I know this is insignificant but my friends don’t think its possible that Ben could have run the 40 under 3.8 with his split from the 1988 Olympics. I think his 40m split was something like 4.66 which means his 40 yard split would have been around 4.35. Is it that much of a difference between a gunned and self-start. That means Ben would have had to make up around .5s at the start…is this right? HELP!
it was 4.29, take away rxn time and it drops to 4.09, then add in the human error of timing when he started, plus when he crossed and it is very reasonable to see a hand timed from first move 40 has been run by Ben Johnson in 3.7.
reaction time only .2?
thats very conservative, his rxn time was likely around .15
numba56 is right. you must include reaction time and hand time when dealing with 40’s.
i realize you have to take into consideration reaction time. so electronically, ben would have run between 4 and 4.1.
Also keep in mind on his official split time that race was 100 meters not 40 so the time taken from that wouldn’t be his fastest 40 meters. To run faster over 40 would mean he’d slow down sooner over the 100.
Charlie’s stated that they tested him once, just for fun, using the same protocol as the NFL combine (first movement, hand time). Ben ran a 3.7.
so is a sub 4 electronically timed 40 impossible for even an elite sprinter?
Impossible? I wouldnt say that…
It just hasn’t been done yet.
If i don’t remember badly, CF stated that the difference btw his “recorded time” and FAT time was nearly 0"65
Best 100 m sprint in training for Ben was 9"19, if i remember well (14"0 in 150s)
thats right he said 9.11 in the 100m, 11.12 in the 120m and 14.00 in the 150m
.65 seems like a huge difference.
Which suggests that Ben had not reached his potential in competition yet!!!
What would he have done in 1989 1990 with two more seasons of consistent training we will never know, but one thing’s for sure… he is a one off… Not even Greene has achieved max speeds equivalent to Ben or Carl in comp. 11.85-95m/s compared to 12.05 m/s for Ben.
Remember, he would have won every olympic gold since Barcelona 92 just on his time from 88.
Tokyo 91 would have been his, just on time alone and that track was obscenely hard compared to Seoul!!!
A sub 4 40 dash was within his capabilities. According to his training
You are correct. Charlie said that he timed Ben from first motion and calculated the difference based on hand-timed to FAT (around 0.24 or 0.25)
the time it takes you to see the first-motion and press the watch and something else. But all the calculations added up to 0.65
If I remember rightly Ben’s 9.19 (worth 9.84FAT according to calculations) the was run in a training session shortly before the '88 Olympics, and Ben run this time from a standing-start! A standing-start probably doesn’t help the overall race as much as a start from the blocks, because with a standing-start you are already somehwat upright, and the momentum of the drive is not as effective as it would be coming out of blocks. So with blocks Ben could have been around a tenth (0.10) faster…it’s amazing how quick Ben was…
Charlie stated that Ben’s training PRs were:
100m: 9.19 (worth 9.84FAT)
150m: 14.00 (worth 14.65FAT)
excellent points on the standing starts. Ben was a freak!
There is NO reaction time in a football 40! You move when you want and and the timer has to react to you!
Again, this is not the same as a football 40. in the 40 you react to the first sign of motion whereas with our standing runs, it was the first intense movement where he might be moving slightly forward before. this is why the difference is so great and does not indicate potential for race times faster than I describe (.65 slower) They were, however, very good indicators of what to expect and was why we could so often call the times within a few hundredths.
Sorry, but I doubt that. Take 60m. Ben’s 60m split times in a 100m race were faster than just running 60m. (6.41 compared to 6.33)
On the other hand one could say indoors you have no assisting wind (I really don’t remember what was the tailwind in Seoul), he was not in the same form in early spring, etc.
But 0.08 is quite a lot on 60m - I would like to know what Charlie thinks why Ben was considerably faster outdoors. (although 6.41 would win you ervery indoor title nowadays)
i think he was referring to why there would difference in the first 10 of the 100m and the first 10 in the 40 (besides the fact one is in meters and one is in yards). so in trying to estimate his first 10 in the 40, we were looking at his first 10 in the 100m and factoring in reaction time as one of the variables that would make the 40 faster.