Wild idea: Airpocket in shoes causing quicker reaction times to be recorded?

Product: Nike Air Zoom Victory Flyknit | Eastbay

I have no idea of the mechanics involved in how this could affect reaction time, but having been closely following the other related threads, this seems like it could be a significant variable (emphasis on "could") if the "air pocket" is something that has been introduced relatively recently.

wouldn't that make it read slower?

I just asked that question in a different thread earlier:

Maybe it's the super shoes that are the underlying factor to all these fast reactions?
All the data people look at is from previous championships. Can we look at other races throughout the years that aren't the world championships?

Wouldnt this have shown up in the Tokyo reaction times? Im not sure of the timeline of super spike adoption for sprinters.

That’s why I was curious if anyone looked at races other then just previous world championships.

Ockham's razor: it's the blocks. Look at what weird things went on at US trials last year.

Not only am I a fan of track and field but also drag racing. Drag racing has a similar reaction time ruling, rule. I've always thought this was an unfair rule. In drag racing when the christmas tree turns green you're good to go. But they have a similar reaction time rule. Where they come up with these rules is beyond me. You can look at a foot race or a drag race slo-mo replay and sometimes never can see where a foul occurred.

Sometimes there is a human that can just react faster than the above average human can. These persons should not be dq if they didn't leave their starting position before they were suppose to.

I kind of understand the rules of both sports, but if you are anticipating getting a flier and don't cross the starting line before the gun or christmas goes off you should be good to go. If you go to soon then a dq is what you get for your effort.

Many of these false starts from days gone by, could be rectified with instant replay, which is available in this here day and age.

Most modern age sports use whatever technology is available to score the game correctly. It's a darned shame that T&F is a century behind the rest of the sporting world.

To lay things out, here are the important times in the reaction time:

Time starting gun is shot

Time horns go off on the individual blocks

Time block pressure data gets to computer (or do the blocks timestamp it?)

Time assigned by computer from the data that the runner started

For 2022 worlds, the calculated last value minus the first value is clearly smaller.

It seems like most peoples guess is the calculation for a false start is faster than it has been because of something like the pressure data being different (the guess in this thread), or the computer algorithm being different.

It could be one of the other events though.

To throw out some wild ideas to go along with the thread title. Somebody used chewing gum (or a defective switch) when hooking up the cable from the starting gun to the computer which delays the starting gun signal by 20 ms, or the speakers in the blocks (which clearly seem different, being some internal, rather than external arrangement) are some new low impedance job that beep 20 ms faster than earlier (historically used to be a delay but now it is instant).

20ms is huge for computers and speed of the signal through the wires, but of course unnoticeable for a human. Someone screwed up in the testing and missed a calibration or delay somewhere in the chain above.

I agree it's the blocks. But WA's response would be those were different blocks. The official party line is - these are the same blocks as the last 3 worlds and they are working correctly.

To me, it doesn't matter whose blocks they are (the DL blocks are different than the Olympics which are different than Worlds). The blocks are supposed to be basicaly 100% accurate if you are telling me that it can measure 0.099 versus 0.010 so comparisons of all events should be valid - not just the last 3.

One thing that was proposed to me was "The Athletes are used to US starters who let it slide if it's 0.009 instead of DQing" so they were timing it. I was like, "You can't be serioius. There is no way that's the case. Plus most of these athletes rarely compete in the US so they aren't used to US starters."

One question. I've been told they also have high speed cameras that check to make sure the 0.0099 reading is correct. Is there really a frame by frame computer that is that accurate? I've been told they double checked the 0.0099 frame by frame. Is that possible?

Why are we ignoring the possibility of cyborg brain implants that facilitate superhuman reaction times? Is THAT tested for

You are on the right track. The brain implant is communicating wirelessly with the high-tech newfangled shoes, which are then directly stimulating the lower extremities to get them feet moving. This circumvents the comparatively slow synaptic path from brain to toe. I estimate this saves the athlete a good 10 or 20 milliseconds.

The computer system that performs the reaction time computations can easily be hacked into via Nest thermostats. All the RTs have been corrupted by operatives in Venezuela who use Italian satellites to connect to the timing apparatchiks - I mean, apparatus - via the Nest thermostats, thereby allowing them to make it appear that the hated US runners were guilty of premature reactulation. I've got a network diagram of all the IP addresses to prove this.

First of all, Devon Allen's reaction time was .099 not .0099.

Second, there are high speed cameras that go much higher than a thousand pictures per second, so yes it's possible. But given how poorly this situation has been handled by World Athletics, I don't believe their starting blocks camera system is as accurate as they claim.

There is obviously something wrong with the starting blocks. EVERYONE in the 100, 110h, and 200, (not just Devon Allen) is having reaction times .02 faster than ever before. So it's not just a Devon Allen problem, it's a systemic problem.

Rojo, keep demanding answers from World Athletcs and the timing company, Seiko. They have a serious problem that they refuse to address, and the only way it's ever going to get fixed is if someone keeps demanding answers about what is going wrong. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Starting blocks are stored overnight in a lightly secured facility prone to extreme temperature fluctuations. There is security cam footage of masked individuals accessing the facility at suspicious times. It would be very easy for a bad actor to reverse the polarity of some of the components so that they could be remotely manipulated to give false readings, literally changing reaction times as they happen. Wake up, sheeple.

IAAF just needs to relax the reaction time rules and require a race official to confirm the false start with video evidence that shows a visible advantage. The mens 200 tonight would be a potential WR attempt but for all the sprinters are going to be pinned to the blocks for fear of a false start.

I think the problem is calibration. Any computer system that tries to measure extremely small intervals of time, weight, etc. are only as good as their calibration. The calibration is only as good as the person doing it. Need to have an independent review of the calibration.

Historically, whenever a blanket improvement has been noted in track and field athletes, it is invariably due to a new PED bring introduced to the athletes.

No. Its not drugs. You are not even close to being right.

First of all, the .02 reduction in reaction times is happening to 100% of the sprinters. Not 100% of the sprinters are using drugs.

Second, none of these sprinters have had reaction times this fast at any other races this year, even at the most recent national championships and the most recent Diamond League races.

It's something that's happening at this world championship and ONLY at this world championship.

while idea: you are an idiot.