History's only sub 9.95, 19.90, 43.10 sprinter, and he is just starting out.
History's only sub 9.95, 19.90, 43.10 sprinter, and he is just starting out.
kartelite wrote:
oh please wrote:WvN versus Bolt at 200 is silly. WvN is at or approaching his peak, Bolt is probably 8 years past his best. I'm sure it would be a good race but Bolt 2009 would destroy WvN of 2017 in 200m. Same goes for Bekele v. Farah at 5000. Bekele is also 8 or 9 years past his peak, maybe more considering his WR is like 11 years old.
Bekele and Farah are less than a year apart in age, Bekele has no excuses for his fall from greatness.
Except for him being the best in the world or very close since 2001. When he won Junior WCCC in 2001, he placed 2nd in the senior Short course race. He ran 7:30.67 that year in August. Farah has never run that fast.
Bekele started Lancing at an early age. I still don't believe that he was 18 when he beat Ritz (in 2001), and that he could run 7:30 at the age that Ritz could have run 8:00-flat or so. But if he was not 18 then, then he is even older than we think now.
kartelite wrote:
Bekele and Farah are less than a year apart in age, Bekele has no excuses for his fall from greatness.
I assume you are trolling, but in case anyone actually buys this nonsense ...
Bekele was at his peak from 2003-2010, Farah from 2011-present; 8 years for Bekele and this will be the 7th for Farah. You only get so many years at the top/at your best and it just so happens the best points of their careers happened at different times for both.
Bekele was great from age 21 to 28 and Farah from age 28 onward. It is certainly much more unusual to see someone become a world-beater so many years into their career.
As another poster noted, Bekele had to deal with many injuries from 2010 onward, but he still had a world-leading 10K in 2011 (26:43), a 12:55 5K in 2012 and was 4th at the olympics, and won the 10K at Pre in 2013. Add in a 2:05:04 debut in 2014 and 2nd fastest marathon ever in Berlin last year (and 3rd and 2nd in the London Marathon, 2016 and this year) and you can hardly say Bekele has suffered a "fall from greatness"
said88 wrote:
Sprinter guy wrote:Something close to 9.75 speed is necessary to run sub-43 in the 400m. 43.03 is insanely fast
I can say that I really don't know a lot about sprinting. But I still also can say that this quote is wrong, definitely wrong, and by a long way.
I would tend more to the opposite: If you can run 9.75, then you will have no chance to run 43.03.
Doesn't really work the same in reverse
But you have to be able to have a certain amount of flat out speed to run those kind of times. To take an extreme example, it's not like someone can run a 10.75 100m, have perfect endurance, and crank out a 43 flat - just not possible
Van Niekerk was in 9.75-9.79/19.50-19.60/43.0x shape in Rio last year
His performance here is not indicative of an ability to run even faster in and of itself
Van Niekerk, all out, today, is probably running 43 high - I'm thinking 43.6-43.9 depending on where he's at in training
We'll see again in August
If Van Niekerk would have skipped the 400 and run the 200 in Rio, Bolt probably loses the 200
But he probably would have pushed Bolt to 9.7x low in the 100 and taken a close Silver. Wayde was in otherworldly shape. Watch the first 200 of that 43.03 again
Sprinter guy wrote:
Van Niekerk was in 9.75-9.79/19.50-19.60/43.0x shape in Rio last year
I don't believe this, never ever. Why do you think he was in 9.75 - 9.79 form?
said88 wrote:
Sprinter guy wrote:Van Niekerk was in 9.75-9.79/19.50-19.60/43.0x shape in Rio last year
I don't believe this, never ever. Why do you think he was in 9.75 - 9.79 form?
Because you can't go 43.03 without that kind of 100m speed
Physiologically impossible
agree....i mean he hit the fastest 200 EVER in his 400 run, Van hit 300 in 31.00, and earlier that year he hit 31.03 for the 3rd fastest 300m of all time, only bolts 30.97 and MJ's 30.85A are faster.
van did his 300m june 11th, and the olympics were august 14, 2 months later.
Bolt ran his 300m may 27th 2010, 9 months after his WR runs in berlin, and opened his 2010 campaign with a 19.56 200. he hurt his achillies trying to run the WR in the 300.
MJ ran his WR at altitude (someone convert his time to sea level) in march 24th 200, 7 months after his WR run 43.18.
so for Van to pretty much run the WR in 300m and kept going meant that he was in AMAZING shape, as we all saw in his 43.03.
Van was fully capably of 9.7-9.80 low, 19.3-4 range, anyone who cant see that is blind
The 100m/200m are a different animal. WVN ran 43.03 because he was in lane 8. He did not see anybody because staggered lanes. He said it himself. He hadn't pressure and needed a really fast 200m split (rest is history)
But in 100m, If ANY sprinter is tied with Bolt (And i repeat. Any sprinter) at 60/70m, is going to panic with Bolt's insane trademark top end speed.
We saw that with Gatlin in 2015. Who was in 9.7x low shape and dominating the circuit. But he panicked when he saw Bolt coming. And it wasn't "a Choke". It is difficult to explain, but YOU CAN'T DO IT BETTER THAN BOLT IN THE FINAL 30 meter. You know he's going to catch you no matter what...
The same with 200m final in Rio. Merritt, Gatlin, De Grasse...all of them capable of sub 19.75 at the time. But they couldn't MENTALLY.
Now Bolt is in decline. But 9.7x in a final is very easy for him. He only needs an average Start. Not to stumble out of the blocks.
and your not very smart
your just like vent, he claims merrit was going to do WR because Van dragged him to a fast time in 2015....ok ok be moronic and tell me van is a 10.10 at best guy and his WR was a fluke cause of lane 8
HE ran the 3rd fastest 300m of all time EARLY in the season, if you didnt see the 400WR falling your an idiot
Sprinter guy wrote:
said88 wrote:I don't believe this, never ever. Why do you think he was in 9.75 - 9.79 form?
Because you can't go 43.03 without that kind of 100m speed
Physiologically impossible
I mean, there is no proof of that. There is proof to the contrary, of course.
I think WVN was in ~9.90 shape last year. Maybe in a range of 9.88-9.92.
When he gets motoring he lasts. You don't need to be extremely fast over 100m for the 400m. That is common knowledge and is most strongly reiterated by Kirani who obviously would not even break 10.0.
Sprinter guy wrote:
said88 wrote:I don't believe this, never ever. Why do you think he was in 9.75 - 9.79 form?
Because you can't go 43.03 without that kind of 100m speed
Physiologically impossible
Sorry, but this is nonsense. For someone with 9.90 capabilities, it's impossible to run 43.03? You don't know this. And you can't know this.
i agree with spencer wrote:
and your not very smart
your just like vent, he claims merrit was going to do WR because Van dragged him to a fast time in 2015....ok ok be moronic and tell me van is a 10.10 at best guy and his WR was a fluke cause of lane 8
HE ran the 3rd fastest 300m of all time EARLY in the season, if you didnt see the 400WR falling your an idiot
Again...43'03 is not correlated directly with 9.7X. Although I think WVN has a 9'78 potential, But not against Bolt in a major final.
And Bolt is not going to race against WVN, except in WC's 100m final.
Remember. Only Yohan Blake ran sub 9.80
against Bolt AND won the race. (2012 Jamaican Trials)
i'm not saying that Bolt is clean.
Michael Johnson was 19.32/43.18, so surely a high 9.7-low 9.8 100m guy, since the 200m time is usually close to double the 100m time. Butch Reynolds ran 43.29 without a sub 20, however. Jeremy Wariner ran 43.45 without ever breaking 20. Van Niekerk ran 20.02 last year in Durban with a tail wind of 1.8 m/s, and 9.98 at altitude with 1.5 m/s. When he ran low 43, he was in better long sprint shape, which does not mean that he was capable of running that much below 20, and he said as much. Now he has run 9.94/19.84 and he's not in top shape yet. So, it is possible that he was in even better shape in Rio last year, but it is also possible that he was not capable of this yet. They hadn't wanted him to train very hard at short distances because of back problems, I think. So, his top speed wasn't as great. So, it could go either way, but I do not think that he was close to 9.7 last year. But quite possibly 9.90/19.80 or slightly better.
Niekerkvelenje wrote:
Wayde just run 9.94 in Velenje Slovenia, wind +0.9
Badass. A true beast. An animal.
I don't really think Van Niekerk is any faster than 19.5ish in the 200, although he could conceivably pop a 19.3x with fluke conditions like Michael Johnson or Yohan Blake
If he can pop off a 9.8x 100 OR 19.6xish 200 BEFORE WCs, though, he's probably ahead of where he was at that point the year before though
42.9x is possible in Van Niekerk's career. But I'll be shocked to see it this year
Sprinter guy wrote:
I don't really think Van Niekerk is any faster than 19.5ish in the 200, although he could conceivably pop a 19.3x with fluke conditions like Michael Johnson or Yohan Blake
If he can pop off a 9.8x 100 OR 19.6xish 200 BEFORE WCs, though, he's probably ahead of where he was at that point the year before though
42.9x is possible in Van Niekerk's career. But I'll be shocked to see it this year
I wouldn't be shocked to see 42.9 this year. We would have seen it in Rio were WVN not in lane 8.
We are talking about 0.04 seconds here.
In the 200m WVN breaks 19.4 but I don't think he will ever break 9.90 simply because of lack of opportunity and not racing it when he is at his sharpest.
Yeah, I agree with your last point especially - it's the same reason why Michael Johnson didn't have a much faster 100m PR
I think the Rio conditions were somewhat ideal actually - it was a fast track, and having to run scared with Merritt and James chasing is really the difference between his 43.4 run a year before and the world record run IMO - TYPICALLY for MOST people an outside lane draw is rough, but not always...
I'm not going to say 42 can't happen this year - I would just be surprised. But I do think it's more likely than not that sub-43 is coming, especially if someone new like Fred Kerley or some other new talent can keep it close through 250 or 300 or so to light a fire under him
If he runs 9.88 and 42.99 he is running 19 flat... forget the 19.55 he can already do that i promise you. that kind of speed with that kind of speed endurance would put Bolt to shame. At risk of sounding like calculoMJ vs WVN10.09 - 9.88 = .21 over 100m43.18 - 42.99 = .19 over 400mmeet in the middle is .20 over 200mMJ 19.32 - .20 = 19.12 200m WRnot a perfect estimate but it should give you the picture of what could happen...As it is with his current PBs,MJ vs WVN10.09 - 9.94 = .1543.18 - 43.03 = .15meet in the middle is still .15MJ 19.32 - .15 = 19.17 200m WRHe has yet to seriously run a 200m in the past two years since long before he got the record. His 19.90 WILL GO DOWN to 19.3x at worst.
Ubeja Covate wrote:
Talking 100/200/400 combo sprinters.
Jamaican Herb McKenley made the Olympics final in all three.
Tommie Smith was world ranked in all three (WR200/400) as was McKenley and Henry Carr.
MJ was histories only sub10.10/19.35/43.20 and still is actually. WR200/400.
WVN is the only sub10.00/sub20.00/sub43.10
McKenley was histories first sub 45.0 relayer
Smith the first sub 44.00 relayer
MJ the first sub 43.00 relayer.
That above gang set about a 20WR's.
I can see a 9.88/19.55/42.99 for WVN down the road.
Sure he is sub10/sub20/and sub44.... but what could he run for a marathon on the track?