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.
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
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
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.
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.