In the prelims of the 100m at the USATF champs.
http://www.flashresults.com/2015_Meets/Outdoor/06-25_USATF/002-1_compiled.htm
2 Trayvon Bromell Baylor 9.84 Q +1.3 4 (1
Yes, he lost to DeGrasse at NCAAs, but DeGrasse's times were obviously slightly wind-aided.
bromell and degrasse were in the same race...so they both had the same wind.
he lost fair and square, on that day. but its clear who is the better runner most days (bromell)
reed wrote:
bromell and degrasse were in the same race...so they both had the same wind.
he lost fair and square, on that day. but its clear who is the better runner most days (bromell)
I can't tell if you missed the point are are purposely being obtuse.
My point was that DeGrasse's time would've been the NCAA record, sure, but the time was wind-aided. He was clearly the superior runner in that race, and with a legal wind he probably would've ended up with a time faster than Brommell's time today.
The purpose of my post wasn't to make any excuses for Brommell losing. But I was trying to pre-empt the idiots who don't understand sprinting who would invariably come on here and say "whatever, DeGrasse's race was superior to this!"
I'm starting to wonder if the Beijing 100m final is going to be:
De Grasse
Bromell
Gatlin
And Bolt doesn't even get a medal.
Bromell just ran his time in a prelim heat, and he shut it down close to the line.
I think the track has an illegal COR.
Maybe it's a Chinese (short) track.
The wind meters at Hayward are full of shit. The wind is much faster on the track than where the meter is.
The current world list in the women's 100 is particularly scandalous. All 6 sub 10.90's of the year, half of which are SB's by more than two tenths, and all supposedly legal.
nonsense
tyson's race had huge wind reading
you think it shouda been 6 to 8m/s for his race if gauge placed elsewhere ???
It's poor form to call people "idiots" while utilizing a run-on sentence.
de grasse's run works out at ~ 9.87 basic
bromell behind him at ~ 10.00
now, bromell's run works out at ~ 9.90 basic
conclusions :
- bromell has run a much faster intrinsic race than at ncaa which maya been due to round fatigue as he did run a 20.03 prior to 100 & not known as a doubler whereas grasse is known as such
- bromell's run is still ~ 0.03s inferior to grasse's ( but we shoud check the RTs for both of their races ), but he has 2 more races to show he may be superior to grasse
Or a third possibility: Bromell doesn't run up to his abilities when challenged. Let's wait and see what the semis and finals bring us.
Are you even paying attention? wrote:
It's poor form to call people "idiots" while utilizing a run-on sentence.
I would agree, but fortunately I am in the clear here since I did not. I assume you meant to reply to a different poster.
I agree, but sadly I was lost after you said the word "obtuse".....see link above.
I don't think this would qualify as a NCAA record.
This is not an NCAA meet.
.143 reaction for Brommell yesterday
Whoa!!! wrote:
reed wrote:bromell and degrasse were in the same race...so they both had the same wind.
he lost fair and square, on that day. but its clear who is the better runner most days (bromell)
I can't tell if you missed the point are are purposely being obtuse.
My point was that DeGrasse's time would've been the NCAA record, sure, but the time was wind-aided. He was clearly the superior runner in that race, and with a legal wind he probably would've ended up with a time faster than Brommell's time today.
The purpose of my post wasn't to make any excuses for Brommell losing. But I was trying to pre-empt the idiots who don't understand sprinting who would invariably come on here and say "whatever, DeGrasse's race was superior to this!"
seems like you worded your original statement poorly. i thought you were trying to say something entirely different.
also, does anyone know why bromell wore tights instead of shorts yesterday? i was hoping it would come out in the post-race interview. maybe it was the heat? shorts would get too sweaty?
Bad Wigins wrote:
The wind meters at Hayward are full of shit. The wind is much faster on the track than where the meter is.
The current world list in the women's 100 is particularly scandalous. All 6 sub 10.90's of the year, half of which are SB's by more than two tenths, and all supposedly legal.
You do know that there are USATF and IAAF rules on wind gauge calibration and where it is placed, etc.
Whoa!!!! wrote:
In the prelims of the 100m at the USATF champs.
http://www.flashresults.com/2015_Meets/Outdoor/06-25_USATF/002-1_compiled.htm2 Trayvon Bromell Baylor 9.84 Q +1.3 4 (1
Yes, he lost to DeGrasse at NCAAs, but DeGrasse's times were obviously slightly wind-aided.
Bromell shut me up, I didn't think he would even make the relay pool. I had Gay, Gatlin, Rogers and Bailey.
TrackCoach wrote:
Bad Wigins wrote:The wind meters at Hayward are full of shit. The wind is much faster on the track than where the meter is.
The current world list in the women's 100 is particularly scandalous. All 6 sub 10.90's of the year, half of which are SB's by more than two tenths, and all supposedly legal.
You do know that there are USATF and IAAF rules on wind gauge calibration and where it is placed, etc.
You don know that they don't put to the wind guage ON the track, so BW still has a possibly valid point. wind readings aren't a perfect proxy to adjust judge the worth of a particular time.
You do have to admit that there have been some crazy sprint times at this venue in recent years.
Guys, its going to be OK. Drugs not withstanding, the potential to kick a lot of a$$ in China is there provided good health and test evasion tactics. Jamaica is about to get theirs handed to them. On a side note; most of mankind won't give a rat's behind.