Author Topic: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread  (Read 15270 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

acole14

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1570
  • Respect: +1089
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #30 on: August 14, 2016, 08:36:26 pm »
0
Bolt was insanely impressive. He switched off at around 70m and glided through for........a 9.86. LOL! Should be a great final still but hard to see the field challenging him.

What's happened to Trayvon Bromell? Barely squeaked through to the final. Was expecting him to be right up there with Bolt and De Grasse.

ya i dno, he's (bromell) definitely a 9.8x guy on his BEST sprint. what did he get in that semi? i didn't see his time. glad he got into the final though.

bolt is a 9.8x guy @ ~70%..  :wowthatwasnutswtf: :ibrunning:

He just snuck in with a 10.01. Obviously still pretty good. He usually gets a better start, maybe just missed it.

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30234
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +7373
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #31 on: August 14, 2016, 09:06:16 pm »
0
ah.. ^^ 10.0x eek



van niekerk just broke the WR for 400m.. WTF!!  :wowthatwasnutswtf:

poor michael johnson :)

Coges

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2485
  • Respect: +1653
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #32 on: August 14, 2016, 09:24:32 pm »
0
What's the deal with team USA? Looking anything but convincing at the moment. I realise they've won all their games but I can't remember the last time any team, let alone multiple teams, got this close.
"Train as hard as possible, as often as possible, while staying as fresh as possible"
- Zatsiorsky

T0ddday

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1343
  • Respect: +1114
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #33 on: August 14, 2016, 09:57:25 pm »
+1
ah.. ^^ 10.0x eek



van niekerk just broke the WR for 400m.. WTF!!  :wowthatwasnutswtf:

poor michael johnson :)

Wow.  Might be the greatest sprint performance ever.  Def the greatest Olympic performance ever.  Out of freaking lane 8!!!

One complaint though... Really hate the scheduling.  Making James and Lashawn run together in same semifinal and push eachother to 44.0 and then have just 24 hours recovery is unfortunate.  Honestly don't think they would have beat WVN... But maybe they would have pushed him to go sub 43... Don't agree with the tight schedule...

Especially the 100m semi and final only separated by an hour...  These deep fields make the top guys have to push harder in the semis than usually...  They should get more recovery so we can see great times... Really was a disappointing final.  I guess it does show how intimidating bolt is and does display that 100m really is a sport and not just a test of speed though...  Gatlin basically ran around waiting for Bolt...

acole14

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1570
  • Respect: +1089
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #34 on: August 14, 2016, 09:59:44 pm »
0
Lots of people on letsrun.com claiming the 400m Rio track is short. Might be tin hat but....given the state of preparation for these games....wouldn't be overly shocked if it came out that he only ran 398.7m or something.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7587664&page=31#ixzz4HMMdGePH

100m final was as expected. Below-average start for Bolt as usual but luckily peak Blake/Gatlin/Gay weren't in the race so he could do just enough! De Grasse favourite for 2020.

Let's say Bolt wins the 200m and the 4x100 relay (both highly likely at this stage). Which career Olympic achievement is greater: a possible Bolt triple-triple or Michael Phelps' 23 golds?

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30234
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +7373
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #35 on: August 14, 2016, 10:16:14 pm »
0
ah.. ^^ 10.0x eek



van niekerk just broke the WR for 400m.. WTF!!  :wowthatwasnutswtf:

poor michael johnson :)

Wow.  Might be the greatest sprint performance ever.  Def the greatest Olympic performance ever.  Out of freaking lane 8!!!

so crazy.. was shocking.. he just kept flying the last 100m.

ya i've never run track so i don't REALLY know the significance of lane 8.. must be hard af (nearly impossible) to mostly "race yourself" and still get a WR.



Quote
One complaint though... Really hate the scheduling.  Making James and Lashawn run together in same semifinal and push eachother to 44.0 and then have just 24 hours recovery is unfortunate.  Honestly don't think they would have beat WVN... But maybe they would have pushed him to go sub 43... Don't agree with the tight schedule...

Especially the 100m semi and final only separated by an hour...  These deep fields make the top guys have to push harder in the semis than usually...  They should get more recovery so we can see great times... Really was a disappointing final.  I guess it does show how intimidating bolt is and does display that 100m really is a sport and not just a test of speed though...  Gatlin basically ran around waiting for Bolt...

ya i was complaining about that earlier to my dad.. i just don't get how they can't schedule this stuff a few days earlier so that they can properly recover between each race. it's really unfortunate.



Lots of people on letsrun.com claiming the 400m Rio track is short. Might be tin hat but....given the state of preparation for these games....wouldn't be overly shocked if it came out that he only ran 398.7m or something.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7587664&page=31#ixzz4HMMdGePH

100m final was as expected. Below-average start for Bolt as usual but luckily peak Blake/Gatlin/Gay weren't in the race so he could do just enough! De Grasse favourite for 2020.

Let's say Bolt wins the 200m and the 4x100 relay (both highly likely at this stage). Which career Olympic achievement is greater: a possible Bolt triple-triple or Michael Phelps' 23 golds?

i was thinking about the possibility of a short track.. deliberate or a mistake. If IOC wanted records to drop, could shorten it slightly every year.. even the pool.

but, in terms of this actual olympics.. I think if the track was actually shorter, we'd see better times in everything.. 10k / 1500m especially, etc. iirc, I don't think we've seen that kind of improvement. Also if it is short, it isn't short where the 100m was... hehe.

i won't even consider it until there's some serious proof floating around.. Niekerk's performance was mindblowing.

pc!

T0ddday

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1343
  • Respect: +1114
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #36 on: August 14, 2016, 10:21:39 pm »
+2
Lots of people on letsrun.com claiming the 400m Rio track is short. Might be tin hat but....given the state of preparation for these games....wouldn't be overly shocked if it came out that he only ran 398.7m or something.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7587664&page=31#ixzz4HMMdGePH

100m final was as expected. Below-average start for Bolt as usual but luckily peak Blake/Gatlin/Gay weren't in the race so he could do just enough! De Grasse favourite for 2020.

Let's say Bolt wins the 200m and the 4x100 relay (both highly likely at this stage). Which career Olympic achievement is greater: a possible Bolt triple-triple or Michael Phelps' 23 golds?

Lol track is short?  Only Kirani and Merrit ran no faster...  398.7 meters is 1.3 meters... Lol so at his speed he would have still been likely been under the world record... IMO that's a bit ridiculous...

I don't think it was a lack of peak gatlin or anyone else... I think it just shows that the 100m isn't a 60... It's not a speed test - it's a competition...  I bet if bolt runs 9.6 degrasse and gatlin run 9.7 or 9.8.  Gatlin waited for Bolt...  Hard not to but still very disappointing that he did that and didn't give us a better race...

It's sorta silly to compare Bolt to Phelps... But if your gonna do it... Bolt by a landslide...

Why:

1) Phelps is a swimmer.  Swimming is a sport available to a fraction of wealthy people in the world.  The pool for sprinting is basically every kid who ever played sports.  Talented sprinters are discovered, talented swimmers are developed. 

2) Recovery between swim events is much easier.

3) Swimming has strokes which are far less different than something like sprints and hurdles.  Especially butterfly and freestyle which are extremely similar as far as performance goes...

4) All swim events are essentially speed endurance events.  There is no true sprint.  Bolt dominates a speed endurance event and a top speed event. 

5) Phelps was basically dominant in two events.  100m and 200m butterfly where he owns the world record.  That's it.  And he didn't even win both of those in back to back to back olympics.  His other medals come primarily from relays and medleys which don't really exist in track...

6) Sure phelps made a difference in some relays.  But he is also American and Americans are a dominant force in swimming.  The American team could have picked up many of the relay golds with just about anybody in Phelps spot.  Jamaica in the 4x100m without Bolt would have never won.  Bolt was the team.  In fact Jamacia wasn't really even challenging in the 4x100 until Bolt came along wheras the Americans were the favorite in many relays before phelps and will be after phelps...

7) Bolt has no silvers.  He literally does all the events resonable for his skill and never loses. 

That's my biased answer to a silly question.  Both are great athletes and can't be compared.  Amazing to watch both of them... You could probably make a strong case for phelps too but I'll always be partial to bolt...

T0ddday

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1343
  • Respect: +1114
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #37 on: August 14, 2016, 10:56:45 pm »
+2

so crazy.. was shocking.. he just kept flying the last 100m.

ya i've never run track so i don't REALLY know the significance of lane 8.. must be hard af (nearly impossible) to mostly "race yourself" and still get a WR.

Yeah, traditionally athletes hate to be in the outside.  It depends on the sprinter of course - but since I never had any kick I always wanted to be inside of a rival on the turn, that way I could catch up, pass them, and come into the straight ahead and try to hold on...   Mentally I would always rather give my opponent a "head start" than have a head start and have to run a farther distance after head start.  Basically imagine if you have to race someone equal to yourself...  You can have two choices  - run with a 10m headstart but weights on your body that slow you down by 10m or give him the 10m head start with weights on...  Obviously both are fair but mentally we would rather be the "faster" athlete with the disadvantage than the "slower" athlete with the advantage...

Truth be told though - the farther outside the lane the easier the race.  All things equal you would rather be outside as much as possible because you are running more straights and less curves...   The inside lanes have a sharper curve so you have to turn far more.  IF (and it's a big IF) you can get past the mental block of being ahead and alone on the outside then lane 8 is a big advantage.. I think that's what we just saw.  WVN is so strong that he basically flew out of the blocks and didn't look back  - not having to turn as much as the other athletes provided him with a world record time...   You can really see this when you watch his last turn and how close he was to the inside of his lane the whole time.  Obviously you want to run on the inside of your lane the entire time - BUT on the tight curve you can't produce power and stay inside the whole time, a powerful long stride sends you to the outside in a tight turn and you end up running farther.  Technically WVN DID probably run a shorter total distance than everyone else...  But not cause he ran less than 400m.  Because of the turns nobody can run in exactly the same place in their lane the whole time, maybe WVN ran "only" 402 meters while the others ran 405 meters..


Quote

i was thinking about the possibility of a short track.. deliberate or a mistake. If IOC wanted records to drop, could shorten it slightly every year.. even the pool.

but, in terms of this actual olympics.. I think if the track was actually shorter, we'd see better times in everything.. 10k / 1500m especially, etc. iirc, I don't think we've seen that kind of improvement. Also if it is short, it isn't short where the 100m was... hehe.

i won't even consider it until there's some serious proof floating around.. Niekerk's performance was mindblowing.

pc!

Lol, you never ran track but you just provided the best proof possible as to why the track can't possibly be short.  I didn't even think of the longer races..   The 10k is 25 laps!  If the track was a couple meters short those guys would be running 50m less than usual - they would ALL pr.  If we don't see that we can put to rest the ridiculous idea of a short track...

However, if you want plausible conspiracy theories you can imagine some doctoring that would produce faster times.  The most obvious is having the back straight be slightly downhill.  There is some maximum elevation change that can occur between any two points on the track but you can imagine if you were slightly above the rule you could help guys on the back straight..   The other obvious thing to do is just run from the wrong start points.  The three staggers on most tracks are for 200m (3.5 meters per lane), 400m (7 meters per lane) and 3 turn 4x400 (10.5 meters per lane)...  I have been at all comer meets where they wind was strong so they ran the 200m on the first 200m of the track and accidently used the 400m start lines and everybody PRed..  I still would bet against any such thing happening in rio. 

Sounds more like American haters who can't stand to see Michael Johnsons record broken.  Why should we be surprised when WVN is the ONLY person ever to run sub 10, sub 20 and sub 44...  IMO that alone makes him arguably the greatest - I'm hoping he adds the 200m to his events for future competitions and dominantes. 

Also, the IAAF is REALLY strict about sanctioning tracks - they check to make sure the track is super level, measured perfectly, etc.

acole14

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1570
  • Respect: +1089
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #38 on: August 14, 2016, 11:34:07 pm »
0
Lots of people on letsrun.com claiming the 400m Rio track is short. Might be tin hat but....given the state of preparation for these games....wouldn't be overly shocked if it came out that he only ran 398.7m or something.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7587664&page=31#ixzz4HMMdGePH

100m final was as expected. Below-average start for Bolt as usual but luckily peak Blake/Gatlin/Gay weren't in the race so he could do just enough! De Grasse favourite for 2020.

Let's say Bolt wins the 200m and the 4x100 relay (both highly likely at this stage). Which career Olympic achievement is greater: a possible Bolt triple-triple or Michael Phelps' 23 golds?

Lol track is short?  Only Kirani and Merrit ran no faster...  398.7 meters is 1.3 meters... Lol so at his speed he would have still been likely been under the world record... IMO that's a bit ridiculous...

I don't think it was a lack of peak gatlin or anyone else... I think it just shows that the 100m isn't a 60... It's not a speed test - it's a competition...  I bet if bolt runs 9.6 degrasse and gatlin run 9.7 or 9.8.  Gatlin waited for Bolt...  Hard not to but still very disappointing that he did that and didn't give us a better race...

It's sorta silly to compare Bolt to Phelps... But if your gonna do it... Bolt by a landslide...

Why:

1) Phelps is a swimmer.  Swimming is a sport available to a fraction of wealthy people in the world.  The pool for sprinting is basically every kid who ever played sports.  Talented sprinters are discovered, talented swimmers are developed. 

2) Recovery between swim events is much easier.

3) Swimming has strokes which are far less different than something like sprints and hurdles.  Especially butterfly and freestyle which are extremely similar as far as performance goes...

4) All swim events are essentially speed endurance events.  There is no true sprint.  Bolt dominates a speed endurance event and a top speed event. 

5) Phelps was basically dominant in two events.  100m and 200m butterfly where he owns the world record.  That's it.  And he didn't even win both of those in back to back to back olympics.  His other medals come primarily from relays and medleys which don't really exist in track...

6) Sure phelps made a difference in some relays.  But he is also American and Americans are a dominant force in swimming.  The American team could have picked up many of the relay golds with just about anybody in Phelps spot.  Jamaica in the 4x100m without Bolt would have never won.  Bolt was the team.  In fact Jamacia wasn't really even challenging in the 4x100 until Bolt came along wheras the Americans were the favorite in many relays before phelps and will be after phelps...

7) Bolt has no silvers.  He literally does all the events resonable for his skill and never loses. 

That's my biased answer to a silly question.  Both are great athletes and can't be compared.  Amazing to watch both of them... You could probably make a strong case for phelps too but I'll always be partial to bolt...

To be clear, I don't seriously think the track is 398.7m. It was just a funny thought given how disastrous the lead-up was to Rio that they were so busy spraying mosquitos they might have forgot to run the measuring wheel around the track.

I know Bolt v Phelps it's not apples to apples, but you can bet the media is going to do it - and it's fun to argue about it! I also argue Bolt mostly for reason 1. The Australian coverage can't get enough of Phelps and he gets lots of exposure here being a strong swimming nation so it's really hard as a track guy to argue Bolt is better to the my workmates sitting around the TV in the break-out area. But he is.

Kingfish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1837
  • Respect: +924
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2016, 12:13:54 am »
+3
Bolt v Phelps.. no contest.


5'10" | 202bs | 36 yrs
reach - 7'8" (92") |paused full squat - 475x1| standing VJ - 40"|

That which that does not kill us, makes us stronger.
- Friedrich Nietzsche

Daily Squats Day 1 - Aug 30, 2011 and still going.

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30234
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +7373
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #40 on: August 15, 2016, 12:46:08 am »
+1
Bolt v Phelps.. no contest.



epic pic.. lmao@!#!@$!@$!@$!

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30234
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +7373
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #41 on: August 15, 2016, 12:53:38 am »
0

so crazy.. was shocking.. he just kept flying the last 100m.

ya i've never run track so i don't REALLY know the significance of lane 8.. must be hard af (nearly impossible) to mostly "race yourself" and still get a WR.

Yeah, traditionally athletes hate to be in the outside.  It depends on the sprinter of course - but since I never had any kick I always wanted to be inside of a rival on the turn, that way I could catch up, pass them, and come into the straight ahead and try to hold on...   Mentally I would always rather give my opponent a "head start" than have a head start and have to run a farther distance after head start.  Basically imagine if you have to race someone equal to yourself...  You can have two choices  - run with a 10m headstart but weights on your body that slow you down by 10m or give him the 10m head start with weights on...  Obviously both are fair but mentally we would rather be the "faster" athlete with the disadvantage than the "slower" athlete with the advantage...

Truth be told though - the farther outside the lane the easier the race.  All things equal you would rather be outside as much as possible because you are running more straights and less curves...   The inside lanes have a sharper curve so you have to turn far more.  IF (and it's a big IF) you can get past the mental block of being ahead and alone on the outside then lane 8 is a big advantage.. I think that's what we just saw.  WVN is so strong that he basically flew out of the blocks and didn't look back  - not having to turn as much as the other athletes provided him with a world record time...   You can really see this when you watch his last turn and how close he was to the inside of his lane the whole time.  Obviously you want to run on the inside of your lane the entire time - BUT on the tight curve you can't produce power and stay inside the whole time, a powerful long stride sends you to the outside in a tight turn and you end up running farther.  Technically WVN DID probably run a shorter total distance than everyone else...  But not cause he ran less than 400m.  Because of the turns nobody can run in exactly the same place in their lane the whole time, maybe WVN ran "only" 402 meters while the others ran 405 meters..

nice thanks for the info.



Quote
i was thinking about the possibility of a short track.. deliberate or a mistake. If IOC wanted records to drop, could shorten it slightly every year.. even the pool.

but, in terms of this actual olympics.. I think if the track was actually shorter, we'd see better times in everything.. 10k / 1500m especially, etc. iirc, I don't think we've seen that kind of improvement. Also if it is short, it isn't short where the 100m was... hehe.

i won't even consider it until there's some serious proof floating around.. Niekerk's performance was mindblowing.

pc!

Lol, you never ran track but you just provided the best proof possible as to why the track can't possibly be short.  I didn't even think of the longer races..   The 10k is 25 laps!  If the track was a couple meters short those guys would be running 50m less than usual - they would ALL pr.  If we don't see that we can put to rest the ridiculous idea of a short track...
[/quote]

ya, I just figured i'd find the longest race on the track and see if it was "fast". that 10k was slow.

i'd be curious to see how many athletes set PB's. so far, just seems like a pretty normal set of numbers.. other than these few outliers from freaks.



Quote
However, if you want plausible conspiracy theories you can imagine some doctoring that would produce faster times.  The most obvious is having the back straight be slightly downhill.  There is some maximum elevation change that can occur between any two points on the track but you can imagine if you were slightly above the rule you could help guys on the back straight..   The other obvious thing to do is just run from the wrong start points.  The three staggers on most tracks are for 200m (3.5 meters per lane), 400m (7 meters per lane) and 3 turn 4x400 (10.5 meters per lane)...  I have been at all comer meets where they wind was strong so they ran the 200m on the first 200m of the track and accidently used the 400m start lines and everybody PRed..  I still would bet against any such thing happening in rio. 


Quote
Sounds more like American haters who can't stand to see Michael Johnsons record broken.  Why should we be surprised when WVN is the ONLY person ever to run sub 10, sub 20 and sub 44...  IMO that alone makes him arguably the greatest - I'm hoping he adds the 200m to his events for future competitions and dominantes. 

that is NUTS. if he wasn't on the "mainstream map", he sure is now.. what a beast.


Quote
Also, the IAAF is REALLY strict about sanctioning tracks - they check to make sure the track is super level, measured perfectly, etc.

nice!

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30234
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +7373
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #42 on: August 15, 2016, 01:00:43 am »
+1
kingfish motivated me to find more of those bolt smiling pics.. he's basically creating meme's as he destroys people.











 :ibrunning:

maxent

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2427
  • Respect: +1581
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #43 on: August 15, 2016, 01:19:35 am »
+1
LMAO i have a strong prejudice against olympic swimming because of the australian obsession with the 'sport' .. even worse than acole i think, cos I dont even try to be balanced about it. bolt all the way. However, i love the idea of comparing athletes .. who is the greatest of all time? Who even makes the top 5? Does Lebron make the cut?
Training for sub 20 5K & 40" RVJ & 170kg BS @ 85kg bw. log entry template

adarqui

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 30234
  • who run it.
  • Respect: +7373
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 2016 Rio Olympics - open thread
« Reply #44 on: August 15, 2016, 01:53:07 am »
0
LMAO i have a strong prejudice against olympic swimming because of the australian obsession with the 'sport' .. even worse than acole i think, cos I dont even try to be balanced about it. bolt all the way. However, i love the idea of comparing athletes .. who is the greatest of all time? Who even makes the top 5? Does Lebron make the cut?

damn .. why'd you have to bring lebron into this? lulz.



from an article LBSS linked on fb:



sick!@@!$

http://screengrabber.deadspin.com/wayde-van-niekerk-smashes-michael-johnsons-17-year-old-1785282344?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow