I need and will pay a stats guy to compare reaction times of Tokyo 2021 vs Eugene 2022.

I don't have the time or I would. Here's Tokyo though. If you go to the official site, they omitted a lot of the relevant details, which I'm sure is why you couldn't quickly find the RTs.

worldathletics.org

The XXXII Olympic Games (Athletics)

The XXXII Olympic Games (Athletics)

Open link

Allen's reaction times in Tokyo: 0.146; 0.121; 0.133.

As to the field: Fastest reaction time in the final: 0.120; three 0.13x, two 0.14x, two 0.15x.

Fastest individual in the semis was 0.121 out of 24 individuals. One other had a 0.12x. Five had a 0.13x. 17 individuals were 0.14x or higher.

In the heats, 4 out of 39 individuals ran 0.11x. Another 4 were 0.12x. If my count is right, 64.1% of the field was over 0.14x (25/39).

HOWEVER, in yesterday's Eugene final, three different athletes had a faster reaction time than all 70+ reaction times in Tokyo at 0.099, 0.108, and 0.109. Holloway also had a 0.124. Only a handful of times in Tokyo were even faster than that, and he was only 4th fastest in this final. Of note that the two SLOWEST in the Eugene final would still have been middle of the pack of reaction times in Tokyo.

Maybe that gets you started. Double check me and I may have a number or two slightly off but in general it's right.

I did this already

DEVON ALLEN ROBBBED. .09999? - LetsRun.com

What do you want done with the data?

More data will be more conclusive in developing a credible theory but I would immediately hypothesize based on this small sample that the reading for reaction times in Eugene was not less than a tenth of a second off. Meaning, even Allen's lightning quick 0.09 was probably closer to a 0.109. Maybe even higher.

Whoops, trying the link again

To your point sprinter guy, the sample size is enormous. For a difference as drastic as we see between Doha and Eugene, ~175 data points in the 100m and 110h is enough to put this way way waaaaaay past any reasonable doubt that there is a difference

Mens 100M semis from Doha to Eugene is super interesting as well.

In Doha 5 of the 24 men reacted under .150 seconds (actually up to .153)

In Eugene 23 of the 23 men reacted under .150 seconds (actually under .147)

Are they using the same equipment as in the NCAA's??

meant to post this here --

Can you think of any other reason why this can possibly be the case other than clear technological or mechanical error? This certainly seems like one of those things that we can draw reasonable assumptions based simply on the data. Every other explanation I can think of seems incredibly improbable.

No, I'd only caution slightly in saying that we can only prove the difference between the system in Doha and the one in Eugene. Obviously I think its an error of some kind, but statistically all we say is that its different.

It can't be overstated how big the difference is. Especially in the absence of some kind of groundbreaking innovation in technology or training, the human race can't simply have improved to that degree. This is the equivalent of "super shoes" taking the marathon from 2:04 to 1:46. It simply has to be the timing system

I had two backup theories that just don't seem likely at all:

1) Athletes suddenly started training reaction time way harder, especially in the last month or so, and were collectively significantly successful in this endeavor. Not likely.

2) Possible PEDs, whether legal or illegal, improving what is possible on the average. Even less likely. Because, everyone would have had to be on board and it would have had to happen all at once, because there's likely a pattern and it is not just one athlete.

It's mostly the same runners if we use Doha, Tokyo, and Eugene anyway, so the advancement of the sport/training is irrelevant either way. If we were comparing 1900's reactions to todays then sure it might matter, but we aren't.

Olympic trials would also be a good data point to add

Recalculated the numbers without early rounds. Using just semis and finals from the mens 100, mens 110h, and womens 100 we get...

Doha - Avg. 154.4ms, 3 120ms or better

Eugene - Avg. 133.2ms, 20 120ms or better

probability of happening by chance - 2.65 * 10^-9

Based on all the data, I definitely think that Devon Allen's actually reaction time was higher than .109, probably more like .119 . But whatever the exact number is, it's well over the allowable .100 which is the most important thing.

Devon Allen got a raw deal. He didn't false start and he shouldn't have been DQ'd.

What is 2.65 * 10^-9 in laymen's terms approximately? A million to one? A billion to one?

Sorry. Its about 1 in 377,358,490

Rojo, while you're at it, have your stats guy explain why the Yankees are so much better this year than last year? Must be something right?

Better yet, get someone to go out and test the equipment. There is no way that equipment can be 100% accurate up to one one thousandth of a second.

If you include london2017 you will see that londons times are between doha and eugene. there seem to be decently large differences based on the location (timing euquipment). Thats not an issue as long we dont come too close to 0.1 which we did in eugene now