Sprint Geezer wrote:
Mullings best times this year, corrected, are:
9.80 (+1.3) = 9.86
9.89 (+2.0) = 9.98
9.90 (+2.0) = 9.99
9.93 (+1.4) = 10.00
9.96 (+0.6) = 9.99
9.97 (-0.2) = 9.95
9.98 (+0.6) = 10.01
The average, excluding his best time, is 9.99--fantastic to be sure, but a long way from 9.86 The difference is a huge 0.13s
Although both his 9.99 average and his 9.86 would fit precisely my fantasy profile of a top 100m guy, for statistical purposes, I think the top time should be thrown out of any predictive effort, even if it was a legitimate time. The bottom time is often thrown out as well, but in Mullings's case it wouldn't make any difference--and plus, it isn't his actual bottom time of the year--the worst are already chopped off this list.
It certainly COULD have been one of the few-and-far-between standout performances of Mullings' career, performances which happen only rarely--BUT the fact that not only 1 athlete, but 2 athletes produced a standout performance in the same meet makes it suspect:
Rodgers' best performances this year:
9.85 (+1.3) = 9.91
9.95 (+1.3) = 10.01
9.96 (+1.1) = 10.01
9.96 (+1.0) = 10.01
9.99 (+1.3) = 10.05
10.01 (+0.3) = 10.02
10.03 (+0.3) = 10.04
10.03 (+1.4) = 10.10
10.07 (-0.7) = 10.02
10.09 (+0.6) = 10.12
Again excluding his time from Eugene, his average is 10.04, --a far cry from 9.91 The huge difference is 0.13s--EXACTLY THE SAME DIFFERENCE AS FOR MULLINGS.
The Eugene times are standouts in the entire careers of both these guys. Only slightly less convincing is the performance of Patton, a standout this year:
9.94 (+1.3) = 10.01
10.07 (+0.6) = 10.10
10.08 (+1.9) = 10.17
10.09 (+1.3) = 10.15
Remember, these are Patton's BEST 4 times this year. His average excluding Eugene is 10.14, which is well above 10.01
MOST INTERESTINGLY HIS ADVANTAGE IN EUGENE WAS 0.13 SECONDS, EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE ADVANTAGE EXPERIENCE BY BOTH MULLINGS AND RODGERS.
I know there are counter-examples that also ran in Eugene, and that the early race was a final, whereas some of the other times used are from the US nationals, where rounds were run
BUT if you exclude times from nationals, both Rodgers' Patton's Eugene advantages actually INCREASE, as some of their best times of the season were run at that nationals meet. The exact coincidence in the 0.13 Eugene advantage disappears, but the ACTUAL advantage increases even further.
As for the counter-examples, such as Gatlin, that could be dismissed as being due to improvement throughout the season, as the Eugene meet was in April, and it is natural to expect better times later in the year. The same logic is difficult to use in reverse in the case of Mullings and Rodgers (peaked too early), because their Eugene performances were LIFETIME standouts, not just standouts this season.
I could go on, but I run out of time...
The 0.13s Eugene Advantage is why those times should be thrown out as bogus.
Similarly, I think that Bledman's time from Clermont should be thrown out.
Anybody who looks closely at what is going on knows the merit behind this thinking, even Bolt's camp.
I'm not alleging anything nefarious such as competition between Nike and Adidas, or intentional malfeasance, although that may certainly exist. At the very least, I'm alleging unintentional incompetence.
What I DO know, as do others, is that those times should be excluded in any analysis of the overall season.