rupp-certified saladbar wrote:
There is no way the legitimate last 4 x 100m splits were 16.0, 12.3, 14.1, 13.4
WTF are you talking about?
Pausing the video when the leader hits the curved 3000 start (100m in) shows the TV clock at 13.3.
Pause at 100 hash line (middle of relay takeover) = 25.2. (200m in)
Pause at start line: 39.9. (300m in)
Pause back at 1500 start: 54.6. (400m)
That makes 13.3 / 12.9 / 14.7 / 14.7.
Look at the start line they use 43 secs into the video. It is the 2nd curved line on the back straight. There is a black box on the infield next to this line and an orange symbol on the advertising board around the outside. From that start line they reach the 100m from home line (the white staggered line before the yellow one) in 25.1 for the pacer. That's 50.2 400m pace.
The pacer then hits the finish line in 39.8 (the guy in yellow is more clear at 40.0) . That's a 14.7 stretch. No problem.
You then foolishly quote the 400m split as 54.6. You are taking that split on the first curved line, which is indeed the proper 1500m start line, BUT, the 'official' 400m split is taken at the 2nd curved line, which is the one they actually started from. So the 54.6 split is for 390m.
The pacer doesn't pass the start line (the 2nd curved line) until 55.9. The African in the yellow in 56.1. That represents a 16.1 100m stretch from the finish line to the line they started the race from.
So the 13.3 / 12.9 / 14.7 / 14.7 you quote is absolute nonsense. Yes, that is roughly what the splits should have been if you take into consideration they started 10m further up the track.
Using the (wrong) start line you get a first 200m (the 200m start line is not clear on this vid) of 25.1, then a 14.8, then a 16.1.
On the 2nd lap the pacer runs the 200m (from the wrong start line - 56.1)from 400m to 600m(1:23.8) in 27.7. The video then is badly edited, but the 800m time (to the 2nd curve) is 1:54.5, meaning that 200m from 600 to 800 was supposedly 31.3.
The pacer hits the 1000m mark (which reinforces that this is the 100m from home point) in 2:22.3. Again, the 200m stretch from 800 was a super fast 27.8 (following on from the previous 200m of 31.3!) Iguider would have gone through 1000m in c. 2:23.2. He then runs the nest 100m to the bell in about 14.4. (2:37.4/2:37.5)
On the last lap, we see Iguider hit the mile start curve in 2:36.1, meaning he went through the bell (9.3m further on) in c 2:37.4/2:37.5. He then goes through the start line (the 2nd curve) in 2:53.5. That's a 16.0 100m stretch!?
Again, the 200m start line is not obvious, but he certainly hits the 100m from home line in 3:19.0, and his torso is over the finish line in 3:32.5. There is obviously a residual error of about 0.4 sec, but that would have been the same at all the marks where splits are taken.
So from 1000m we have a 14.4, 16.0, 25.5, 13.5. There is no way that they slowed down that much for 100m and then sped up to 51.0 400m pace from 1200 to 1400m.
If you take the first curved line as the 1200m split, which is where the race should have (but DIDN'T start from), then you'd have got the following from 1000m for Iguider: -
or ~ 14.3, 14.8, 26.7, 13.5
That gives closing splits of ~ 55.0, 40.2, 13.5, based on the running clock. Because of the residual error of 0.4, then his times at each 100m point over the last lap would have been more like - 2:37.9, 2:52.7, 3:19.4, 3:32.9
But the splits obviously don't change.
It is clear from just watching the race with the naked eye that there is no such drastic fluctuation in pace. The reason for the wildly changeable splits is because they started from the wrong line and ran less than 1500m.
If you can't follow that then I can't help you.