MICHAEL NORMAN 9.86!!!! (1.6)

I like how sprintgeezer acts like the authority on sprinting performance but simply doesn't believe fast times in sprints are possible, and his evidence for that seems to be that he just refuses fast times are real.

Seemingly stemming from the fact he once ran a windy 10.27 so can't understand how someone runs 9.86.

They jogged to keep their contracts, what can’t you understand?

Incompetence at a nothing event where competence was not required, that’s what’s going on.

It’s no big deal since the event meant nothing, but it would be nice if cooler heads prevailed. All these athletes will have plenty of chances to run again.

lb202 wrote:

NormanBenjaminObserver wrote:

What is going on?

They jogged to keep their contracts, what can’t you understand?

Lol. yeah, right.

Idiotobserver wrote:

lb202 wrote:

They jogged to keep their contracts, what can’t you understand?

Lol. yeah, right.

Go watch the video I posted before then since you’re so smart ???

lb202 wrote:

NormanBenjaminObserver wrote:

What is going on?

They jogged to keep their contracts, what can’t you understand?

My comment was more about the timing system. Because the times are all over the board, it creates more suspicion about Norman's 9.86.

Y’all please check twitter for even Gaults account

They simply jogged the races, nothing fishy. Cmon guys, the 100m was legit.

they’re all over the board because once again most chose to jog their races

NormanBenjaminObserver wrote:

lb202 wrote:

They jogged to keep their contracts, what can’t you understand?

My comment was more about the timing system. Because the times are all over the board, it creates more suspicion about Norman's 9.86.

Watch the race. Baker mailed it in over the second half. Norman and Benjamin didn't. You are the one attempting to "create" suspicion. Both Norman and Benjamin were tremendous athletes who competed at the international level while they were in high school. Rai Benjamin ran 21.0 and 46.x indoors, while Norman ran 20.14 and 45.19 his senior year, tied for the fastest time run by a high schooler in the 400, and nearly the fastest 200 meter time ever run by a high schooler, finishing just behind (not very far behind at all) Noah Lyles in that race, who currently runs 19.50.

I've had this argument with people for years based on the evidence, I have consistently said that Norman is obviously capable of running in the 9.8 range. His 10.27 (-1.2m/s) in high school was equivalent to a 10.19 with no wind, and to a 10.09 with a 1.6 m/s tailwind. So you mean to say that it's suspicious for Norman to have improved from a ~10.09(+1.6) in one of his only competitive 100m races ever in the same conditions to a 9.86 (+1.6) (0.33 seconds improvement) over the course of four years?

His wind-legal 200m PR at the time was a 20.14. Now it is a 19.70 (and that is clearly not his peak 200m performance), which is an improvement of 0.44 seconds. His 400m PR has gone from 45.19 to 43.49, an improvement of almost two seconds. He is built in a Bolt-like way, with freakish proportions and a remarkable ability to be powerful and turn his legs over in a way that is normally difficult for people his height. Rai Benjamin makes similar use of his tall frame, but Norman's ability to turnover is beyond world-class. I honestly believe his ability from the starting blocks is comparable to nearly any sprinter in the 100m today except for perhaps Coleman, and his top-end speed and speed endurance speaks for itself through his other performances.

It's blindingly clear that times in the 9.8s are within his capability, there is no actual evidence to suggest his time was illegitimate, and the bitterness people on these boards demonstrate towards impressive performances is just absolutely tiresome.

Relax.

Everybody is hoping that this was for real. Everybody.

We just want confirmation, because it would be so great.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Relax.

Everybody is hoping that this was for real. Everybody.

We just want confirmation, because it would be so great.

What "you" want is for people to not confirm the event until "you" personally confirm it. Relax and get over yourself. It is your error that you did not fly to Forth Worth to personally measure and time the event.

Does anybody actually fall for that stuff?

I don't understand. I see a lot of commentary out there (and I saw it last year, too) of people RAVING about Normans "starting" ability.

If his start is so good -at the level that I've seen hyped online in certain corners-, and certainly his ability to decelerate is obvious, why in the world would he allow his coaches to not let him run the 100? Why doesn't he just make the switch to the 100? Are his coaches oblivious to this or something?

If one assumes he's got a start second only to Coleman, has a 19.70 200m PR, and just ran a 9.95 basic at perhaps a glorified practice...how bad of a coach would you be to keep telling him, "no, I won't allow you to run the 100 at ALL, you must only be a 2/4 guy with an emphasis on the 4." Wouldn't that be an incompetent coach or something?

My argument would be Norman's start is not nearly as good as seems to get hyped. Though, for a 2/4 guy, it might be pretty stellar. In comparison to good 100m starters, though, he likely has moderate starting ability. I'm now on the fence on this argument because I admit I often don't see what's clearly before my face. But, if I'm not accurate, and his start is such a plus for him, then what is he doing running 400s as his primary event?

This was in 2016 but the point still stands

Sprintgeezer wrote:

Does anybody actually fall for that stuff?

^ And he confirms my observation.

Please ignore Norman's 9.86 until this troll gives us his personal approval.

PS. What no one believes is all of your "stuff."

I was talking about your stuff.

I personally find it tedious, unimaginative, and boring.

Seriously, does anybody fall for it? Otherwise it would be a lonely pursuit.

lb202 wrote:

https://youtu.be/6J5XPzl-Ph4

This was in 2016 but the point still stands

And what point is that? Is that supposed to be representative of his start being second only to Coleman? His ability to eat up that field?

lb202 wrote:

https://youtu.be/6J5XPzl-Ph4

This was in 2016 but the point still stands

Alright, alright, now THIS is interesting.

The thing about the "Norman is an INCREDIBLE STARTER" hype is that it's usually built around cherry picked evidence. Him eating up other high schoolers, or winning junior international fields where he was FAR and AWAY the superior talent proves what we already know: Norman is an incredible talent who has already proven himself as a powerhouse sprinter. But if you get into the weeds of something so specific as "he has a better first 50 meter ability than most 100m specialists", then you need to dig around a bit more.

Exhibit A:

From the same year as the 2016 U20 Champs. Running a similar time, but obviously in completely different circumstances (it was a semi-final rather than a final) against a COMPLETELY different level of talent, his first 50 meters looks....like nothing special. In fact, based solely on the eye test, the least noteworthy part of his race was his first 50ish meters. But, to be fair, it's a semifinal and conservation plays a role -even for a young buck-. Still, he wasn't just EATING UP Young, Rodgers, and Gatlin in that run; his success came AFTER those first 50 meters, which in my book is where it really matters over 200, anyway.

My point being, he's probably a good starter in the context of a 2/4 guy, but against other 100 guys of any consequence his start isn't especially an advantage to him outside of the fact that it doesn't put him out of the race before he can even have a chance.

But, maybe I'm wrong. But in the final, it was much of the same:

For kids, what he and Lyles are doing in these runs are EPIC, my point isn't to argue or question that. But, like...if we keep posting out of context vids here for making arguments, then lets at least include that one could argue makes a case AGAINST those claims.

good kidd madd city wrote:

orderly wrote:

Why would you not leadoff Coleman?

Exhibit A

https://youtu.be/4Q7zyBxov2k

that’s against high school kids, coleman will start that well and get that much of a gap against the beat in the world