BRIANNA ROLLINS AMERICAN RECORD!!

That was phenomenal, i hope she takes down that world record.

And Hot!

search for women's 100h results

her RT was relatively slow at 0.176 whereas fastest in field was 0.137s

a good RT is 0.13 & if she had got it, then her time wouda been

12.22

she couda been 0.01s off the wr with just a decent RT !!!

cmon man...she'll get the record soon enough. she can spare another 0.7 m/s legally.

also, false starts aren't worth it in these meets.

off note, pearson's 12.28 had almost identical wind with 1.1 & RT of 0.145

rollins' actual run was 12.26 - 0.176 =12.084

pearson's was 12.28 - 0.145 = 12.135

that's 0.051s difference

the fractionally less wind for pearson woud reduce this fractionally, but i'm pretty sure it was a hotter day in her run than for rollins counteracting the wind difference ( anyone know the temperature yesterday ? )

rollins does have a significant gap on even a peak pearson

Here's a can of worms-

I wouldn't spend too much time comparing reaction times.

There are three main reaction time systems:

Lynx- used in the US and around the world by independent timers.

Omega- used at the Olympic Games, Diamond League, and events in Europe.

Seiko- used at IAAF World Championships and select events.

Each has different hardware and software. Presently the IAAF does not have a way of calibrating the system so comparing them to is useless. The IAAF is finish a multi year research project on the standardization and calibration of all system.

i've heard this many times

however, logically there can be essentially ~ 0 difference between

if there was a +/-0.1s variation then a bunch of guys running 10.00 under 1 system coud be running 9.90 or 10.10 under the other systems

Detailed analysis of false starts; though, it was written when one false start for the field was still allowed...

http://condellpark.com/kd/reactiontime.htm

This is pretty much the clean WR already!

Hope she can gain another 0.05, maybe by Rio 2016? Now that would be awesome.

I make a clean WR progression -

4 12.26 +1.2 Brianna Rollins USA 18.08.91 1 Des Moines 22.06.2013 WR

8 12.28 +1.1 Sally Pearson AUS 19.09.86 1 Daegu 03.09.2011 WR

13 12.33 -0.3 Gail Devers USA 19.11.66 1 Sacramento 23.07.2000 WR

22 12.37 +0.7 Gail Devers USA 19.11.66 1 Sevilla 28.08.1999 WR

52 12.44 ±0.0 Glory Alozie NGR 30.12.77 1 Bruxelles 28.08.1998 WR=

52 12.44 +0.4 Glory Alozie NGR 30.12.77 1 Monaco 08.08.1998 WR

74 12.46 +1.8 Glory Alozie NGR 30.12.77 1 Salamanca 10.07.1998 WR=

74 12.46 +0.2 Gail Devers USA 19.11.66 1 Stuttgart 20.08.1993 WR

103 12.48 -0.2 Gail Devers USA 19.11.66 1 Berlin 10.09.1991 WR

And if you take out Gail Devers it becomes:

4 12.26 +1.2 Brianna Rollins USA 18.08.91 1 Des Moines 22.06.2013 WR

8 12.28 +1.1 Sally Pearson AUS 19.09.86 1 Daegu 03.09.2011 WR

18 12.36 +0.3 Sally Pearson AUS 19.09.86 1s2 Daegu 03.09.2011

22 12.37 +1.5 Joanna Hayes USA 23.12.76 1 Athínai 24.08.2004

38 12.42 +2.0 Anjanette Kirkland USA 24.02.74 1 Edmonton 11.08.2001 (Michelle Perry has a 12.45 with negative wind - likely WR standard 2005-7)

52 12.44 ±0.0 Glory Alozie NGR 30.12.77 1 Bruxelles 28.08.1998 WR=

52 12.44 +0.4 Glory Alozie NGR 30.12.77 1 Monaco 08.08.1998 WR

74 12.46 +1.8 Glory Alozie NGR 30.12.77 1 Salamanca 10.07.1998 WR=

184 12.52 -0.4 Michelle Freeman JAM 05.05.69 1s1 Athínai 10.08.1997

211 12.53 +0.2 Michelle Freeman JAM 05.05.69 1h1 Athínai 09.08.1997

Looking at this, it also makes me wonder what Lolo Jones' time would have been in Beijing 2008. What a double whammy that would be, losing a clean WR time as well as Olympic Gold.

WRONG! The only record broken was the length of times for commercials after her race... 22 minutes.

We would never see it due to tons of commercial breaks. Better chance of reading about it on the net... it will be quicker.

wr potential wrote:

Looking at this, it also makes me wonder what Lolo Jones' time would have been in Beijing 2008. What a double whammy that would be, losing a clean WR time as well as Olympic Gold.

Yeah, and everyone bashes Lolo.