White Lightning wrote:
I don't think it's arbitrary, and here's why: I arrived at the figure through a process of mixed reasoning and conjecture. Admittedly, the "evidence" on which I based the process is weak, and the assumptions I built in have not been tested. But still......
That is CLASSIC. Translation: I am pulling this all out of my ass, but still, here me out!
You got us, good one.
Let me take a shot at your REAL underlying assumption:
* based on your statement that "old school" sprinters on today's tracks and shoes and nutrition/training, and with a tail wind, could run in the 9.8's, and...
* your name white lighting,
* and your belief that the clean WR would be in the mid 9.8's.....
your real belief is:
except for Bolt maybe, the clean old school WHITE sprinters were probably as fast as the fastest clean black sprinters of today, and that if drugs never entered sports, whites would have run times as fast as the fastest blacks.
Right? I mean THAT is what you are really trying to "reason" way your towards. Correct? THat is usually the case with threads about "what would be REAL CLEAN WR be in x event." It's usually an attempt to say: in a clean sport, whites are as fast as blacks.
Of course reality tells this is not true, but some people don't like reality, and prefer "mixed reasoning and conjecture...weak 'evidence' and untested assumptions."