-
There are cameras every where now that can that record at 60-240 frames per second. There must be 15 or more different videos of that race most of them show the athletes and the starter. It can be proven that he didn’t false start. Did they have those rules when Maurice Greene set the world record 20 years ago.
-
60m record wrote:
There are cameras every where now that can that record at 60-240 frames per second. There must be 15 or more different videos of that race most of them show the athletes and the starter. It can be proven that he didn’t false start. Did they have those rules when Maurice Greene set the world record 20 years ago.
I'm not entirely sure about that really. I think it's more complicated than that with regards to time taken for the sound of the gun to reach the camera device, position of the device etc. Also how clear from the footage that the athlete has actually left the blocks etc.
And about Greene again can't say for certain but electronic blocks have been around for a longggg time. It's very simple tech. Been in swimming since the early 80s. -
You don't go by sound you go by light. You can find the exact frame where the gun fires with any cell phone camera now a days and calculate reaction time. I do it for all my races.
-
Maybe the IAAF should let your cell phone count as the reaction time block sensor.
Why we are at it, maybe it should just do the photofinish too.
PLEEEEASE. You have no idea what you're talking about. -
If you have multiple videos of a race showing that an athlete did not false start, combined with electronic timing what difference does it make? In all the major races they go to the video to determine if there was a false start and even over rule the block sensors in some cases. I don't even see the wires for block sensors in the videos of either of Maurice Greene's 6.39. Do we even know if those race meet the burden of proof contemporary sprinters need to meet?
-
Record should be ratified.
Maurice Greene's WR didn't have electronic starting blocks.
Call a spade a spade. -
Every aspect of our sport has changed over the decades - including the rules.
Greene set the record under the rules for that time and he was celebrated for it.
But, the technology of the sport has been evolving which has allowed us to craft the rules to provide for a more level playing field to help ensure the integrity of performances. -
calculo wrote:
ex-runner wrote:Absolutely nowhere in those studies does it say you need to take a breath during the race
how clueless are you ???
it was not point of study & is impicit in conclusion that anywhere between 9 - 21% of a 100m is aerobic
for that 9 - 21% of the metabolism to function, oxygen is required for maximal performance & that means breathing
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
nonsense
that is just a difference in degree of talent not training intensity or race biology
11.5 guys train just as hard as 10-flat guys but their talent doesn't allow them to run 10-flat but 11.5 & they don't have different biology
Nowhere does the study imply breathing is required during the race or that 100m runners would have their performance limited by oxygen. You can breath before and afterwards.
Or are you implying that when you are between breaths you are no longer respiring aerobically? That respiration suddenly becomes anaerobic the second you are not inhaling. As if humans need to constantly suck in air without pause like a vacuum cleaner or they start building up lactate and fatiguing whilst going about their daily business. Nonsense.
I suppose on that same vein you believe that compression only CPR is a myth also? Oxygen cannot remain in the blood stream and be delivered to the muscles/heart/brain unless you are actively breathing?
Also very interesting that you fail to recognise how maximal exercise for 9.8 seconds vs 11.5 seconds could have drastically different energy system requirements. Especially when we are discussing essentially the phosphate creatine energy system. 11.5 seconds is an effort that is 17% longer. You can't just use the PC system or anaerobic respiration systems for an infinite period of time as long as the distance remains under 400m. Ludicrous.
The fact that you fail to accept the phosphate system does not need oxygen to deliver energy to working muscles really affects the legitimacy of your arguments. High energy, readily available phosphates are stored INSIDE muscle cells and don't need any movement of air into one's nose, one's mouth or up one's arse to function when required immediately. -
careful geezer.....you need to know that vent/calculo is protected on here.
like i said i got banned for 1 day for just mocking his writing style, then banned again for 10 days for mocking him again and calling him calK*nto and mocking Renato Canova and calling him Ret*rdo, and rekrunner by calling him reekdummer.
ive had many a post deleted for using "t*rd" at the end of a word as well. its pretty sad and pathetic what is allowed on this site and what i get banned and deleted for.
vent can cuss and call everyone and anyone and idiot, moron, imbecile, dunce etc. but i cant mock him?
so be careful geezer, i like reading your comments and if vent gets his poor feelings hurt you will get banned. -
hey rojo im guessing you get just as annoyed as i do and just scroll down past the rants of vent/calculo....cause if you didnt you would see his constant barage of offensive insults, here i highlighted them from 2 replies for you...
how clueless are you ??? is calling someone clueless and insult? i think so
learn to think this is implying a person isnt capable of learning to think, thus calling them mentally handicapped...which is an insult
utter nonsense nonsense
noun
1.
spoken or written words that have no meaning or make no sense.
"he was talking absolute nonsense"
synonyms: rubbish, gibberish, claptrap, balderdash, blarney; More
2.
foolish or unacceptable behavior.
"put a stop to that nonsense, will you?"
thus implying the person is a fool or cant speak or write, thus calling them mentally handicapped...which is an insult
that is nonsense again with the nonsense word
learn to think here it is again...
idiot ummm really this is acceptable?
he seems to know hell of lot more about sprinting than the idiot being responded to
a guy with no clue that Coleman split 6.37s en-route to his silver in london in miserable weather.....calling someone an idiot and another guy he insults by saying he has no clue.
the repondee is such an idiot not to realise basic physiology....here is idiot again
only an idiot coudn't understand that nesta ran 9.78 in rieti at end of long hard season & never faster than 9.85 anywhere else......this one is golden. here he calls someone an idiot, then tops it off with them not being able to understand.
so there you have it rojo.....either
A) ban him for life, or let the rest of us fight back to his insults by any means necessary. you are protecting a cyber bully and when we fight back you punish us. its not right -
Sprintgeezer wrote:
Pretty much every single thing in VenTard’s response is flat-out wrong.
What a masturbating idiot.
To the other poster, sorry but i wasn’t that fast. Still plenty fast, but not THAT fast!
Coleman is smoking, he has made the first 50m matter again. He will get in people’s heads this year.
so geezer, what do you think his SB will be this year?
looking at his indoor vs outdoor progression
2017/18 6.37 Clemson (USA) 19 JAN 2018
2016/17 6.45 College Station (USA) 11 MAR 2017
2015/16 6.52 Birmingham (USA) 12 MAR 2016
2014/15 6.58 Blacksburg (USA) 06 FEB 2015
2017 9.82 +1.3 Eugene (USA) 07 JUN 2017
2016 9.95 +1.7 Eugene (USA) 03 JUL 2016
2015 10.18 +2.0 Eugene (USA) 26 JUN 2015
2014 10.30 +0.9 Greensboro (USA) 14 JUN 2014
going with the trend i see, i predict he is good for a 9.70-.72 in early april. fastest i can find is bolt running 9.76, May 3rd 2008.
but seeing how his 200m isnt up to par with his 60m, and more in par with mo greene and his 200, does someone have his 10m splits for his 9.82? i feel that he prob dies after 60-70m or so and cant maintain till the end. if he can this year then yes i see a 9.70-72 in three months from now, and peaking in early june with a 9.67 or so and falling apart back to 9.82-.85 ish like he did last year. he hit 9.82 in early june and fell apart to a 9.94 by august.
what do you think mr geezer? -
just watched his NCAA record run, and a few things i noticed.
1) dude looks like mutha f*cking wayne brady! https://www.bet.com/topics/w/wayne-brady.html
2) looks like he held his breath till about 70-80m of that race, he has a short stride with fast turnover, but how it cycles through looks like he is going to blow out his hammys big time -
http://nwamedia.photoshelter.com/image/I0000Jvexwrvyz.M
as you can see in this pic what im talking about....this form is going to be very very devastating to his hammys. you cant have that fast of turnover and your legs cycling through like this and the hammys not blowing up, it will happen. and it will be painful -
polevaultpower wrote:
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.
Ok, missed him turning.
However, it shows he needs to pick his races if he is going to break records. I suspect this will get him more money for the next one. :-) -
My 5 thoughts on Christian Coleman WR in 60m 6.37 https://youtu.be/xDtP6Y72AMc
-
I don’t think we will see 9.6 from CC, or even low 9.7–although I would love to see it! Nobody has ever achieved those times without anything other than excellent form, something that Colemans doesn’t have.
And about VenTard and the mods, I have found the mods to have been very reasonable. They let you go off, if 2 things happen: 1) Vent starts it, and 2) Vent is talking easily verifiable BS.
Vent operates by the maxim “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, dazzle them with bullshlt”. I have no opinion on his knowledge or postings regarding distance running, but about sprinting he knows nothing. It would be as if I came on here pontificating on Aouita, Bekele, and Komen. -
sadly i have to say geezer you are wrong. his bullsh*t transcends all distances. he doesnt know anything from the 60m-marathon but he will call you and idiot for not agreeing with him.
he still claims that jim ryun ran 3'24 (and why the f*ck he writes times like that instead of 3:24 like the rest of the world is super annoying as well)
claims everyday during the summer someone will break the WR from the 1500 -10k, then he makes asinine predictions for the marathon that he is ALWAYS wrong.
and the mods? well i have been banned multiple times or have all my comments deleted (and even deleted from other threads that he wasnt even hijakcing) for mocking vent/calculo AFTER he started his hijacking of threads and insulting people. he can call anyone and everyone and idiot and moron etc but man you mock him a few times and boom banned/deleted.
like i said before he never in his life done anything athletic or participated in any sport...he is a worthless, lazy, fat, arrogant NONATHLETIC, UNCOORDINATED 40yr old virgin, living at his moms house and annoying us with his quotes within quotes. i hear he is from the UK as well.....which interesting enough i have a strong belief that 2nd place most annoying "rekrunner" is also from the UK...and he is protected as well. ANNOYING
you have vent hijacking threads with his fantasy annoying bullsh*t and insults or you have rekrunner hijacking threads to rant over and over and over that EPO and PEDs dont work. why cant they just be banned for life already? -
I knew within a few minutes that the record would probably not be recognized. There are about a half dozen requirements which are unlikely to all be met unless the meet prepares for a WR attempt. Obviously, DL, global and national championships, etc., are usually prepared for WRs.
Pardon me if someone has already pointed this out; in spite of this being a season opener and Coleman being young, there is no guarantee Coleman will ever run that fast again. Mo Green set the 60m WL early in his career and was never able to better it. The way it works is, the training and physical transformation required to improve in the 100 and 200 won't improve his 60m capability. -
ex-runner wrote:
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.
Coleman did appear to get an almost perfect start; he didn't appear to FS, but we will never know. Requiring the electronic blocks makes sense for WRs. -
Yes Trackcoach, it's good that some standardized rules are in place.
I also agree that he may never run this fast again, unless it's this year. He's hot now, he should go for it again, with a legit setup. Everything is firing on all cylinders, and his timing seems to be right on.
But you never know. Guys have done well in the 60 even as they get older. Look at Powell's half-assed 6.44 heat, when he was already semi-old, certainly much older than CC.
I also agree that the effects of the 100m training he should be doing may detract from his absolute 60m performance, but only time will tell on that one. For a lot of guys, form and mechanics training doesn't "take" on race day, because they aren't confident.
It takes a bit of courage to stick to something and maybe lose races for a while, while you figure out how to do it best. It takes patience, discipline, and more than anything, faith. Who knows if CC will evolve as a 100m guy.
