Regarding my thoughts on tone being the reason Gatlin came apart in the 100m final. Christopher Glaeser just posted an article I wrote on this subject on his site and here’s a clip of Gatlin after the race in which he mentions how his legs felt tired going into the final. https://youtu.be/Npgj7GERJ5U
I honestly do not think the reason above is the reason why gatlin ran badly. he ran 9.8 cruising in the semi and with his experience I just do not believe any of this. hes been there before, he knows the process and I still believe Justin was in 9.6 shape period. I posted an article regarding lord cram a few days ago and his links with nike and quite honestly, its all a scam.
Justin must have a top team behind him as hes dropping 9.7’s since may which clearly shows these guys have a great group. from physio to coach and so on. I just do not believe he lost that race
lmao ever the conspiracy.
No one can logically dispute that he was possibly in 9.6 shape, certainly in shape to equal or better his 9.74; however, the question is why didn’t he accomplish that. In my view, the tone implications are much more logical for the reasons I explain in the article.
While I’d never be so naive as to rule out the possibility of behind the scenes corruption, I do not believe that’s the case in this situation. I also do not believe he manufactured the emotion we see from him in the post-race interview, that, his times in the rounds (poor strategy), coupled with him stating his legs felt tired going into the final add up to a great case for hyper tonus. Particularly as made evident by his 200m performance.
read Occam’s razor
In this way, what’s more likely
A- he over extends himself in the rounds or B- some behind the scenes plot coerced him to escalate the hype and fly in the 100m rounds then fall apart in the final; thereby having a negative impact on his readiness for the 200m which results in him running .17 slower than his PB earlier this season- blowing who knows how many opportunities that may have presented themselves to him had he been the victor.
in 2009 Bolt’s rounds at the WCs went as follows:
10.20
10.03
9.89
9.58
Beautifully crafted progression in which even the 9.89 semi was .31 slower than the 9.58.
The percentage progression of the rounds relative to the 9.58 is as follows:
93%
95.5%
96.8%
100%
Meanwhile, let’s entertain your theory and say Gatlin threw the race. I think we all agree he was in sub 9.7 shape. Let’s say he was good for 9.69 in the final (.5 faster than his 9.74). Even so his 9.83 and 9.77 would equate to 98.6% and 99.1% respectively. Both of which are tremendously higher intensity exertions relative to Bolt’s profile in the 2009 WCs.
So much evidence to back the tone theory.
As I recall, the conditions for the final though not bad were not as favorable as some of Justin’s earlier runs. 21 C/71F 78% humidity and of course the -0.5 headwind. Naturally losing form about 25m out did not help his performance either. I’ve never seen his technique fall apart in any race to that degree even going back to his days at Tenn. He had warmer conditions for a number of his 9.7 races including a Doha race being in the 90s F despite being run around 9 pm or so local time.
If you run 9.80 into a headwind you are obviously in 9.70 shape or faster. Gatlin’s faster races had better conditions. I don’t think it’s even possible to purposefully lose a race by 0.01s. The danger of accidentally winning would be too great at this sort of margin. Also, if Nike controls the outcome of races why would a Nike sponsored athlete be told to lose against a Puma sponsored athlete?
Before the Olympics, Yohan Blake was the favourite over both distances. Was he also told to tighten up and lose? He dropped a 9.69 into a headwind shortly after, which means he should have been capable of running faster than Bolt’s 9.63 with the 1.5 tailwind they had in the Olympic final.
Re: Justin Gatling 9.80 2nd place final.
Step 38, 40, 42 he flails his right arm as a throw(maybe to just go for stride length since he must have depleted his system very hard for the first 80m). It was tough to see from the side view but from the front on shots from head on and slightly above, you could see the flailing. I do believe he was at about 80m in 36 steps, them all of sudden he lengthened his stride to where he covered last 20m in 7steps(very impressive). He covered the 100m in just a wee bit over 43steps, in the final.
He may be the only other mere mortal able to get a single (or two )10m segment in 3.5 strides within a sub 9.90 run, other than bolt.
Maybe his higher frequency newly minted cadence in conjunction with his ‘100m rounds exertions’ finally ran out of real estate, and he was able to pull the rip cord to almost pull off the win for the last 20m
Physical condition as proposed by James. Equally imho he was psyched out by Bolt appearing on his shoulder since his form collapsed at this stage. Irrational behaviour (loss of usual mechanical form and concentration) can be observed when mere mortals are challenged by the all time greats - muhammed ali, viv richards etc.
This brings up something I mentioned on a different forum, without many serious responses:
How much time did Gatlin lose in the last 20 meters?
The Bolt fanbois assumed this line of questioning was somehow intended to denigrate the value of Bolt’s win…which it is assuredly not. I think James is spot on in his breakdown of Gatlin’s poor rounds management and Bolt deserved the victory.
But with 5-8 strides occurring during a significant collapse in form, I’ve got to think that Gatlin was on his way to a 9.77 or faster into that headwind. From a basic perspective, that would be Gatlin’s finest running ever. That’s a 9.74 basic, the same time he ran in Doha this year with a tailwind. I’m assuming that he hit a top 10m split of 0.84 into a -0.5. In Doha, his top split was 0.83, with a +0.9 wind. I’m not a “basic” fetishist, but I think this sort of comparison speaks volumes about his improvement in-season this year.
So though James is almost certainly right about Gatlin’s total failure to manage his energy properly, if you look at what he was on track to run prior to the collapse at 80m, it really does show that he and his camp were peaking perfectly.
The splits will tell us with precision. I know a lot of people were surprised that Bolt only lost 0.06 in Beijing 2008 with the celebration; maybe Gatlin lost less than it appears on TV. But my guess is that Bolt’s gaining ground on him (and then passing him) was less about a superior max velocity and more about holding a nearly-identical max velocity better than Gatlin.
I do think Bolt had a faster top speed, but likely less than we’re used to seeing. My prediction is Bolt topped out at 0.835 and Gatlin at 0.840, if we’re going to the nearest 0.005. That’s a really tiny measurement and I don’t think the official splits will break it down to that level of precision.
If Gatlin was at 0.84 for his fastest split, which we assume is 60-70, then his 80-90 and 90-100 SHOULD be at 0.86/0.87, or 0.86/0.88, or something similar. In his 2006 WR, he actually managed to close at 0.85 and 0.85. He no longer has that sort of speed endurance, based on splits from the last two years, but his race is more complete now and his top speed (when adjusted for wind) is better.
If the last 20 is something like 0.87/0.90, we know that he lost a substantial amount of speed because of the stumbling.
Well stated Stylee, which is what makes, provided my thesis is correct, it even more of a profound loss for Gatlin to sabotage his WC success due to failing round management 101.
I am one like many others who is awaiting the release of the official splits.
I’d be surprised if he lost more than 0.02s compared to previous races over the last 20m. Bolt seems to be with him at 85m and then 0.01s ahead at 100m.
Despite the fantastic season Gatlin had leading up to the WC (and let’s not throw away his excellent times in the WC, they just weren’t indicative of what he could have done via proper planning in the rounds and not breaking form in the 100m final), if I were to predict the Olympics so far away, I believe Bolt will reign supreme.
Bolt came through with true elite professionalism last week in regards to both race plan execution and performing when it counts on the grand stage. Further he did this coming off of a relatively lackluster season due to the injury. Provided he stays healthy he has all the potential in the world to SHINE once again in Rio.
As brilliant as Gatlin performed leading up to the WC, his 9.74 and 19.57 are a far cry from Bolt’s PB’s and the momentum Bolt has coming out of last week gives every indication that he’ll retain his crown in Rio.
Bolt’s future rides on him staying healthy and speaking of healthy, I believe we’ll see more greatness from Yohan Blake.
Provided everyone’s next year goes according to plan, factoring in previous marks, and my opinion on human performance potential, I’d pick the 100 and 200m final as:
- Bolt
- Blake
- Gatlin
We’ll see if things change as the time approaches.
It pains me not to include Powell in the discussion because he’s always been one of my personal favorites.
Official splits are not a given. IAAFhas worked with local biomechanical researchers at previous championships but not every time.
I didn’t see any timing equipment (tripods) in the field so they would have needed an elaborate setup of camera’s or some kind of laser equipment in each lane (not likely, plus you cannot use it for the 200 and 400).
So if you see split data from another source without any reference to the equipment used, take it with a grain of salt, because accuracy to the 0.01s is improbable.
On another board someone else noted the absence of sighted so I wondered about that. If not I think it’s ridiculous to put on a major and NOT get splits. Hopefully something was done that we are not yet aware of.
PJ has done unofficial split analysis at 30-60-80 for some major meets, I believe (correct me if I’m wrong, I’m getting that from another poster on another board). The times I’ve seen credited to him are all sensible. It’s not perfect but it can still be informative.
It is totally ridiculous for the IAAF to not invest in this sort of thing.
Yeah I looked online a number of days after the race and to see if had done anything yet but found nothing-of course it’s still relatively early.