Talk about trying to discredit Track and Field, sounds like you're a disgrace to the sport. Go away please.
Talk about trying to discredit Track and Field, sounds like you're a disgrace to the sport. Go away please.
The real truth however is there are fast footballers just as fast as track sprinters when it comes to something as short as a 40.
Olympic sprinters/NFLers Ron Brown, Sam Graddy, Johnny Jones, James Jett were no faster in a 40 than non Olympians like Bo Jackson, Deion Sanders, Joey Galloway none were actually serious sprinters.
Even in his prime if timed in the same method the footballers are timed I doubt Bolt breaks 4.20. Yes I know about Coleman. Not talking on a track in route to..........
A world class sprinter is about speed endurance something footballers simply don't work on, train for. So at around 45ish there goes the sprinter leaving the footballer as he shifts in another gear, one a footballer doesn't possess.
How can you complain about the timing (from video), when the distance wasn't certified either?
Maybe both were wrong...
Adding a timecode to the video, its 4.22 from hand lift to line. Maybe 4.21 depending on when he breaks plane
Actually -- It's 4 sec + 22/29 of a second (time code runs from 0-29), so 4.75
Adding a timecode to the video, its 4.22 from hand lift to line. Maybe 4.21 depending on when he breaks plane
Why do the hundredths only go up to 29?
sbeefyk2 wrote:
The point of that stunt was to show that track and field athletes can sit on the couch eating potato chips and McDonalds for years and - without spikes or warming up - still run as fast as the fastest football players.
.
How many chicken nuggets did Bolt have before the 4.22 pace?
Hand egg is fake wrote:
I think you are correct.
Good catch.
Can you download it, and then use editing software frame counter and then slow it up so that it takes 4.22 sec to run the distance- and then it will preemptively answer a critique that the video you used was simply running too slow (because the speeded up version will look ridiculous and also sound strange).
Compressing broadcast video , and uploading to youtube does not equate to 30 fps . Compression schemes drop frames . knowing youtube downloads are MP4 , tells you everything you need to know about frame accuracy.
NSP wrote:
Adding a timecode to the video, its 4.22 from hand lift to line. Maybe 4.21 depending on when he breaks plane
Actually -- It's 4 sec + 22/29 of a second (time code runs from 0-29), so 4.75
Exactly, you can see it all on frame-by-frame. (30 fps, some of the time code frames are skipped/doubled)
http://www.watchframebyframe.com/watch/yt/OHMi9sWcavkModern technologist wrote:
Exactly, you can see it all on frame-by-frame. (30 fps, some of the time code frames are skipped/doubled)
That's because some of the frames are doubled (2.22, 3.08). The rolling lights at the right don't move.
That time code video is interesting. Maybe I'll download an app that does that so I can see if it's legit.
Typically, hand timing is faster than automatic timing, even if it's only auto started, so it seems as if the 4.22 is a fake when you time it out yourself. However, it's a very bad angle, and it's hard to clearly see when he starts. Also, it's strange that a guy yelled "start" vs just letting him go when he wanted to, which is how it's usually done. It's just not ideal conditions to prove it wrong.
I do disagree with rojo that a 4.22 is unbelievable though. As a 40 yo I ran a 4.66 40yard dash. I'm sure Bolt is faster than I am, even if he isn't training that much. 4.22 is fast, and surprising, but not impossible.
Of course, it's the NFL. The NFL is a scamming, multi-billion dollar corporation, much more concerned with bottom line profits than sportsmanship, morality, or reality. The modern NFL is a disgrace, and most people in this country are willfully ignorant to it. The number of people who follow along with this league, despite the numerous wrongs and damages they've inflicted, is only explained by constant need to place personal entertainment above what's right, and is indicative of a sick society. And if you can't take a look around and see we are disgustingly sick, please don't reply to this because you are hopeless and your opinion is void.
I realize I'm posting this on a running message board. Which makes anything I write basically void of value as well. Still, I stand by my points.
I don't doubt that this was a hoax, but they worked hard to make it convincing. In the flotrack video there is a view from the side and it shows the running clock with Bolt crossing at 4.2:
https://youtu.be/21UknRG9ffg?t=73
btw, the flotrack commentators were much better at promoting track and field than rojo. They acknowledged the inaccuracy of the timing while praising bolt for his accomplishment in street clothes.
nfl.com also has a slightly different angle.
We can't tell when his chest is over the finish line. We also know that timing from video is not going to be exact. I timed it a few times and it seemed well within the range of error. It is not implausible to me that he actually ran 4.22.
zxcvzxcv wrote:
We can't tell when his chest is over the finish line
You can tell when he crosses by the shadow he casts off to the left
I initially counted 140 frames (4.67 seconds) from first movement to finish but I'll have to compare it to videos from the actual combine to see if my method is accurate
At 3:41 of the video the guy on the left says, "I'm not saying he's primed for a comeback, but if he is he's giving some signals."
That is what I said first. If he is in good enough shape to do something even remotely close to 4.22 with those shoes and warmup pants, and he turned down numerous soccer offers, he is making a comeback. I would love to see this. Let Seb Coe do what he will with drug testing, but Bolt brings the excitement to track and field.
Also, I wonder whether anyone confirmed that the distance was accurate.
amateurish set-up wrote:
How can you complain about the timing (from video), when the distance wasn't certified either?
Maybe both were wrong...
Maybe the turf had Nike 4%-rebound stuff in it too.
zxcvzxcv wrote:
We can't tell when his chest is over the finish line. We also know that timing from video is not going to be exact. I timed it a few times and it seemed well within the range of error. It is not implausible to me that he actually ran 4.22.
NO. You simply don't understand this. I don't know what else there is to say other than you don't understand this. People are either saying my timing is off a little (I was a little late in the 1st video) or we don't know where the finish is exactly.
I timed it 5 times - starting clearly after he started running - and hitting it at the ifnish line and never got closer than .37 of 4.22.
Do you guys realize how much distance we're talking about him covering in .37 of a second at that speed? It's not a matter of knowing where the finish line is. When Bolt is running a 100, he covers more than 10 meters per second. So in .37 of a second you are looking at at more than12 feet. So if we don't know where the finish line is by a few inches, that doesn't matter.
The only way this could be legit is if the finish line is way before the actual finish line on the astroturf. But again, it would need to be about 12 feet before that line and the shot from the other angle where you see the clock shows the clock stopping near where the finish line is.
Here is the other tweet where you see the 4.22 clock.
https://twitter.com/ZackCoxNESN/status/1091743423957266432rojo, do you really not understand the theory (Einstein) of relativity?
First, everything is local to a reference frame. Light (signals) don't travel instantaneously. This is the theory of special relativity.
But there's also the theory of general relativity and gravitational time dilation. So just because you time it at 4.75s on your YouTube video, doesn't mean it wasn't 4.22s where the boots were on the ground. You are assuming your local coordinates (and timing mechanism) would transpose to Atlanta.
The higher the gravitational potential (the farther the clock is from the source of gravitation), the faster time passes. Clocks close to massive bodies run more slowly.
Clearly, Atlanta had many more people there (creating mass) than your video replay. So how can you be surprised that their clocks were slower?
this is typical of why this sport is a failure compared to what it should be -- which is the top sport
Our own people in our own track &field community are the first to start going out of their way to write articles that one of our own failed to do something. Lets say he didnt make the time? I dont see basketball people downplaying it when someone is said to have snatched a coin off the backboard. They dont pull out the science. They just go with it. Just shut the f up and let it become a story that happened. You people dont know when to shut your mouths. For 30 yrs i heard how Bo Jackson went 4.1 and i know its probably bllsh!t. But football figures dont make whole campaigns to end the myth. You people are truly nerds