whos the better sprinter

regob

whos better in your opinions, asafa powell or usain bolt

geoff29

I'm disappointed to see that I wasn't included in the poll... I can run like the wind!

eagle eye

What sort of poll is this, Bolt beats Powell last Friday and breaks the world record at the Olympics. Why ask this question? the answer is there in front of you.

regob

the reason i asked this is because me and a friend have been having this argument since like the olympic games final, im for bolt, he seems to think asafa is gonna improve i have to disagree, just wanted to see wat peoples opinion on this are.

griffspeed

regob wrote: »

whos better in your opinions, asafa powell or usain bolt

Powell far better technician, 9.77 followed by 9.82 all in 1 hour yesterday in Italy, Powell will take back the record next season, along with 60 m indoor record.

geoff29

well, if it's any help, I *used* to think Powell was gonna improve time-wise. I always thought that he had a comfortable looking run - with plenty in the tank. But whatever that plenty is, he's miles off Bolt. Bolt might as well be a different species such is the difference between the two, and indeed everyone else.

I think the time for this discussion was before the finals. The question has been answered quite conclusively!!

geoff29

griffspeed wrote: »

Powell will take back the record next season...

really?!?!

regob

honestly mate i cant see it, as the olympic final basically showed that bolt had a far faster time in him that 9.69, and i just cant see asafa having a quicker pace.

Bongomc

Bolt's projected run in the olympic 100m was 9.52 but his slowing down at the end cost him and I can't see Powell coming anywhere close to that time.

However I would like to see Powell beat or equal Bolts record to motivate Bolt.

OutOfPosition

Tirinesh Dibaba

Bobby04

Bongomc wrote: »

However I would like to see Powell beat or equal Bolts record to motivate Bolt.

+1

regob

OutOfPosition wrote: »

Tirinesh Dibaba

ure point is?

thirtyfoot

This poll a little like asking who is the better hurling team - Waterford or Kilkenny.

dna_leri

Tingle wrote: »

This poll a little like asking who is the better hurling team - Waterford or Kilkenny.

Yes, but Waterford did win the National League and played some very good hurling on the way to the final - uncanny similarities?

Actually is really POBS - Post Olympic Blues Syndrome brought on by an absence of the five ring circus that we got used to all those weeks ago.

It starts with comparing GAA players to real athletes and you know you are in trouble when you wake up at 3am and realise you've just been dreaming of Clare McNamara.

High&Low

Tingle wrote: »

This poll a little like asking who is the better hurling team - Waterford or Kilkenny.

I think if it is a simple "who is the better sprinter" purely based on speed, then it is a no brainer. However it is based on style and who you would want a young sprinter to copy, technically, then it would be Powell.

Bolt is a freak of nature, nobody that big has run like that before, but he is an ugly runner and nobody should model themselves on him. Powell is far more orthodox and is good at every stage of the race, from out of the blocks o the finish line (except if its a major final!!!!!!!!!!)

Watching Powell run the final leg of the 4x100 relay in the olympics was watching absolute technically perfect sprinting.

eagle eye

Bongomc wrote: »

Bolt's projected run in the olympic 100m was 9.52 but his slowing down at the end cost him and I can't see Powell coming anywhere close to that time.

However I would like to see Powell beat or equal Bolts record to motivate Bolt.

Could you give me a link to where you got this incredible figure because from all I've seen in athletics this sounds like complete rubbish to me.
So links or you are talking trash.

Bongomc

eagle eye wrote: »

Could you give me a link to where you got this incredible figure because from all I've seen in athletics this sounds like complete rubbish to me.
So links or you are talking trash.

http://olympics.fanhouse.com/2008/08/27/usain-bolts-coach-he-could-have-run-9-52-100-meter-dash-in-bei/

9.52 is what his coach said he should have run.

thirtyfoot

Bongomc wrote: »

http://olympics.fanhouse.com/2008/08/27/usain-bolts-coach-he-could-have-run-9-52-100-meter-dash-in-bei/

9.52 is what his coach said he should have run.

Here are the USATF splits.

10 1.85
20 1.00
30 0.94
40 0.86
50 0.82
60 0.82
70 0.83
80 0.84
90 0.86
100 0.87

I find it hard to see where he would have got 0.17 off in his last 20m considering he averaged 0.865 in the last 20 - he would need to run 0.79 for his last 2 10m splits which considering he began to naturally slow at 70m would be difficult to see happening. Where would he pick up the 0.17 in the last 20m? (actually the last 15m as it was only 7 strides of showboating not as some report 30m).

His coach said 9.52, a group of non-track scientists in Norway said 9.52 while 99% of track stat freaks say 9.62-9.65. I would go with the stat track freaks as they are track stat freaks for a reason and they are usually not wrong. Maybe Pheredykes could offer his opinion as he is up on this kind of stuff.

Pherekydes

Tingle wrote: »

Here are the USATF splits.

10 1.85
20 1.00
30 0.94
40 0.86
50 0.82
60 0.82
70 0.83
80 0.84
90 0.86
100 0.87

I find it hard to see where he would have got 0.17 off in his last 20m considering he averaged 0.865 in the last 20 - he would need to run 0.79 for his last 2 10m splits which considering he began to naturally slow at 70m would be difficult to see happening. Where would he pick up the 0.17 in the last 20m? (actually the last 15m as it was only 7 strides of showboating not as some report 30m).

His coach said 9.52, a group of non-track scientists in Norway said 9.52 while 99% of track stat freaks say 9.62-9.65. I would go with the stat track freaks as they are track stat freaks for a reason and they are usually not wrong. Maybe Pheredykes could offer his opinion as he is up on this kind of stuff.

I actually posted earlier in this thread but the post never appeared. The best unbiased opinion is that he might have run about 9.65 without the showboating.

In the matter of opinions, I tend to go with the unbiased ones.

newballsplease

daft poll- the answer is simple. anyone else who votes for powell needs treatment.

Bobby04

Tingle - that is fascinating to see the 10m splits that you've posted, and thanks for doing so. But is there similar info available for some other quick runs like the 9.72s that Powell & Bolt have to their names just for comparison? Or indeed are there 10m splits for Bolt's 200m WR?

thirtyfoot

Bobby04 wrote: »

Tingle - that is fascinating to see the 10m splits that you've posted, and thanks for doing so. But is there similar info available for some other quick runs like the 9.72s that Powell & Bolt have to their names just for comparison? Or indeed are there 10m splits for Bolt's 200m WR?

I don'y know about 10m splits but the 100-100 splits are 9.96 & 9.34:eek:

walshb

Bongomc wrote: »

http://olympics.fanhouse.com/2008/08/27/usain-bolts-coach-he-could-have-run-9-52-100-meter-dash-in-bei/

9.52 is what his coach said he should have run.

Have to agree fully here. Bolt, had he been pushed and had he NOT celebrated early, could have ran 9.5

II saw the splits for the 10 metre slots and the best was .82 at the 60 m mark I think; but IMO, this is when Bolt knew he had the race won. He didn't need to find an extra gear and from 60-70-80 etc, he was slowing down. Had he maintained and actually pushed hard from 60-100, then 9.5 was achievable...

Does anyone really believe that at 60 metres, Bolt was at his physical peak?
I don't think he was and if you believe that from 60-100 he could have ran .79/.80 splits, then sub 9.6 is a definite

RoyMcC

Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that sprinters physically can't accelerate from about 60m - it's those that decelerate the least that come out on top.

Mind you this guy is re-writing the accepted rules...

dna_leri

walshb wrote: »

Have to agree fully here. Bolt, had he been pushed and had he NOT celebrated early, could have ran 9.5

Yes, Bolt is breaking the rules but nobody has ever got faster after 70m.

For a scientific analysis read:
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09/usain-bolt-955s-yeah-right.html

Key question is:
Where in this race are you going to find 0.14 seconds?

Answer, you can't find that time at the end of the race. Unless you assume that Bolt is going to run a 0.79 second 10m interval somewhere in the race. But that, I'm afraid, is not possible, and therefore, you cannot conclude that he would have run 9.55 seconds without celebrating.

High&Low

walshb wrote: »

Have to agree fully here. Bolt, had he been pushed and had he NOT celebrated early, could have ran 9.5

II saw the splits for the 10 metre slots and the best was .82 at the 60 m mark I think; but IMO, this is when Bolt knew he had the race won. He didn't need to find an extra gear and from 60-70-80 etc, he was slowing down. Had he maintained and actually pushed hard from 60-100, then 9.5 was achievable...

Does anyone really believe that at 60 metres, Bolt was at his physical peak?
I don't think he was and if you believe that from 60-100 he could have ran .79/.80 splits, then sub 9.6 is a definite

Using that argument Bolt would have run sub 19 for the 200m as he ran flat out!!!! but he "only" ran 9.34 for the second 100m and that is with a rolling start (look at his split for the first 20m in the 100m final).

As others have said it is impossible for an athlete to continue accelerating the entire race.

He may run 9.5 next year but he wouldn't have run it in Beijing.

Pherekydes

walshb wrote: »

Have to agree fully here. Bolt, had he been pushed and had he NOT celebrated early, could have ran 9.5

II saw the splits for the 10 metre slots and the best was .82 at the 60 m mark I think; but IMO, this is when Bolt knew he had the race won. He didn't need to find an extra gear and from 60-70-80 etc, he was slowing down. Had he maintained and actually pushed hard from 60-100, then 9.5 was achievable...

Does anyone really believe that at 60 metres, Bolt was at his physical peak?
I don't think he was and if you believe that from 60-100 he could have ran .79/.80 splits, then sub 9.6 is a definite

Seriously, are you trying to say that a guy racing in the Olympic 100m was NOT flat out at 50 or 60m? Bolt's fastest split was 0.82. That is the absolute fastest he can run for a 10m split, currently.

Looking at the splits, you can see that the effect of maximum acceleration followed by running flat out takes hold as early as 30m before the finish, way before Bolt began celebrating.

walshb

dna_leri wrote: »

Yes, Bolt is breaking the rules but nobody has ever got faster after 70m.

For a scientific analysis read:
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09/usain-bolt-955s-yeah-right.html

Key question is:
Where in this race are you going to find 0.14 seconds?

Answer, you can't find that time at the end of the race. Unless you assume that Bolt is going to run a 0.79 second 10m interval somewhere in the race. But that, I'm afraid, is not possible, and therefore, you cannot conclude that he would have run 9.55 seconds without celebrating.

Excellent data, but the most important aspect IMO is missing, and that is the fact that Bolt had nobody pushing him in the race and this cannot be overlooked. What happens had Bolt at 60-70-80 metres saw a couple of athletes still level and challenging?

All the science in the world cannot get the answer to this and I think that Bolt had an extra gear there to either speed up or maintain. Time will tell, but from 60 metres, Bolt knew he had the race won and although he was at his peak speed (in this race); he may well have increased the pace had there been a danger of losing!

walshb

Pherekydes wrote: »

Bolt's fastest split was 0.82. That is the absolute fastest he can run for a 10m split, currently.

Looking at the splits, you can see that the effect of maximum acceleration followed by running flat out takes hold as early as 30m before the finish, way before Bolt began celebrating.

I would say that is the absolute fastest he did run, not CAN run.
He did what he had to in that race. There's more in the tank!

Pherekydes

walshb wrote: »

All the science in the world cannot get the answer to this and I think that Bolt had an extra gear there to either speed up or maintain. Time will tell, but from 60 metres, Bolt knew he had the race won and although he was at his peak speed (in this race); he may well have increased the pace had there been a danger of losing!

You completely misunderstand the term 'peak'. If he was at his peak speed, he cannot increase the pace. Otherwise he's not at his peak speed.

Peak speed = maximum speed = speed which you cannot go beyond (by definition). In fact, if you try to increase your maximum speed you will slow down. This is why you see the world's top sprinters looking very relaxed while running at top speed. Relaxing means they will slow down less in the last 30m. Looking at many sprint races over the years, this is where the biggest gaps occur.

Believe me, Bolt was running at maximum speed during the 100m final.

walshb

Pherekydes wrote: »

You completely misunderstand the term 'peak'. If he was at his peak speed, he cannot increase the pace. Otherwise he's not at his peak speed.

Peak speed = maximum speed = speed which you cannot go beyond (by definition). In fact, if you try to increase your maximum speed you will slow down. This is why you see the world's top sprinters looking very relaxed while running at top speed. Relaxing means they will slow down less in the last 30m. Looking at many sprint races over the years, this is where the biggest gaps occur.

Believe me, Bolt was running at maximum speed during the 100m final.

I fully understand peak and you obviously seem so so certain that Bolt was at peak?
Only Bolt knows for certain such a thing. You cannot know this.

Bolt was not pushed in the race and this is the key to determining his physical peak. If you study say Bailey from 1996, you will see that he was flat out all the way, because he was pushed all the way. Bolt knew he had the race won at 60-70; so maybe he didn't push that extra little bit; hence his real peak was not established. Did you ever think of that?

Although I did say Bolt reached his peak speed in Beijing, I didn't mean that to be his absolute max, my mistake. Typing error!

Bolt's peak speed in the race was .82 for 50-60, however, was this his real peak speed?
I think had he been pushed, then this would have been bettered!

thirtyfoot

walshb wrote: »

Bolt was not pushed in the race and this is the key to determining his physical peak.

Bolt was pushed in the race and didn't realise he had it wrapped up until 80 or 85m. Look again at the race and you'll see he didn't to think about celebrating until 7 strides out.

He'd want to be pretty naive to think he had it won and wrapped up at 60m considering his main rival and a guy who beat him a couple of weeks before Beijing in the Stockholm GP was a couple of lanes away and still in the hunt and at that stage out of eye sight. He was pushed, no doubt and also he reached his peak at 60-70m as practically all male 100m sprinters do.

Bolt '08
10 1.85
20 1.00
30 0.94
40 0.86
50 0.82
60 0.82
70 0.83
80 0.84
90 0.86
100 0.87

Johnson '88
10 1.83
20 1.04
30 0.93
40 0.86
50 0.84
60 0.83
70 0.84
80 0.85
90 0.87
100 0.90

Lewis '88
10 1.89
20 1.07
30 0.94
40 0.89
50 0.86
60 0.83
70 0.85
80 0.85
90 0.86
100 0.88

Greene (9.86) in '97 peaked at 60-70m with a 0.85, Bailey (9.91) peaked at 60-70m in same race with a 0.85. The fastest split recorded for a 10m is 0.82. Lewis has a 0.83 at the 80m mark, while Gatlin and Powell had 0.85 at the 90m mark for their 9.77's.

Since it is accepted by 99.99% of people that Bolt was pushed to 80m then he would need to be superman to pick up 0.17 in the last 20m.