Ya Ben was fastest out of the blocks way more explosive than Bolt. If you combine the power and genetics of both athletes and you get an athlete named Ben Bolt.
ukathleticscoach wrote:
Either way, Bolt has that insane stride. He's made the 100 about the last 50 meters, and in his 2009 record he split faster than the 60m world record anyways. Johnson would win a 40 yard dash sure, but not a 100m.
Bolt ran the fastest ever split to 30m during his WR[/quote]
tough one.ben ran 9.78,in seoul,but slowed down at the end and raised his arm.i believe he could have run 9.69 in that race.usain bolt ran his world records on a much faster track than the one ben ran his on.i actually think ben would win this-just.all depends on how much faster todays tracks are,than in the past.ben's 9.78 would be the equivelant of a 9.6 today,or even faster.ben has also said todays tracks are faster,and that he would probably have beaten bolt.yes,usain ran 9.58,but he would not run that on a 1980s track.
So much misinformation in this thread, but I'd just like to address the largest one: Bolt's 2008 run of 9.69.
First of all, he would not have run sub 9.60 as some of you say. His last 10m split was 0.90 seconds. All of his splits are in this photo from speedendurance.com:
http://speedendurance.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/berlin2009beijing2008usainbolt10msplits.jpg
If he had run through the line, his final 10 meters would most likely be 0.83 and he would have run 9.62.
And it isn't the best race of his life, it can just be argued that it's the same quality run as his 9.58, because the wind & altitude correction gives his WR a time of 9.62.
Anyway, just FYI, his precise time in Berlin was 9.572.
How is this even a comparison? I feel like 90% of these johnson supporters did not watch Bolt's 9.69.... As stated above me, his last 10m was .90... He most likely would have run .83 if he didn't start dancing on his way to the line... plus, his 80-90m split would've been faster seeing as how he started celebrating during that too..
T: Why do think it took so long for someone like Maurice Greene to match Ben's time?
CF: First of all, it depends on whether he matched it or not. Ben shut down before he finished his race. It's called "slicing the bologna thin." If you can break your record more often you'll pick up your bonus money every time you do it at $300,000 a pop. If Ben had run through the line he'd have gone 9.72.
T: Did Greene's 9.79 have anything to do with the new "springy tracks"?
CF: Yes, they've sped up the tracks. The IWAF, which is the sport governing body for track and field, set criteria for competition sites. The frequency of the tracks was to run between 28 and 80, 28 being very hard and 80 being very soft. 80 would be something like what Munich was: it was so soft people were even falling down. Seoul would have been about a 34.
These days they're going right outside of the specifications to try to speed up the tracks. In Tokyo, the track was a 13 and in Los Angeles it was an 11. In other words, f*ck the distance runners! So the long distances runners are getting stress fractures, but the sprinters are running faster. They've done everything to make conditions better for the sprinters.
T: Many people still refer to Ben as the fastest human on earth. Could he have gone even faster? What was he capable of?
CF: All those athletes in all those races — at least until 1996 — would never have beaten him. He would have still been there. It's very clear that had he run in Tokyo with that harder surface, he'd have broken his own record. He would have ran a 9.72 simply running through instead of raising his hands at the end. Add in the hard surface and we could have seen a 9.69. He slowed down and raised his hand at the end because, obviously, he wasn't anticipating that to be the last race he ever ran.
People should not forget that Bolt slowed down on the last meters when he ran the 9,59 in Germany. On this day, it could also be a 9,53 or 9,54 if he run through the goal with topspeed. Ben Johnson was a very good starter and the 9,79 in 1988 was impressive. I saw this race as a 16 year old boy back in the days. Also Ben slowed down a little bit before the goal, so i think it could also be a 9,73 or 9,74.
BUT a 9,73 or 9,74 is not a 9,53 or 9,54 so it should be clear for everybody who would have won a race between the two sprinters.
This is insane to even ask such a question. when bolt broke the world record and ran 958 Tyson Gay in the same race rain 970 and bolt beat him by daylight. Ben Johnson was nearly a tenth behind gays performance. There's a gigantic difference between two-tenths of a second in a Sprint. In 2008 when bolt won the gold medal he didn't even run the last 15 M and still ran 969. Which means in that race he would have beat Ben Johnson by as much Bolt Beat Tyson Gay in Berlin. I don't care what the track surfaces are it's not going to make that much of a difference because . Johnson didn't run on cinders or anything. Seouls track was fast.
Any speculation on changing Ben's Johnson's training would mean that Ben Johnson wouldn't be the same person, which is also irrelevant.... If Johnson raced with what he had ,against bolt, bolt easily finishes ahead
thetruthhurts: "If you take a break from the drugs like Gatlin did you can preserve yourself a few more years hence why hes dropping prs at 32 but he will decline soon fast he has one or two years left."
3 years and 8 months later, Gatlin wins the World Championship 100m.
That's almost 4 years later, and he is the best in the world, so by above logic either he was never on drugs, or he is currently on drugs. So much for logic.
Great thread, btw! Never expected to find sprint threads here
Ben Johnson would be injecting himself CRISPR myostatin inhibitors and other crazy stuff if he was around today. 1988 Johnson with 2018 technology runs under 9 seconds.
An ancient Australian Aborigine could reportedly run sub 9 barefooted.
Subway Surfers Addiction wrote:
An ancient Australian Aborigine could reportedly run sub 9 barefooted.
Did he find a natural form of the "speed peptide?"
Yes, quack, quack.
I heard rumors that the Jamaicans allowed certain substances to be legal and that USA sprinters were not allowed to take these substances in any form legally. They don't test their athletes like USA does is another thing that I hear.
I am not convinced that Bolt is 100% clean. People are afraid to speak up and challenge this publicly in the sprinting world because he is Bolt.
Of course, who knows how a head-to-head race would develop. I would also like to have seen Johnson's response to slightly different coaching--that guy didn't run 9.79 on great coaching, he ran it on roids, with an M.D. as his primary coach.
Actually. Ben ran well with great coaching. Many superb coaches have used Charlie Francis' training methods since.. Mario Astaphan was a M.D. nd that was it. This information is readily available.
Knowing the history of the sport better now, should Ben Johnson be viewed differently than how he has been treated? Being a person who doesn't follow sprinting much, I just assumed Ben's a drug cheat, but knowing the history better as he destroyed everybody where 6 out of 8 of the 100m finalists have been linked to taking drugs, we should give Ben Johnson more respect.
