MICHAEL NORMAN 9.86!!!! (1.6)

Sprintgeezer wrote:

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.

I was talking about "your stuff.."

I personally find "your stuff" and "your analysis" tedious, unimaginative, and boring.

Seriously, does anybody fall for "your stuff"?

The answer is, No. "Your" attempt to discredit Norman's time is a borefest. "You" cannot accept it. Therefore, no one can accept it. Get over yourself, geezer dude.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

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.

Tedious, unimaginative and boring is your pompous, arrogant self.

You have been a fail for years, and you are a fail now.

We don't need your failed approval to know that Michael ran the time he did, for 100 m, with legal wind.

but blackloud... he has continually worked on his start since then!

If 2016 Norman with that start runs 10.27 into a headwind and 20.14

and then he has worked on his start since then:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63lDb4ICqMM

(from 2018)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2w8tXOAgrw

(from this year)

2020 norman bigger taller faster stronger BETTER start can get out FAST!

look at his 200m versus Lyles last year, he ate Noah and all the 200m specialists up on the start

Sprintgeezer wrote:

IF he can actually do it, and IF Gatlin or Baker again show 9.7/9.8 form, they have a shot (with CC) to put the WR down where JAM had it.

I’m not big on Gatlin on 2nd.

CC-Lyles-Norman-Gatlin/Baker

Don't put gatlin on there. I'm tired of him and his doping representing the us. I would put it coleman, baker, norman, lyles. Coleman is a great starter, you want lyles closing, and norman may be the best curve runner on the list

Yeah, you know, Gatlin has never seemed to me to out-perform on 2nd. That’s why I put him on anchor, and/or Baker.

I like Lyles for a long 2nd, if he can handle the stick. Yeah he’s amazing on anchor, but who would make a better 2nd? Gatlin works because he is decently fast, and very reliable.

jabouk wrote:

but blackloud... he has continually worked on his start since then!

If 2016 Norman with that start runs 10.27 into a headwind and 20.14

and then he has worked on his start since then:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63lDb4ICqMM

(from 2018)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2w8tXOAgrw

(from this year)

2020 norman bigger taller faster stronger BETTER start can get out FAST!

look at his 200m versus Lyles last year, he ate Noah and all the 200m specialists up on the start

So, my engagement on the discussion isn't to try to hate on Norman. Any type of question about the timing and all the other bologna from his 9.86 is probably academic because he CLEARLY represents mid 9.9 basic capability (which is what a 9.86 with +1.6 represents), so I have to buy it. I also buy that, between Lyles and Norman, Norman is a MUCH more efficient and explosive starter. So if Lyles can manage a 9.90ish basic 100m last year (9.86 +0.9) with his horrid start/acceleration, then certainly Norman can go at least 9.94ish. It's completely logical; so to keep in line with the original post, I buy this 9.86.

But I get combative when people start showing up claiming that Norman may well be amongst the best starters in the world even in the context of short sprinters. It looks like Norman is a student of the sport and has great desire, so I buy the competence and progress he's had on his start. Honestly? I don't have a full understanding of how good a starter he really is because we don't have any 60 meter results of any consequence from him and he's more apt to run against guys who excel in the 200 more than the 100, so comparing in race footage is a bit tricky. He HAS improved, I'm sure of it. But where does that progress put him in relation to the short sprinting worlds best? Tough to say, specifically.

Him eating up Lyles, well. I really like Lyles. I'm rooting for him, he's amongst my faves. But...his start is awful. Hell, he should probably take some training cues from either Normans coaches or Norman himself on how to figure out his start, because it doesn't look like he's making much progress in that department, frankly. So, when Norman gives it to Lyles on a curve, it doesn't give much weight to the "he's a great starter" argument for me, simply because Lyles is a TERRIBLE data point from a starts/acceleration perspective (imo, anyway). And agains: I'm a Lyles fan, to be clear.

Ultimately, my point is, if he had 85% the starting potential that the online hype artists portray, he'd have to be in the wrong event (400). And, more than likely, I believe him to be in the right event, meaning he's a good starter but great at it only in the context of a 2/4 guy and compared to other 2/4 guys.

But, hey, I'm willing to listen. If he's got a start that actually compares as well or better than most 100m specific guys, then I'd have to accept it. But if that ever really becomes the case, then he and his team REALLY need to consider moving down to the 100/200 specifically. It doesn't make sense to have one of the best starts in the world, and one of the best finishes in the world, but ignore all that to try to win a 400 title/wr. You could....just try for that in the more "famous" event (100).

Personally I'm of the belief that Lyles has distinctly better finishing ability in both the 1 and 2, so I could see looking at the odds and saying, "While I think I could beat Lyles in a 100 on occasion, I'll take my better chances in dominating the 400 so I can rack up my titles/records there rather than trying to fend off Lyles over 100 year in and year out".

Devils advocate; I could also see arguing a case for going for the 100 if Normans start is good enough because that puts all the pressure on Lyles to not lose too much ground before he runs out of real estate. That can be super advantageous, even if your competitor (Lyles) has an edge in finishing ability (think Ben Johnson vs. Carl Lewis). But that argument would probably hinge on him (Norman) legitimately having top 10ish/5ish starting ability in the world over the first 40 meters of a 100. Which, full disclosure, I don't think he has. But, again, I could be wrong in my assumptions/analysis.

You might be one of the most foolish users on this site.

Norman was ahead of everyone in that final at 60m except Gatlin - a multiple time World (or olympic) 100m champion......as a 16 year old.

I stand corrected!

After doing some research and having 24-hours to think about it, I think the Norman 100m performance is most likely legit. I watched his last 100m from 4 years ago several times. He was a 17yo and ran 10.27 into a 1.5 head wind; with better mechanics and a little wind at this back and he could have run 10.1x. Perhaps he was always a great 100m sprinter, but showed enormous potential in other events as well. Also, I watched yesterdays race several times and mechanically, he looked like a 100m sprinter, totally difference from the way he looked in high school.

Its wild to say it, but yes Norman may just be one of the best starters in the world. Very few 60/100 men can really get out the blocks like he appears to. More results would help show this for sure.

As for whether he is in the wrong event... I think Norman is an all time freak elite athlete who has the potential to be elite in all three sprints.

He is 22 now, will be 23 in December.

2018 | Age 20 | 43.61/19.84 --- all time 400m athlete already, major jump

2019 | Age 21 | 43.45/19.70 --- now top5 400m, 12th all-time 200

2020 | Age 22 | 9.86 --- 8th fastest american, already, 17th all-time

He has six months till he turns 23... and he's already all time for three events. Bolt barely ran 100m before he got good good... there's plenty of time for Norman to excel. I think he could end up top 5 AT 400/200 and can go sub 9.80 as well. Maybe he can get even faster who knows

NJ fan wrote:

You might be one of the most foolish users on this site.

Norman was ahead of everyone in that final at 60m except Gatlin - a multiple time World (or olympic) 100m champion......as a 16 year old.

Say that again with, a straight face.

Michael Norman, born 12/03/1997

US Olympic Trials for Rio: 07/01/2016 thru 07/10/2016

Do the math, then get back to me about "foolish user".

It IS "wild to say". Get him a sub 6.5 60 meter dash clocking, and then we can begin to talk about POSSIBLY being amongst the very best starters in the world. Dartfishing/Coach's Eyeing his 9.86 from youtube videos doesn't count, though.

To be fair, he essentially already IS elite in all three distances. Quick take, who is the better 100 guy RIGHT now, Lyles or Norman?

@blackloud I respect your discussion posts, thanks for contributing. Right now? Hot take, I'd go with Norman. In the same way that Lyles could beat Coleman early on, I think athletes do well in off-events when focusing on specific elements of their race plan. Whether Norman can be a 100m guy all year long with seven or eight sub 10 clockings is an entirely different story. Like you said, we need more evidence - my gut feeling on his elite starting ability is moreso a reflection of watching him progress over the last four years from HS

blackloud wrote:

To be fair, he essentially already IS elite in all three distances. Quick take, who is the better 100 guy RIGHT now, Lyles or Norman?

Based on Lyles' recent 18.90 (for 185m; no chance of breaking 20 if that was a 200m), Norman.

his 18.90 says wrote:

blackloud wrote:

To be fair, he essentially already IS elite in all three distances. Quick take, who is the better 100 guy RIGHT now, Lyles or Norman?

Based on Lyles' recent 18.90 (for 185m; no chance of breaking 20 if that was a 200m), Norman.

That's an interesting rebuttal. Maybe fair.

For me, I include recent history in the equation, though, too:

Let's call Norman's 9.86 (+1.6) a "basic" 9.94.

Lyles has the follow "basics" to his name already that are already ahead of that:

9.90 basic--9.86 (+0.9) Shanghai 2019

9.93 basic--9.89 (+0.7) Des Moines 2018

9.93 basic--9.92 (+0.3) Monaco 2019

9.94 basic--9.88 (+1.1) Des Moines 2018

He also DID run a 9.93 in a "semi" with a huge +4.0 wind on his back this year in Florida during early July. They supposedly all skipped the final because the weather took a turn for the worse. Presumably he wouldn't have run a semi race all out, either, and he ran that in the same race where Gatlin ran 9.98.

To me, Lyles history of beating Norman more often than over 200, and with a history of better basic times from years prior over 100 meters despite his poor starting ability, means Lyles is the better 100 guy as things stand today. The 18.90 might well be a poor result (something like, what, a 20.4x or so?), but he ran a windy 9.9 in a semi recently, too, so its not like he's been sitting on the couch during all this pandemic stuff.

I imagine a 100 face off where Norman DOES indeed out start Lyles, but Lyles passes him towards the end of the race for the win. And where does Coleman fit in all this? I guess I'm just counting him out because of the testing fiasco, but he adds an intriguing element to a potential Championship final with all three of them theoretically in it. He would certainly get out pretty well ahead of BOTH Norman and Lyles in a 100. Would that hurt Norman's start advantage on Lyles? Would they both inevitably just run Coleman down? It would actually be one helluva race, honestly. Though, based on statistical history, Colemans sub 9.8 basic puts him so far ahead of both Norman and Lyles, he should be able to stave them off. Theoretically.

If you were to assess the three in the 100/200 what we've seen from them, and I won't get technical and the wiser sprint heads can probably correct me.

In the 100:

Coleman ~ Best start/second best top-end speed/decent finish

Lyles ~ Worst start/best top-end speed (narrowly)/by far best finish

Norman ~ Second best start/worst top-end speed/decent finish

For the 100m, I'd find the start most important.

My ranking: 1. Coleman 2. Lyles 3. Norman

Coleman is first or second in the two most important components and builds up a big enough lead. Lyles has shown he can run down Norman if he doesn't have a terrible start (an area he's improving). Norman

200:

Coleman ~ Best start/second best top-end speed/ worst finish

Lyles ~ Worst start/best top-end speed/best finish

Norman ~ Second best start/worst top-end speed/decent finish

For the 200m, I'd have top-end speed narrowly edging finish tied as most important.

My ranking: 1. Lyles 2. Norman 3. Coleman

Lyles is best in the two most important categories. Norman needs a very bad start from Lyles to defeat him, in the 100 a bad one might suffice.

They're also starting roughly in line with the endzone and finishing around the end of the far endzone, which would be about 110y, so there's no doubt about the distance for me, nor about the credibility. Norman gets a very good start and is flying. The only question would be whether the wind gauge was accurate. He's absolutely that good. If he can run 9.94 basic in his first 100m race in years, with no one to chase, he can absolutely be a sub 9.80 basic talent in Tokyo.

He's already tied for #4 all time in the 400.................

confirmate wrote:

Sprintgeezer wrote:

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.

I was talking about "your stuff.."

I personally find "your stuff" and "your analysis" tedious, unimaginative, and boring.

Seriously, does anybody fall for "your stuff"?

The answer is, No. "Your" attempt to discredit Norman's time is a borefest. "You" cannot accept it. Therefore, no one can accept it. Get over yourself, geezer dude.

+1

You may be right but the argument applies to Bolt's coach equally. How bad a coach was he to have a potential world record holder at the 100m never running the event?