lb202 wrote:
https://youtu.be/6J5XPzl-Ph4This 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:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8ekOnxX60MFrom 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:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pC22DhqMsBkFor 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.