You've got to be kidding.
Sprintgeezer wrote:
If that remains impossible, then neither of them should go, and the 4th-place finisher should go in the individual 100m. They will all be there in the relay, anyway.
A drawing of lots is ridiculous, childish, and insulting to my intelligence--and totally unnecessary.
snooper wrote:
White pixels wrote:It's already been declared a tie, but when I zoom in on the finish line photo with the line drawn on it, I see white pixels from lane one's chest are past the line. Lane one looks like the winner to me.
Unfortunately you can't say for certain if those pixels are her bib or the track; the pixels appear whiter than both.
A suggestion for the future: don't use white bib numbers. Obviously they blend in with the white of the finish line. In a case like this, it could have helped determine the team.
No,those white pixels in front of the line are clearly not from the track. The track pixels are darker than the bib pixels. My opinion is that the runner in Lane 1 was the winner of this race.
Alistair and Jonathon Brownlee have a very decent chance of being clear by the finish and will then cross the line together I reckon.
White pixels wrote:
snooper wrote:Unfortunately you can't say for certain if those pixels are her bib or the track; the pixels appear whiter than both.
A suggestion for the future: don't use white bib numbers. Obviously they blend in with the white of the finish line. In a case like this, it could have helped determine the team.
No,those white pixels in front of the line are clearly not from the track. The track pixels are darker than the bib pixels. My opinion is that the runner in Lane 1 was the winner of this race.
To throw a further monkey wrench into the discussion I believe that the finish line is illegal. I was just watching the womens final again and if you have an opportunity take a look at the finish line. The lines are painted approximately 2" wide, with the survey placing the finish line of the front edge of the line. At the intersection of each lane line with the finish line a 2" x 2" square is created, which is pained black. That black square creates the black line images that you see on any finish photo. IAAF rules now stipulate that the black portion may not be wider than 20 cm on the front side, ensuring that the finish line image is, in fact, on the front edge. A portion of that black square should have been covered by white tape. When the race is that close is could make a difference. Now, there is a very small amount of blue color bleeding onto the white finish line image; that is indicative of the camera being in the front edge of the line from an inside camera placement; the blue pixel of a FinishLynx camera is on the right edge.
SomeCoach wrote:
To throw a further monkey wrench into the discussion I believe that the finish line is illegal. I was just watching the womens final again and if you have an opportunity take a look at the finish line. The lines are painted approximately 2" wide, with the survey placing the finish line of the front edge of the line. At the intersection of each lane line with the finish line a 2" x 2" square is created, which is pained black. That black square creates the black line images that you see on any finish photo. IAAF rules now stipulate that the black portion may not be wider than 20 cm on the front side, ensuring that the finish line image is, in fact, on the front edge. A portion of that black square should have been covered by white tape. When the race is that close is could make a difference. Now, there is a very small amount of blue color bleeding onto the white finish line image; that is indicative of the camera being in the front edge of the line from an inside camera placement; the blue pixel of a FinishLynx camera is on the right edge.
Leave it to Hayward Field to f*ck up the Olympic Trials.
White pixels wrote:
No,those white pixels in front of the line are clearly not from the track. The track pixels are darker than the bib pixels. My opinion is that the runner in Lane 1 was the winner of this race.
Actually, if you look at the track pixels, you can see that they are many different shades of white/grey. You are zooming in on a compressed JPEG image captured with a camera of unknown resolution, which was pointed at an unspecified screen displaying the finish photo (hence the tilt) and attempting to call the race by eyeballing the brightness of one pixel compared to the one next to it.
You're embarrassing yourself.
Broheim wrote:
Those pixels aren't clearly Tarmoh's bib. They could be, but its impossible to tell. If they are Tarmoh won. Tarmoh had a better lean if you go off shoulder angle.
http://postimage.org/image/4ao68bruv/Dead heat.
If anything this is a photo of how not to lean in a 100m.
You can't accurately tell the shoulder angle in the finish line photo. Remember, the left/right axis of the photo is time, not distance.
I also feel I have to mention again that this is clearly a camera-phone snap shot of a computer screen, so everybody should refrain from putting too much confidence in their own at-home analysis of this picture.
pjb knows what he is talking about. there's a lot of nonsense going on in this thread and being spouted by people who
a) don't know USATF/IAAF rules and
b) don't understand how finish line cameras work
pjb wrote:
Broheim wrote:Those pixels aren't clearly Tarmoh's bib. They could be, but its impossible to tell. If they are Tarmoh won. Tarmoh had a better lean if you go off shoulder angle.
http://postimage.org/image/4ao68bruv/Dead heat.
If anything this is a photo of how not to lean in a 100m.
You can't accurately tell the shoulder angle in the finish line photo. Remember, the left/right axis of the photo is time, not distance.
I also feel I have to mention again that this is clearly a camera-phone snap shot of a computer screen, so everybody should refrain from putting too much confidence in their own at-home analysis of this picture.
ENHANCE! But before you do that be sure to get their eigenvalues.
Just be glad that they were not trying to make the decision on the basis of an image like this - taken of the women's 100 finals at the World Championships in Helsinki in 2005!
http://www.iaaf.org/gallery/photofinish/eventCode=3365/photo=W_100_f_1/popup.html
Similar thing happened last year in swimming. Cullen Jones and Josh Schneider (teammates) tied for second place in 50 Free at US Championships. The top two qualified for World Champs. They had a swim-off in a Grand Prix meet in Charlotte several months later.
Interestingly, basically the same thing happened to Jones in 2009. He tied for second with Garrett Weber-Gale in the 50 Free with the top two qualifying for the WCs in Rome. They had a swim-off two days later.
(Jones won both swim-offs)
The sensible thing to do is what they do in any other event when there is a tie. They go on count back in all field events because the likely hood of a tie is highly more likely and in the sprints or track events there is an amazing timing system that can sort out any tie down to the thousandth but not in this case. Lol so count back who ran faster in the semi Tarmoh did. Who ran faster in the heats Tarmoh did so for me it's simple. Tarmoh goes! Now let's carry on with the rest of the trials!
Just thinking wrote:
The sensible thing to do is what they do in any other event when there is a tie. They go on count back in all field events because the likely hood of a tie is highly more likely and in the sprints or track events there is an amazing timing system that can sort out any tie down to the thousandth but not in this case. Lol so count back who ran faster in the semi Tarmoh did. Who ran faster in the heats Tarmoh did so for me it's simple. Tarmoh goes! Now let's carry on with the rest of the trials!
Actually, this thinking is quite flawed. At no time in track and field do you use what happened on a previous day to break a tie. This does not happen in the field events.
This should about cover it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxq9yj2pVWk
Make sure your image enhancer can bitmap.
Geeky Geek wrote:
Just be glad that they were not trying to make the decision on the basis of an image like this - taken of the women's 100 finals at the World Championships in Helsinki in 2005!
http://www.iaaf.org/gallery/photofinish/eventCode=3365/photo=W_100_f_1/popup.html
Fortunately, that tie wasn't for a podium spot...
SomeCoach wrote:
Just thinking wrote:
The sensible thing to do is what they do in any other event when there is a tie. They go on count back in all field events because the likely hood of a tie is highly more likely and in the sprints or track events there is an amazing timing system that can sort out any tie down to the thousandth but not in this case. Lol so count back who ran faster in the semi Tarmoh did. Who ran faster in the heats Tarmoh did so for me it's simple. Tarmoh goes! Now let's carry on with the rest of the trials!
Actually, this thinking is quite flawed. At no time in track and field do you use what happened on a previous day to break a tie. This does not happen in the field events.
The semi-finals were on the same day. If you cant even get elementary facts like this correct, you automatically forfeit your right to be allowed a vote.
steve dildarian wrote:
SomeCoach wrote:To throw a further monkey wrench into the discussion I believe that the finish line is illegal. I was just watching the womens final again and if you have an opportunity take a look at the finish line. The lines are painted approximately 2" wide, with the survey placing the finish line of the front edge of the line. At the intersection of each lane line with the finish line a 2" x 2" square is created, which is pained black. That black square creates the black line images that you see on any finish photo. IAAF rules now stipulate that the black portion may not be wider than 20 cm on the front side, ensuring that the finish line image is, in fact, on the front edge. A portion of that black square should have been covered by white tape. When the race is that close is could make a difference. Now, there is a very small amount of blue color bleeding onto the white finish line image; that is indicative of the camera being in the front edge of the line from an inside camera placement; the blue pixel of a FinishLynx camera is on the right edge.
Leave it to Hayward Field to f*ck up the Olympic Trials.
Deer Dildorian,
Yeah that world record by Eaton was really an F up.
Get your brain outa your arse.
Thanks for correcting me .... in my head I had been focusing on the rounds. An oversight on my part rather than not knowing facts.
anonomie me wrote:
Deer Dildorian,
Yeah that world record by Eaton was really an F up.
Get your brain outa your arse.
Typical Oregon fan. Changing a letter in my last name so it says "dildo" (how unimaginative) and bringing up a non-sequitur. With an education like that it's no wonder top recruits want to go elsewhere.
The difference between 4th and 6th is not comparable to one person going to the Olympics and one staying home.