He was down by several meters and was able to run down his competitior. What a talent, what a runner.
He was down by several meters and was able to run down his competitior. What a talent, what a runner.
Blazing feet wrote:
He was down by several meters and was able to run down his competitior. What a talent, what a runner.
just about to post about this, 43.06 was the split..... probably had more in him tbh lol
link
https://twitter.com/FloTrack/status/1001130988418863111Wait haven’t Wariner and Johnson both split sub 43 on relays?
Only Johnson did, 42.94. Jeremy has a 43.10 And a 43.18.
43.06 at such a young age is incredible
Open PRs by WVN, MJ, Reynolds, Warinier, and Watts are all superior.
history’s historian wrote:
Open PRs by WVN, MJ, Reynolds, Warinier, and Watts are all superior.
so hes the 6th best 400m runner ever at worst time wise? wow what negative
history’s historian wrote:
Open PRs by WVN, MJ, Reynolds, Warinier, and Watts are all superior.
Uh, no.
1 43.03 Wayde van Niekerk RSA 15.07.92 1 Rio de Janeiro 14.08.2016
2 43.18 Michael Johnson USA 13.09.67 1 Sevilla 26.08.1999
3 43.29 Harry Reynolds USA 08.06.64 1rA Zürich 17.08.1988
4 43.39 Michael Johnson USA 13.09.67 1 Göteborg 09.08.1995
5 43.44 Michael Johnson USA 13.09.67 1 Atlanta 19.06.1996
6 43.45 Jeremy Wariner USA 31.01.84 1 Osaka 31.08.2007
7 43.48 Wayde van Niekerk RSA 15.07.92 1 Beijing 26.08.2015
8 43.49 Michael Johnson USA 13.09.67 1 Atlanta 29.07.1996
9 43.50 Quincy Watts USA 19.06.70 1 Barcelona 05.08.1992
9 43.50 Jeremy Wariner USA 31.01.84 1rA Stockholm 07.08
I think he just means superior in that they ware worth faster than 43.06 if they had a flying start.
I didn’t realize until now that Van Niekirks open 400 is faster than all but one relay split ever. That’s insane. What could Niekerk have split that day?
Flo’da boy wrote:
I think he just means superior in that they ware worth faster than 43.06 if they had a flying start.
I didn’t realize until now that Van Niekirks open 400 is faster than all but one relay split ever. That’s insane. What could Niekerk have split that day?
About 58.xx. WvN is in poor health.
I’d predict low 42s and see what he could do. Honestly, he might’ve gotten sub 43 if they put out machines or something for him to chase lol
Norman is another huge talent like Lyles and after ill health last year is showing that he is a sub 44 talent this year. I would be shocked if he does not run mid to high 43 open at NCAA's or USA's this year.
Jeremy Wariner
The two-time world 400m champion was a key member of the USA 4x400m squad in the 2000s, picking up two Olympic relay golds and three world titles. He also boasts the second-fastest relay split in history with his 42.93 from the 2007 World Championships.
Wariner's split time from Osaka 2007 (WCs) is 43.10 per the alltime-athletics website. That was the #2 split. http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m4x400ok.htm
Per the IAAF website wrote:
Jeremy Wariner
The two-time world 400m champion was a key member of the USA 4x400m squad in the 2000s, picking up two Olympic relay golds and three world titles. He also boasts the second-fastest relay split in history with his 42.93 from the 2007 World Championships.
Actually, the IAAF website lists Wariner's split as 43.10.http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=dddc90b4-16f7-4162-883c-ee1db36fea3b.pdf&urlSlug=fastest-4x400m-splits-in-history
Per the IAAF website wrote:
Jeremy Wariner
The two-time world 400m champion was a key member of the USA 4x400m squad in the 2000s, picking up two Olympic relay golds and three world titles. He also boasts the second-fastest relay split in history with his 42.93 from the 2007 World Championships.
Does anyone else think he got the baton a little late in the hand off zone than when runner's usually get it and that might have helped his time?
vivalarepublica wrote:
Does anyone else think he got the baton a little late in the hand off zone than when runner's usually get it and that might have helped his time?
The time should be taken from the finish line. It should make no difference when the last runner actually accepts the handoff.
line to line wrote:
vivalarepublica wrote:
Does anyone else think he got the baton a little late in the hand off zone than when runner's usually get it and that might have helped his time?
The time should be taken from the finish line. It should make no difference when the last runner actually accepts the handoff.
Yup, the splits are taken when the baton crosses the line. So, unless the 3rd leg was finishing faster than the 4th leg's start then it wouldn't help. In reality it may have hurt his split since the clock started when the baton crossed the line and then they made the exchange so he lost some momentum on the exchange compared to if he was running full speed from the line.
line to line wrote:
The time should be taken from the finish line. for splits 3 & 4 and the mid point of the exchange zone for splits 1&2 It should make no difference when the last runner actually accepts the handoff.
you are so correct