0 ) = 43.90 !!!
these are rough'n'ready figures to demonstrate a principle
Weights just bulk you up and slow you down, Calculo. Too many weights just make you stiffer and ruin your range of motion. The next day you are always sore unless you are on a strength boosting/recovery aiding PED.
Right. That's why no sprinters have ever lifted without PEDs, you're saying?
Dolt post.
disgraceful_admin wrote:
800ftw. wrote:Probably the fact that he's moving faster.
He's moving faster, but we assumed "constant aerobic/anaerobic ability". Which means he's going to tire out faster at 43.90 pace than 45 pace.
The whole point is stride length is longer at the same effort. Meaning pace is faster. No change in energy systems per se is needed.
Fentrekker wrote:
Those of you who make cheating allegations based only upon performance, help us out. Just type up a list of fastest allowable times so who know who to call a cheater.
On this sad-sack board they'll need to make special lists based on nationality, hair color etc.
Bad Wigins wrote:
To say they have no weights in a country where rugby is the #1 sport is absurd.
No machines? Use free weights.
Sounds like you've never been.
rupp-certified saladbra wrote:
On this sad-sack board they'll need to make special lists based on nationality, hair color etc.
Then why don't you stay put on that "new, clean era of athletics" forum? You're probably one of those that believes doping started & stopped with the Russians. And now that I think about it, that's probably what has happened. All clean performances now...who would have thought? Lol.
Endurance Sport Doping wrote:
rupp-certified saladbra wrote:On this sad-sack board they'll need to make special lists based on nationality, hair color etc.
Then why don't you stay put on that "new, clean era of athletics" forum? You're probably one of those that believes doping started & stopped with the Russians. And now that I think about it, that's probably what has happened. All clean performances now...who would have thought? Lol.
You seem to have trouble with reading comprehension. Good luck with grade 8!
Huh? You're the one on the "new, clean era of athletics/cycling forum" that sprouts off about how clean athletics & cycling is now. So, instead of throwing out cat calls - why don't articulate why we should believe the sport is clean now? 🤔
Endurance Sport Doping wrote:
Huh? You're the one on the "new, clean era of athletics/cycling forum" that sprouts off about how clean athletics & cycling is now. So, instead of throwing out cat calls - why don't articulate why we should believe the sport is clean now? 🤔
What the fvck are you talking about? I've never ever heard of your little forum.
Read more closely, respond to the post at hand, and stop with whatever the fvck you're babbling about.
I don't know if Mo is clean or not but its not a total anomaly for people to get faster in their mid 20s. Plus, Farah just isn't racing any 12:40 or 26:30 runners. The best guys are running 12:50s and 26:40s. Current Mo would be dropped by peak Berkeley, Sihine (10000), Gebresellasie, Tadesse (10000), Kipchoge (5000) and Tergat 10000Just tonight Kipchichir and Ahmed set big pbs and they are 28 and 26. Lots o people got faster later, including Paul Tergat.
It's that easy wrote:
Capt. J. Kirk wrote:44s for 400m and 1:43.1 for 800m after one year's training. No bloody way is that plausible without help. It is a total joke.
Compare that to an average elite (top 10-15 consistently) that miraculously develops a kick overnight at age 28 (after years of hard training) just by doing push-ups!
rupp-certified saladbra wrote:
What the fvck are you talking about? I've never ever heard of your little forum.
Read more closely, respond to the post at hand, and stop with whatever the fvck you're babbling about.
I also know who you are....I've seen your posts on that other forum. So, trying to pull a fast one & play dumb huh? And what the fvck are you talking about? What's there to respond to in your "post at hand?" Your riducling posters on this forum for their doping bias. What a chump.
calculo wrote:
- footage shows track was not sludge as you claimis this a joke ???
you never seen dirt track
one after deluge making it total sludge ???
what part of
"conveyor-belt used as LJ runway"
your neurone not comprehend ???
-footage does not show Ryun running all of both bends wide. Your supposition he did run wide is just that
is this a joke ???
he runs wide every part of 1st lap & every part of 2nd lap shown 'til crushing away
he ran hugely wide on bends for that 880
he ran hugely wide in that 880y
/quote]
What are you going on about, 880yds? I never mentioned his 880 yd WR, I was talking about his 440 leg at Kansas Relays in 66.
I am absolutely correct in saying that the video footage of that relay shows him entering the first bend close with 3 other runners, and he is moving in to be in lane 1. It shows approx 1 sec of that bend, so you cannot say that he ran the entire bend wide! Likewise for the 2nd bend. It shows him slightly wide of another runner, but in lane 1. Again, there is about 3 secs of that bend, so you don't have any evidence he ran the entire bend wide.
So why are you mentioning lap 1 and lap 2 for a 440 relay leg!?!
In addition, the video footage shows the track being rolled just before the mile race, and he took over 10m behind the leader, not 20yds as you have claimed.
You have exaggerated the distance behind, exaggerated the condition of the track and made up how much extra distance he ran. The only evidence is a poorly edited clip which shows less than 10 secs of his hand-timed 46.9.
calculo wrote:
[quote]Ryun had plenty of other opportunities to show 44 speed for 400m
like Korir, he didn't need to show it, unless when required
but came nowhere near
never needed to show it
Suggesting he could is unbelievably idiotic
utterly laughable
he won every relay within shot
No he didn't.
His team only came 4th on 19.3.66, after his 48.5 leg. He certainly needed to have run faster there!
A week before Kansas Relays he also came 4th in the relay with a 47.6. Again, he needed to show his 44 flat 400 ability there to win, didn't he? Or was he only capable of 44.0 on that one day in his career and every other day, more like 47 flat!?
He also ran a 47.8 relay to come 3rd in June 66 and a 47.0 in coming 3rd in May 67.
So there are 4 examples of where he could have showed this 44 sec 400 ability in order to win the race, but failed to do so.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Ryun could run 45 flat 400m let alone 44 flat, which would have meant he was capable of being the open 400m WR holder in 67. Laughable comment.
calculo wrote:
Coe ran at least 10m wide when winning European 800 in 86 in 1:44.5, which in itself is worth 1:43.2 for the distance if run in lane 1laughable
pathetic
nowhere that much & so pathetic limpet-tight to cram's butt it was pathetic !!!
he wanted to be so much cram's butt-conjoint it was absurd !!!
They were also negative splits- 52.8/51.7
same for nobody-mckean, who was aggressive !!
so again not ideal and probably worth shaving a couple of tenths off
no
coe
was total parasite
It was also a championship race after rounds and it was cold, wet and windy
he won as a total parasite
His last 200m was 24.8
he won as a total parasite
and he ran about 2.5m wide on last bend
he won as a total parasite
so that makes it worth 24.5 at least, if run close to rails.
he won as a total parasite
There is your 1:43 with a 24 + last 200m
nonsense
he won as a total parasite
You seem obsessed with Cram's butt and parasites!
Since when is it a crime to follow your main rival, running much wider in the process, and then outkicking them in the straight? Happens all the time.
Coe got only 240m of drafting in total throughout the whole race, which is nothing out of the usual.
His laps were negative - 52.8/51.7.
He ran 2.5m wide on first lap, 8m on second, so those laps become - 52.5/50.6 = 1:43.1. Including a last 203m of 24.8, which = 24.4 for 200m.
Add on 0.1 for extra 40m of drafting = 1:43.2 - 24.4 last 200, 12.4 last 100m
calculo wrote:
offer me his solo last 400 in a 1'45 with 24+ ???
What is the relevance of the last 400m being solo?
Where is Korir's 1:45 or faster with a solo 2nd 400m and 24 last 200m?
W. Kipketer's 24.6 last 200m in Monaco 97 wasn't solo over last 400m. He only hit the front just before 600m. He ran no extra distance during race, had 200+m of drafting, and run 2nd lap in 50.7.
Coe's intrinsic 1:43.2 with 50.6/24.4 finish in a Championship after rounds is certainly comparable with Kip's 1:42.7 with 50.7/24.6 finish.
Coe's Moscow silver in 1:45.8, running 11m wide was equivalent to a 1:44.4 if run in route 1. His 2nd lap was 50.7, last 200m 24.9. He ran 7m wide on that 2nd lap and 3.25m at least over last 200m, so that equates to a 49.8!! and 24.4 finish (last bend in 11.8).
Also ran 1:45.4 in Viareggio 79 with a 51.1 last lap and 24.5 last 200m.
So he has run several 1:45 or faster races with 24 sec last 200's.
Relating to this thread's title, Korir certainly looked the most impressive in the heats in London today. I think he's the favourite, but I don't think he's going to walk it, and I'd be surprised if the winning time goes faster than 1:43 low. Will be interesting to see just how fast a 44 low 400 guy can finish in a slow 800m, if the time drifts out to 1:45 - 1:47!
I think I think Brazier and Rotich for the other 2 medals.
Fed-Up With BS wrote:
rupp-certified saladbra wrote:What the fvck are you talking about? I've never ever heard of your little forum.
Read more closely, respond to the post at hand, and stop with whatever the fvck you're babbling about.
I also know who you are....I've seen your posts on that other forum. So, trying to pull a fast one & play dumb huh? And what the fvck are you talking about? What's there to respond to in your "post at hand?" Your riducling posters on this forum for their doping bias. What a chump.
Honestly, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Provide a link or something, dipsh!t.
You "know who I am" yet you are talking about someone else, moron.
I don't post on any other sports forums and don't even know what this "clean sport" one is. Sounds horrible, so I guess that's why you're on it. If so pathetic loser is using my handle they can come at me here because I am the original.
Deanouk wrote:More exaggerated twaddle
more rubbish
No one else but you and your various alter egos would even consider for a moment that Ryan was ever capable of anything remotely approaching 44.0 for 400m
you have 0 analysis ability
He ran many relay legs and fastest he got was 46.9
only required in '66/'67 "when in shape" & needed to be as 20 yards down
Video footage was at wrong speed
is this a joke ???
i coudn't care if it was in super-slomo
i wanted to see weather & how much wide running he did not his vid speed !!!
it was lot of wide running !!
learn to analyse
and edited to show about 12 secs of his entire leg
enough to show serious wide running
prior mile showed appalling track with steamroller trying depserately to dry it out !!!
still insufficient as conveyor belt put in for LJ !!!
- Video footage can't be used to prove the 46.9 ht was accurate
no
chicago tribune said it was 46.9
give us your clocking ???
- footage shows track was not sludge as you claim
is this a joke ???
there is a steamroller at start !!!
it still coudn't fix the LJ runway !!!
learn to think
- footage does not show Ryun running all of both bends wide
he starts wide, he ends wide
he perhaps does lot of dipping in & out of 1st lane, but to think he didn't run seriously huge amount extra in race is totally absurd !!!
can't you think ???
Your supposition he did run wide is just that
is this a joke ???
he starts in lane 4 !!!
how is that lane 1 for an anchor ???
https://video.lib.ku.edu/items/show/1526he passes guy wide at ~ 1/2 way !!!
he finishes race in lane 3 !!!
how the fuuck in this universe was this a tight anchor leg in lane 1 at all times ???
can't you analyse ???
Ryun had plenty of other opportunities to show 44 speed for 400
he hardly ever needed to as not 20 yards back on anchor & often not rested for relays but he said he was rested for this meet albeit just few days before a run, so not even this fully rested !
but came nowhere near
is this a joke ???
see above
tell us when Ryun again was 20 yards behind in a leg ???
Suggesting he could is unbelievably idiotic
is this a joke ???
see above
total sludge !!! & he runs 46.9y !!!
starts in lane 4 !!! & ends in lane 3 !!!
to claim he didn't run serious extra is utterly absurd !!!
was he running huge parts of race on infield to make it 440.00 yards ???
Coe ran at least 10m wide when winning European 800 in 86 in 1:44.5, which in itself is worth 1:43.2 for the distance if run in lane 1. They were also negative splits- 52.8/51.7, so again not ideal and probably worth shaving a couple of tenths off. It was also a championship race after rounds and it was cold, wet and windy
laughable !!!
most pathetic continental run in history !!!
it can never be called a major as it can never be as just euros
he ran most pathetic race i saw at a continental !!!
so desperate to limpet cram, he felt his life depended on it !!!
he limpeted cram so bad, it looked liked he had put superglue on cram's vest at start !!!
so pathetic & ignominious a run i have never seen before or since !!!
His last 200m was 24.8, and he ran about 2.5m wide on last bend, so that makes it worth 24.5 at least, if run close to rails.
There is your 1:43 with a 24 + last 200m. More like a 1:42 high if negative splits and weather also taken into consideration
utter nonsense
he got huge huge drafting from cram so pathetic it is most ignominious televised 800 in history !!!
even worse, he hardly beat mckean who was utter crap in '86 on clock
he barely outsprinted a guy who was likely no better than 1'44-flat !!! shape in zurich at 75F
please
beg/borrow steal us that mckean was actually a 1'42-mid !!! guy in a zurich- '86 ???
coe whipped himself into something like 1'43-flat shape in zurich, but he was humilated by having to draft behind cram worse than a toxoplasmosis, more like total leech
i remember how coe got killed off by 2 800s in 1 day in edinburgh !!!
Ryun ran 880y WR when 2nd run on same day !!!
coe once tried 2 800s in 1 day in serious meet
it finished him !!!
go fetch coe's stunning edinburgh efforts for us to laugh at !!!
Kipketer's 1:42.77 in Monaco had a 24.6 last 200m, but he was close to curb throughought race and was drafted for more than 200m
is this a joke ???
he already said
"it was too close to zurich"
meaning zurich had wrecked him
in zurich he wouda run, if not off suicidal 23.0 / 48.3, but 24.25 / 49.1
~ 1'40.00 - 1'40.25
impress world
where is coe's estimated 1'40-flat run ???
rupp-certified saladbra wrote:But vent
who ?
it's calculo
wouldn't the longer trajectory have a longer duration, too?
Help me out
no
learn physics/logic
bigger propulse at same angle means 1st level calculation, not square or cubic root adjustment
you do not realise principle
guys will get bigger/stronger & average 6'0 of now in zurich, will in 50 - 100y be 6'3 - 6'6 with same "trajectory" for stride
the distance of 800 is fixed
it is not crept up by 1m every 25 years to cover every generation or such as from '50/'75/'00/'25 the 800m wouda needed to added on 1m every 25y to accommodate bigger stronger longer striding mofos, so becoming 801 then 802 then 803m race every 25y
fixed distances, which get reduced timewise by bigger striding mofos from longer strides
if a good zurich such as london-'12 couda averaged for 8 guys in 1'42.50 for fully-rested/ideal/etc
the expected zurich in 50 - 100y, coud be expected of '12 guys average of maybe ~ 6'0 at now at then of 6'3 - 6'6
1'35 - 1'38
totally dependent on when evolutionary limit kicks in, but it certainly ain't
1'38
& it will never be a runt at hugely alleged 5'9 if begged/borrowed an inch !!!
What about all those guys who ran sub 12:50 in Paris in 2012 before Mo crushed them at London?
People do get faster wrote:
I don't know if Mo is clean or not but its not a total anomaly for people to get faster in their mid 20s. Plus, Farah just isn't racing any 12:40 or 26:30 runners. The best guys are running 12:50s and 26:40s. Current Mo would be dropped by peak Berkeley, Sihine (10000), Gebresellasie, Tadesse (10000), Kipchoge (5000) and Tergat 10000
Just tonight Kipchichir and Ahmed set big pbs and they are 28 and 26. Lots o people got faster later, including Paul Tergat.
It's that easy wrote:Compare that to an average elite (top 10-15 consistently) that miraculously develops a kick overnight at age 28 (after years of hard training) just by doing push-ups!