His fastest time last year was 6.45 run on May 11th, and on May 2nd .
Taking the difference in 60m times (0.08) and scaling it down to 40 yards we get him being about 0.05 faster over 40 yards, so 4.07 (down 0.05 from 4.12).
-
What he posted, but Coleman is clearly faster now than he was last year. Currently, I'd put him on 4.07.
His fastest time last year was 6.45 run on May 11th, and on May 2nd .
Taking the difference in 60m times (0.08) and scaling it down to 40 yards we get him being about 0.05 faster over 40 yards, so 4.07 (down 0.05 from 4.12). -
ex-runner wrote:
calculo wrote:
ex-runner wrote:
calculo wrote:
[quote]sprinter guy wrote:And, doing some maths and taking his past race patterns into account, I would give Coleman a 9.81 for 100 meters right now in still wind
no
6.37 = 9.74
assuming some semblance of endurance
he has truck-loads
9.74-basic
9.64 with 2.0m/s
Don't post on threads about sprinting. You think the 100m is an aerobic event
idiot
you know nothing about sprinting & aerobic component
learn to think : if a 10.00 guy is asked to run a 100m in 100% nitrogen atmosphere pressurised to 760mm Hg, do you think his clocking will be 10.00 ???
Well he'd die if not returned to oxygen soon after crossing the finish line
i see you have sliver of grasp of logic
you do not die after the race
you start to die after 60m when the stored ATP runs out & that's why the 100% nitrogen scenario will never allow them to match their 10.00
What part of "don't need to breathe" do you not understand?
nonsense
you need to breath in last 40m of a 100m if you want to maximise your performance for fastest clocking
Have you heard of the term 'oxygen debt'?
wow !!!
a huge need concept
no one here has ever heard of this before ?!
studies, which i'm sure you have no clue about indicate anaerobic/aerobic distributon for 100m is 21%/79% with error involved pushing this out to as much as 9%/91%
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15518295
that means at very worst, 9% of 100m running requires oxygen & that without me having to explain it to anyone clued up on science, but i obviously need to for you, it means you have to breath in a 100m for fastest clocking
the paper's conclusion from abstract
While accumulated oxygen deficit measures are often used to estimate anaerobic energy contribution, at such high exercise intensities (and brief exercise durations) as used in the present study, accumulated oxygen deficit measures showed larger aerobic energy estimates than expected
You can breathe later in 100m running
& you need to breathe by 60m for fastest clocking
Or do you think it's impossible to hold one's breath for 9.8 seconds?
laughable
we are not interested in a 10.00 guy trying to hold his breathe for full race & clock nonsense 10.2/10.3
we are interested in them running fastest possible time & for that you have to breathe by 60m -
ex-runner wrote:
Say what, Bro? wrote:
What events did you exit? Elite 100m sprinters take 3-4 breaths during a race. Metabolism is alactic the first 6-8 seconds then transitions into lactic.
Linford Christie never used to take a breath
nonsense
you do realise that humans also breathe thru their nostrils ???
unless the guy raced with his nostrils & mouth taped up then he did breathe during a 100m
Some elite sprinters take one or two but the air inhaled does not contribute to aerobic respiration during the race
nonsense
you also breathe thru your nostrils
There is negligible aerobic component in the 100m and so altitude is nothing but beneficial to the 100m
utter drivel
you offer no science at all !!!
aerobic metabolism has significant effect in a 100m & altitude therefore has a detrimental component to 100m running somewhat counter-acting the bigger advantage of lesser air-resistance to run thru
Hines ran 9.95A for 1st ever auto-time sub-10
the wind-altitude calculator gives this as 10.03
the creator of that calculator freely admits he incorporated no physiology into it, so that 10.03 is wrong when all the factors considered
Hines time is likely to have been significantly quicker than 10.03-basic when accounting for aerobic metabolism & i reckon he was worth one of 9.98/9.99/10.00 at sea-level
Hines was fully entitled to believe he was a sub-10 guy that day at sea-level
study showing importance of aerobic metabolism to 100m running, which you can conduct your own research to refute
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15518295
the aerobic-anaerobic energy system contributions to 100-m and 200-m events were calculated. For the 100-m event, results indicated a relative aerobic-anaerobic energy system contribution (based on AOD measures) of 21%-79% and 25-75% for males and females respectively (9%-91% and 11%-89% based on La/PCr measures )..
...While AOD measures are often used to estimate anaerobic energy contribution, at such high exercise intensities (and brief exercise durations) as used in the present study, AOD measures showed larger aerobic energy estimates than expected -
calculo wrote:
idiot
with 19.85s endurance, faster than legend mo greene, Coleman has plenty of endurance to hold on from 60 - 100
Mo Greene had plenty of endurance
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/2298150/Maurice-Greene-doping-allegations-hit-IAAF.html -
aduck2022 wrote:
Like Bolt , soon he will be posing for photos with one of his eyes covered
or taking the piss out of bible with putting "i am " somewhere in his name.
he is the replacement ,
what amount of roids did it take for green to run such time and none
really close for a long while , i think you know the answer .
sprint scene under tight control l.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/2298150/Maurice-Greene-doping-allegations-hit-IAAF.html -
Absolutely nowhere in those studies does it say you need to take a breath during the race.
Linford used to take a deep breath whilst settling into his blocks. That oxygen will be circulating his blood. The first 6-8 seconds is entirely hypoxic then after that the oxygen already in his blood will do whatever it needs to do.
Also I read the study and the average male time for 100m was 11.5 seconds
I think that's an entirely different kettle of fish to what we are talking about. -
Say what, Bro? wrote:
What events did you exit? Elite 100m sprinters take 3-4 breaths during a race. Metabolism is alactic the first 6-8 seconds then transitions into lactic.
Actually metabolism is always "lactic" lol
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature24057 -
Peak too soon? wrote:
It's a long season. Hope he didn't just shoot his wad.
Yea he should have run 6.60 and he'd be perfectly fine. That extra 0.20 just ruined his whole season. -
VenTard.
The reasons most breathe during a 100m are twofold: 1) the natural cycling helps the body to relax and not tense up; and 2) the blood pH changes which can cause a desire to respire to restore the pH to a normal level.
You could run a hard 100m race in vacuo if you held your breath. It would suck because you would be too tight, and you would have an insanely strong desire to inhale upon finishing.
Swimmers, whose events take longer than does the 100m, often practice no-breath lengths. Because even their sprints are around 20 seconds at best, short-distance swimmers train to be lactic monsters. More than a few of the best 50 free and fly men and women do not breathe during their race, because they train for the pain, and because in those events, a breath can kill you if not done absolutely perfectly.
VenTard.
Pay no attention to the calculo poster on sprints, he's a complete moron. This is the same idiot who claimed that Powell did so well in Rieti because there were lots of trees around providing lots of oxygen.
It's pretty much impossible to articulate a stupider theorem.
VenTARD. -
Is that the real Sprintgeezer?!
-
i dont think at my best i could have held my breath for the full 100m.
i do know that i tried to hold my breath for the first 30m, being that i wasnt very explosive and had a 19" vert my start and drive phase was not that good. but if i tried to be relaxed it was much slower. so i worked out holding my breath like i was doing a bench max for the first 30m.
and sprintgeezer dont listen to vent/calculo on ANYTHING...the guy is the biggest and most annoying moron on LR. i mean he claims jim ryun ran 44 flat, 1'39, and 3'24...and yes he used ' to instead of : like the rest of the world. he is beyond annoying. my first time i was banned on here is when i argued with him that van would get the WR and not merrit. but he insisted that i was utter drivel, a f*cking idiot, moron and a joke....he used 45 vids, 15 pages of insults to prove that i was an idiot. well i predicted a 42.98-43.05 for van. i was correct, started mocking him and got banned. he is worthless.
two geezer, from all the things you have posted you have knowledge based on actually being an ATHLETE. from what i have read i take it you were a 10.12-20 guy in your prime. you know whats up cause you ran, competed. vent on the other hand is a mid 40s, 40lbs overweight still living with his parents in london i believe, virgin, math nerd who has 0% athletic ability what so ever. i wish more than anything that he would be permanently banned from LR and he can go be an annoying troll on some rubics cube forum, i can see it now.....
is this a joke?
4 twist of orange with a sore wrist, that cost him at least .045 seconds!
utter drivel, learn basic maths, always do color blue first!
moron! ~2.3cm wide on green, check the vid its mickey mouse!
drivel! in '67 jim ryeuuun did the cube in WR time, but it was wooden, on a plastic cube he has the WR anyone knows that -
m!ndweak wrote:
is this a joke?
4 twist of orange with a sore wrist, that cost him at least .045 seconds!
utter drivel, learn basic maths, always do color blue first!
moron! ~2.3cm wide on green, check the vid its mickey mouse!
drivel! in '67 jim ryeuuun did the cube in WR time, but it was wooden, on a plastic cube he has the WR anyone knows that
^this
i think vent should do a youtube channel where he commentates over old vintage videos drunk as sh*t and slurs his speech while he screams
"moron"
"wabbit"
"are you dunce!"
etc, that would be great to see how dumb and ugly he is while he rants about fantasy stuff blackout wasted. i bet it would generate some views for sure! -
The iaaf needs to get their s”-t together with these world record regulations. Or these meets need to abide by it if they’re going to have athletes of Coleman’s quality show up. Either way, the fact that his run doesn’t count as a WR, along with him having to drive 2 hours to get a drug test that didn’t end up mattering is stupid, and makes the iaaf look stupid. Screw them; he’s the fastest 60m sprinter in history no matter what they say.
-
WHAT ABOUT THE SPORT!!!!!!
-
PrZ wrote:
The iaaf needs to get their s”-t together with these world record regulations. Or these meets need to abide by it if they’re going to have athletes of Coleman’s quality show up. Either way, the fact that his run doesn’t count as a WR, along with him having to drive 2 hours to get a drug test that didn’t end up mattering is stupid, and makes the iaaf look stupid. Screw them; he’s the fastest 60m sprinter in history no matter what they say.
Don't be a fool. There are more track meets going on every weekend than there are testers.
And the issue is Clemson not having a full suite of the proper equipment. And of course knowing that, there was no need for a tester to be there for Coleman. I don't know what the status was for other events. But the electronic blocks are a baseline for sprinter events.
These rules are in place and all of the athletes and coaches are aware. Either the school needs to get up to full world class standards, or the runner who has a shot at a WR, chooses to run where there is the right equipment. Not so easy in college competition. Unless its the championship.
I'm sure this meets NCAA rules records? If so he'll get ratification. -
Victorious88 wrote:
Peak too soon? wrote:
It's a long season. Hope he didn't just shoot his wad.
Yea he should have run 6.60 and he'd be perfectly fine. That extra 0.20 just ruined his whole season.
I should have been more clear. It's not about his season being ruined. What I mean is that we know he is capable of running 6.37 and by running that fast in his first meet, expectations (and pressure), could play with his head. It's best to build up to that time. -
PrZ wrote:
The iaaf needs to get their s”-t together with these world record regulations. Or these meets need to abide by it if they’re going to have athletes of Coleman’s quality show up. Either way, the fact that his run doesn’t count as a WR, along with him having to drive 2 hours to get a drug test that didn’t end up mattering is stupid, and makes the iaaf look stupid. Screw them; he’s the fastest 60m sprinter in history no matter what they say.
The test still mattered, you still have to have a test within 24 hours to get ratified as a US Record, and I imagine he also has bonuses in his contract tied to that... -
crumpet wrote:
I'm sure this meets NCAA rules records? If so he'll get ratification.
He's a professional athlete, he won't get a collegiate record for his performance. -
If it's true that he was not using electronic blocks then I don't think the record should stand for anything personally.
A human cannot tell to 0.05s accuracy if someone has false started or not by eye, and he broke the record by 0.02s.
This is why electronic blocks exist. It could have been an illegal start and nobody would know.
