Duane Solomon 600m WORLD RECORD ATTEMPT Saturday 3/29

Pro News/Info/Results Distance

Page 6 of 6

1 5 6

Next Last

10 years ago 04/04/2014 11:55am EDT

re: Peer Mediator

Peer Mediator wrote:
Wtfunny wrote:
A video is hardly evidence of anything. Especially old videos from tapes .... Tapes run slow and tapes run fast. More so, if someone wanted to mess with things, they could easily modify a video digitally to make it appear anyone ran whatever they wanted it to look like.
There's a video online of some guy playing guitar like crazy which is a good example of how easy it is.
More likely, with older videos, they just aren't accurate. And audio is out of sync with video which only compounds things.
I agree with most of the rest of what you're saying .... But the video doesn't mean the slightest thing at all.
I don't agree with you on that one. The vast majority of races you see on Youtube are taken directly from the live screening of the races. They will be exactly the same speed as they appeared on a live transmission.
Have a go at timing some and I bet you're not out by more than the standard 0.2/0.3, if you're a decent time keeper.
The point I was making is that Ventolin is wrong when he states that the timing of Coe's Firenze run cannot be guaranteed as legit. All the versions of the race will yield a sub 1:42 time. And quite a bit lower. I get 1:41.4 & 1:41.5. The on screen clock of the Italian version of the race has him crossing the line at 1:41.42.

Not if they're taken from a video tape conversion. New races, sure. But anything converted from some aging tape isn't going to be worth "evidence" of much at all.

Tape players are notoriously bad. Even high quality studio tape players. There's a story about Wynton Marsalis being invited by the studio big wigs at Columbia Records to a pre-release listening of their newly remastered CD of Miles Davis' Kind Of Blue. On hearing it, Wynton turns and said "your tape player was fast, the pitch is sharp". And that was for high quality audio recording in a world class studio, not someone's home VCR.

10 years ago 04/04/2014 12:30pm EDT

re: Wtfunny

DeanoUK:

replying to ventolin makes you seem almost as crazy. Just stop.

10 years ago 04/04/2014 12:35pm EDT

re: west side road man

west side road man wrote:
DeanoUK:
replying to ventolin makes you seem almost as crazy. Just stop.

No ... It's the replying in kind that illustrates he's just as crazy, and equally obsessed.

10 years ago 04/04/2014 12:43pm EDT

re: Wtfunny

Wtfunny wrote:
There's a story about Wynton Marsalis being invited by the studio big wigs at Columbia Records to a pre-release listening of their newly remastered CD of Miles Davis' Kind Of Blue. On hearing it, Wynton turns and said "your tape player was fast, the pitch is sharp". And that was for high quality audio recording in a world class studio, not someone's home VCR.

There's a HUGE difference between audio and (frame-by-frame) video in that case.

10 years ago 04/04/2014 12:47pm EDT

re: HardLoper

Oh I see, we're talking about someone uploading the thing to YouTube, I guess that could be off.

10 years ago 04/04/2014 3:21pm EDT

re: Deanouk

Deanouk wrote:You're a delusional fool. And a misinformed one at that

you have produced mostly drivel

NO, he never run 48.3 on dirt. Check your facts. He ran a 48.3 in April at Crystal Palace, which is synthetic

it is an embarassement to quote a 48.3 on synthetic

Unlike Ryun, who would have needed to be in some type of peak form in the Spring for all his College races, that was Coe's first outing of the year on the track

more rubbish

Ryun ran numerous indoor races, a criminal number which hardly gave him adequate rest to peak

he even ran a 1500 on new years eve in '65 !!!

he ran a total of 14 indoor races from that day to march 19th in '66 !!!

a completely stoopid race programme which in no way helped him

Why did I choose Coe's relay splits on dirt for comparison?

because his open 400 times have always been hugely embarrasing

a 46.87pb in the only real high profile 400 race in his career was appalling

Really? Is that a serious question? Probably due to the fact Ryun never ran any open 440s on dirt (or on anything), so I'm comparing like for like. Had Ryun ran some open 440s on dirt then I would compare them with Coe's

if a guy has open 400s, you use them 1st line

Ryun didn't so use relay

coe had plenty of open 400s, but some clockings between 46.87 - 47.10 do him no favours whatsoever

The 47.6 he ran at Cleckheaton was also synthetic, not dirt

i highly doubt some nowhere place like this had a synthetic track in in '79

even then, 47.6 on synthetic is poor

The only open 400 he ran on dirt in 79 was the 47.7 he ran at Loughborough

he ran a 49.1 in rotherham in '77 which was almost certainly dirt

He won the 400m in a "relaxed" 47.7, beating Andy Kerr by 1.4secs. He then won the 800 with a 23 sec last 200m, ahead of Garry Cook, and finished with a 46.3 winning relay leg

who on earth is this giant kerr ???

So he did no more than was required to win the open 400m. He clearly needed to put in more effort in the relay. Thus his relay legs are the only comparison to Ryun's relay legs

nonsense

a trio of 46.87 - 47.10 in an international meet & his national championships is poor

in fact it is humiliating he ran the final of the 400 national champs in his penultimate race before '80 games & finished dead-fuucking last for 8th in 47.10 miles behind 45.29 jenkins

Coe also ran a 45.5 and a 45.6 relay legs on synthetic. Ryun's 46.9 doesn't come close to that or Coe's 46.3 on dirt

utter drivel

can you not read ???

46.9 for 440y NOT 400m & on a quagmire unfit for lj, with a 3'55.8 mile in his legs making up 20y on the lead guys in relay !!!

as for coe's 45.5r, he got drafted most of the way round for 6th

"we had top timers who's life depended on hand-timing accuracy as that was all that was available
if you have your own personal clockings, offer them"
Can you not see the irony of these ramblings? Clearly not.
So you believe (and state as facts) tracks in Italy during the 1980's to be short and have inaccurate timings, despite video footage, electronic timing devices, photo cells, world class fields, etc, but you can state categorically that all the small college meets in the US, with college athletes, hand timed stop watches (which often differ) and no video footage are 100% bona fide accurate?

nonsense

firenze, where auto-timing broke down & virtually any class athlete who turned up got an sb or pb

for american college meets, there was nothing small about meets with crowds in 10,000s in '60s, it was a huge sport

what part of 15,000 people turned up to watch Ryun in his 46.9r you not comprehend ???

as for questioning measurement of american tracks, if loads of guys ran huge sbs/pbs on them then you might have a semblance of a case

where are the wrs of the other college guys Ryun raced against ???

where are the huge pbs from the other guys Ryun ran that 880y against in terre haute ???

That is laughable

you have offered nonsense

"on 10th june he ran 1'50.9 prelim & when still ill, he ran 1'44.9wr & the next day he ran 4'02 mile & finished with a 47.8 relay !!!"
He couldn't have been that ill if he ran 2 races the next day. It's a stupid comment to make

utterly clueless

he was committed to run these meets & under huge pressure to do so as biggest name in american track

what part of his vid where he said he felt completely flat the next day can't you comprehend ???

"he ran 4'02/1'47.9/48.5 in march '66 whilst still tuning up for major part of season, the 46.9 came 1/12 later"
Yeah, and he came 4th in the relay. One would expect him to have been all out to try and make up the deficit, no?

get a clue

that 1st meet was an invitational indoors

the 46.9r meet was on his home track in front of his home fans

i have posted vid where Ryun says he only was at a peak less than a handful of times/y

his 48.5ir meet wasn't but 46.9r meet clearly was

"in mid-april again prior to 46.9, he went 3'07 for a 1320y & then 47.6"
Is this supposed to be impressive? A 4:10 + Mile equivalent and then another 4th place in the relay

what part of peaking for his his upcoming home meet you can't comprehend ???

he'd also run a 3'58.0 the day before !

"the next day he ran 4'02 mile & finished with a 47.8 relay !!!"
This time for 3rd place

how much of a fool are you ???

that was the day after when ill thruout the meet he ran the 880wr of 1'44.9 !!!

he musta been dead after his 1'44.9wr & to run 47.8r in his 2nd race the next day is an incredible effort !!!

"you can't claim 12.1 as the 100m lane line is not in the shot & no side-on angle & don't claim nonsense about dvd quality, that is the only feed of the race with running clock & no clear 100m lane mark in shot at 3'26"
12.1 was the official split given at the time and repeated in countless books and websites since. There is a clear line on my copies of the race

utter drivel

there is NO official 100m split anywhere

they only do splits for either 300m + 400 multiples & 400/800/1200

if you have an "official" 12.1 split, show it

as for your "copy" of the race, that is more drivel

these meets only have the official broadcaster & feeds go to whole world

individual countries can have some side-on/long-angle shots but not with official running clock superimposed

your copy is same as on youtube & the 100m indicator in lane 3 is NOT in shot

"& he got drafted for 1/2 that bend offering ~ 0.15s"
Rubbish. Coe ran wide on Straub's shoulder that entire last lap

utter drivel

he's directly behind straub on last bend until he makes his move to overtake him 1/2 way

With 200 to go he was more than 2m behind and the face on shot shows he is wide of Straub

& he came tight onto bend for 1/2st half from side-on shot then moved wide to overtake

He purposely ran wide all that bend in order to make Ovett run wider still to pass him

utter rubbish

ovett wasn't leading the race, straub was

coe had to think about straub long way before ovett

he had all the worry in the world wondering if he coud even get past straub let alone worrying about ovett !

the side on shot shows coe tight on 1st 1/2 of bend as sraub was giving him all the trouble he couda dreamed off !!!

He was too wide and too far back to get full drafting. He probably ran more like 2m extra, which is more like 0.25secs

utter nonsense

he was within 2m of straub on 1st half of bend & got drafting

he ran last 1/2 of bend wide with foot on lane line towards end

he ran something like 1.0 - 1.25m extra

a distance more than accounted for drafting in 1st 1/2 of bend

"that means Ryun's previous 400 had been 58.0 NOT 60.0
Coe had run the same section of his race (800-1200m) in 54.5. That's 5.5 secs faster than Ryun had run the corresponding split
no
it's 3.5s"
3.5 secs difference on the penultimate lap is a huge difference. The immediate pace before the last 300m was significantly faster in Coe's race compared to Ryun's.

54.5 synthetic v 58.0 on dirt is a significant but not huge difference

what part of your numbskull has ignored fact Ryun went thru faster in 1st 800 in 2'03.6 dirt v 2'05.2 synthetic ???

Ryun had already run 1st 800 significantly faster than coe before latter efforts

10 years ago 04/04/2014 3:30pm EDT

re: HardLoper

HardLoper wrote:
Wtfunny wrote:
There's a story about Wynton Marsalis being invited by the studio big wigs at Columbia Records to a pre-release listening of their newly remastered CD of Miles Davis' Kind Of Blue. On hearing it, Wynton turns and said "your tape player was fast, the pitch is sharp". And that was for high quality audio recording in a world class studio, not someone's home VCR.
There's a HUGE difference between audio and (frame-by-frame) video in that case.

Tape players are tape players ..... And they don't typically run at precisely the same/correct speeds.

10 years ago 04/04/2014 3:36pm EDT

re: Peer Mediator

Peer Mediator wrote:I don't agree with you on that one. The vast majority of races you see on Youtube are taken directly from the live screening of the races. They will be exactly the same speed as they appeared on a live transmission

nonsense

compression/etc can make difference when posting

Have a go at timing some and I bet you're not out by more than the standard 0.2/0.3, if you're a decent time keeper

there was thread before of a fast steve scott race which didn't tally with official timing

youtube timings aren't accurate

The point I was making is that Ventolin is wrong when he states that the timing of Coe's Firenze run cannot be guaranteed as legit

it can't be taken as legit

the timing was busted & took forever to be "officialised"

a vid time doesn't ake t official

All the versions of the race will yield a sub 1:42 time

no one can tell difference between a 1'42.5 at actual speed & an 1.42.0 on a compressed then uncompressed vid

And quite a bit lower. I get 1:41.4 & 1:41.5

nonsense

you weren't the hand-timer in firenze, let alone the auto-timer

The on screen clock of the Italian version of the race has him crossing the line at 1:41.42.

where they got that nonsense from is beyond belief !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOS3RQU92Z4

that vid has him at 1'41.98 before clock goes magically back to 1'41.72 !!!

how on earth does 1'41.98 go back to 1'41.72 with a proper auto-time ???

10 years ago 04/04/2014 4:54pm EDT

re: Peer Mediator

Peer Mediator wrote:This is pure fantasy and speculation

nonsense

it is realistic approach

There is no way of quantifying how ill someone is and there is equally no way of converting illness to time deducted

if someonse says they felt "terrible" as Ryun did, only a fool coud believe they ran anywhere close to their best

There is no way of measuring what a 1:50+ earlier in the day would have affected him later that day

drivel

any 880 earlier in day woud take significant tenths+ out of you for later race

only a fool coud believe he ran his fastest possible 880 with a 1'50 in his legs

To be honest it should be nothing at all, as it was practically a jog for him

utter nonsense

a wr attempt shoud have best part of 1/52 rest beforehand

he was nowhere fresh & fully energy-loaded for that wr

Have you conducted several tests on the difference between grasstex, synthetic and cinders?

fool

countless people have told you 1s difference dirt/sythetic

how many times have you have to watch ron's statement ???

as for grasstex, ole timers have state it was simply there for low maintenance

why on earth weren't '68 trials on grasstex if it was so fast ???

No, I thought not. In that case deducting a second per lap is not backed up with any legitimacy

utter drivel

the legendary ron says at 25'45

1s/lap

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT2ANRbiiH8

if your peabrain thinks he knows better than greatest wr breaker post-war & a professional accountant to boot, then offer it !!!

You have simply plucked the figure from somewhere not very nice

drivel

see ron above

Then there is the issue of it being hand timed. That makes it more likely a 1:44.5 FAT

nonsense

it's accepted as 0.14s for above 400m making it

1'44.43

trivial slowing compared to huge amounts to knock off for illeness/prelim/-ve splits/etc

So you have taken 3 secs off his time based on nothing which can be backed up scientifically. You do not know that grasstex synthetic slowed him down by 2 secs

nonsense

where is grasstex semi-synthetic at '68 trials meet ?

guys who ran on it said it offered nothing more than dirt

it was only brought in because it drained water quickly

now take off 2s for track from Ryun's 1'44.43 for grastex to '70s synthetic, then more for prelim/-ve splits & illness

Cram - 51.7/51.5 1986 Commonwealth

fool

i posted it

Juantorena - 52.6/51.4 1977 World Cup

& he ran an essentially 1'43.50 solo in games, worth maybe 1'42-high rested & with pacer to bell

he looked about same shape '76/'77 so this offers evidence of 1s+ -ve splits being worth 1+s better of 1s+ +ve splits

Kipketer - 52.0/50.7 Monaco 1997

the race i quoted

he was in 1'40-mid shape that year in zurich off suicidal 48.3 in his 1'41.2

in this case, a -ve 1.3s split differential looks at possibly 1.9 improvement at +ve splits, but with unknown extra distance wide

a 1s -ve split looks initially 2s better at 1s+ +ve splits at no extra distance for prelim estimate at super-fast actual clockings

a -ve split of 1s+ has to be looked at as at worst 2s better if run off 1s+ +ve splits in superfast actual clockings

Rudisha - 51.6/51.2 Nairobi 2010

the big gun

seeing as it's nairobi altitude, too many complications except he ran pretty damn quick at low-altitude that year

Ovett - 54.8/50.5 Moscow 1980

1'45+ races are rubbish

get a clue

albeit i think he couda been as fast as 1'42-high for games

Coe - running 810m in the Moscow final would have split 54.9/49.7 with a clear run on the inside

what part of 1'45+ rubbish didn't you understand ?

& drafted until final kick in last 100

Coe- 52.7/51.8 1986 Europeans. Again, he was wide on every bend and covered more like 811m. It was worth more like 52.4/50.8 if he'd been running in lane 1 all the way

err...

what part of getting hammered by johnny

1'43.84 v 1'44.17

you don't remember ???

coe was in 1'43-low/3'29+ shape that year on evidence of rieti which astonished cram who ran 1'43.1 there after long season + likely hungover

So, a negative split in a 1:44 type race is not that rare.

a 1'44+ clocking woud be a start

offering nonsense about extra distance takes into no account that Ryun was probably also running extra distance in 1st lap

there is no account saying he led at 1/2 way in the 880wr

10 years ago 04/04/2014 5:00pm EDT

re: Mr. Obvious

Mr. Obvious wrote:Awesome, we know the tracks are accurate because surely the math and physics departments have the best men out there measuring them. This may be my favorite Ventolin argument since the "Oxygen enriched atmosphere" adjustment based on the track being surrounded by trees. You can't make this stuff up (I mean Venty can).

fool

if you don't think universities didn't have top level maths/physics guys available to measure accuracy of their own track then you really are stoopid

10 years ago 04/04/2014 5:33pm EDT

re: arturo

arturo wrote:Vent pretty poor that you forgot this one

i saw the race on tv

i didn't need a commentary unless it was about some injuries/heavy chedule/etc beforehand

Sri Ram Singh of India led the first lap in 52.3. "Slow," said Walker. "Why isn't Boit going out?" The reason was that Boit had had a fright. "After the first 100 meters I felt a strain," he said later. "I thought I was going to pull my right hamstring. By the time I passed 200 I felt better. My plan was to try to kick with 300 to go. But if Juantorena was going fast, I was not going to pass him."
As it happened, Juantorena was just pounding into the lead with 300 to go. Boit followed, running lightly, waiting. It seemed a mistake. "He's playing into Juantorena's hands," said Walker. "He can't kick with him." But off the turn Boit came on, gaining. Juantorena looked over and strained to accelerate, his arms describing great, arhythmic arcs. With 70 meters to go, Boit was slightly ahead. "Then he came up on me again," said Boit. "We were together 10 meters from the finish." Both were staggering. Juantorena won as Boit relaxed, slipping back a meter at the end, his face passive in resignation. "You couldn't say Juantorena won going away," said Walker. "Neither one of them went much farther than the finish line." The times were 1:44.0 and 1:44.1. Juantorena had run the last lap in 51.5—faster than his first, a rarity. "It was my hardest race," said Boit. "I return the compliment," said Juantorena. "It was great competition."

nice account of race on youtube

however, i'm sure boit will probably tell you immediately he coudn't carry kipkurgat's jockstrap

here is a "real" great run after 1'44+ round in a windy meet, solo !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CaPl8C5gpo

rested/windless meet/paced to bell :

that was a 1'42-high for you in '74

10 years ago 04/04/2014 6:59pm EDT

re: ukathleticscoach

ukathleticscoach wrote:
'after a previous 11.7 !!!
11.7/24.8 !!!
on dirt !!!
how on earth can you not mention the 11.7 as that is most important part by far of his last 300m - it's bedrock'
Video of this race not some BS report which was put up before?

fool

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5070489&page=3

it;s acknowledged Ryun ran

~ 11.7

kick for 1200 - 1300

offer refutation

an 11.7 on dirt !!!

that is speed in a 3'38.2 on dirt with all effort in last 300m/400m to stake a

1'39.9/3'24.2

on '70s synthetic

let me ask you a question ?!

how fast does a 1200 - 1300 split in a 3'38.2 on dirt have to be to consider for synthetic

1'39.9/3'24.2

maths says there has to be a number ?

what is it ?

What happened to Ryun in the 800m 72 trials. Pretty poor performance for a 1:39 runner. He was lucky to trip in the 72 1500m heats off that form!

fool

he retired by '70

didn't run '70 - retired

felt too weak to compete

to come back for '71 ->

was a miracle

Page 6 of 6

1 5 6

Next Last

Reply Replying to

Username

Password

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview

By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Remember me on this device.

Duane Solomon 600m WORLD RECORD ATTEMPT Saturday 3/29

Hot Now

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

You have been subscribed.

Duane Solomon 600m WORLD RECORD ATTEMPT Saturday 3/29

Jump To A Page

Follow Wtfunny

Block Wtfunny

Follow Wtfunny

Block Wtfunny

Follow HardLoper

Block HardLoper

Follow HardLoper

Block HardLoper

Follow ventolin^3

Block ventolin^3

Follow Wtfunny

Block Wtfunny

Follow ventolin^3

Block ventolin^3

Follow ventolin^3

Block ventolin^3

Follow ventolin^3

Block ventolin^3

Follow ventolin^3

Block ventolin^3

Follow ventolin^3

Block ventolin^3

Jump To A Page

Hot Now

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

Reply Replying to

You have been subscribed.