Powell smashes 100m world record

clv101 said:
That's an interesting point. I guess it's clear that the runners of 40 years ago were disadvantages compared to today's runners (equipment, training, diet etc.) so the fact they were so close is pretty impressive!
Click to expand...

If you look at other events though (say the mile), the times have come down a lot more.

My theory is that things like equipment, training and diet are (relatively) less important for the 100m. By which I mean that the top sprinters are 'born' that way - OK so it still depends a lot on training etc but perhaps not so much as say middle distance running.
 
clv101 said:
That's an interesting point. I guess it's clear that the runners of 40 years ago were disadvantages compared to today's runners (equipment, training, diet etc.) so the fact they were so close is pretty impressive!
Click to expand...

It is interesting but as HangTime says it seems mostly down to innate natural talent, for an event as short and explosive as the 100m you must rapidly come up against the law of diminishing returns. There must be a physical limit to how quickly the race can be run and training, diets etc etc can only alter this so much. In the future there may be some giant leap forward (no pun intended) as in the triple jump when Jonathan Edwards smashed the record but I suspect because of the way the event is it will continue to be more of an incremental drop in the times. :)

Congratulations to Powell, a stunning time and I really hope he is clean.
 
Its amazing that when you think only a few days back in the World Championships, he couldnt get anywhere near this time. Then in a low key event like this, BANG - he breaks the record.

What is impressive is that most of the fastest 100m times ever have been run by him. This time is not a flash in the pan. He is consistently producing them. The problem is that in big events, he chokes. His mental attitude during the big races needs looking at I think. Physically, he is already where he needs to be.
 
Its so hard to believe in athletes now a days the performance drugs are to far ahead of the testing ,i remember seeing a program saying they thought at least 75% of athletes took drugs to improve performance ,and that there was loads of ways to aviod being caught ,then again look at silly lingford LOL
 
THE DOC said:
then again look at silly lingford LOL
Click to expand...

I've always wondered about this one, there was no reason for Christie to even bother with this race or drug test from what I recall yet he still did. I have always had a bit of a suspicion it was simply to make a point, his career was effectively over either way but I'd prefer to think it was to make a statement about the rifeness of drug taking rather than sheer stupidity.
 
I think we should stay away from comparing 200m and 100m, one of the qualifiers in osaka for the 4X100m races where they pass the baton i'm sure Powell ran UNDER 9 secs with a rolling start as it were.

Powell is the best sprinter around just seems to choke on the big occasions.
 
Vegeta said:
the 4X100m races where they pass the baton i'm sure Powell ran UNDER 9 secs with a rolling start as it were.
Click to expand...

Yep with a rolling start the likes of Donovan Bailey have also run sub-9s back in the 90s. Bear in mind that with a baton change they aren't going to be going full pelt either (due to the other bloke needing to reach them and switch the baton cleanly) so surely 8.5s or therabouts much be possible.

Bear in mind that the 200m isn't really a fair comparison since although they will have hit full speed (no baton to contend with) they have to go round a bend and it is much harder to run flat out for 200m than for 100m - i.e. fatigue starts to come into the equation.
 
Yeah I just seen the run now - I really wish sprinters would go at it for the full 100 god knows what time he would have clocked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom