These are the splits that were given to Pierre Jean shortly after Olu and Gatlin ran in the WR tying race. Until the official splits come out (any idea when?) we will have to examine these. Based on the splits provided, I believe that Gatlin could improve to a 9.69. Here are the splits from the WR tying race and what his 9.69 would look like. The original splits that Pierre posted did not include the 80-90m split.
The splits that were given to Pierre are more than likely “a little off” seeing that Gatlin would have run the fastest 30-60m segment ever, also with the fastest top speed maintained for more than 10m. If Gatlin were to improve the first 0-10m segment to 1.87 (which is conservative based on other sprinters i.e. Ben at 1.83-Maurice at 1.86) he could run a 9.69 with all other things being equal. Also, if you take a look at the last 10m of the 9.77 race, the splits show that Gatlin’s speed dropped substantially (80-90=.84…90-100=.90). This drop in speed is important to note because the only other WR holder to drop off in speed that much during the last 10m was Ben (.89) who was slowing down and looking over his shoulder. An improvement in Speed Endurance could possibly allow Gatlin to run close to 9.67. Of course, this is all based on these very odd splits that were provided to Pierre. Thoughts?
The data given in Doha is not reliable. With the material i have i came to this:
30m 60m 80m 100m
3.85 6.39 8.07 9.77 Gatlin
3.79 6.36 8.08 9.85 Fasuba
Remember last year in Athens
3.83 6.39 8.07 9.77 Powell
I agree, that is why its so hard to see where there is room for improvement throughout the entire race. It does seem that the greatest improvement would come from 0-10m no matter what the splits actually are. The same could be said for most of Trevor’s sprinters including Marion when she worked with him.
Yes. Based on the splits that were originally provided, improvements could be made from 90-100m. The splits seem to be wrong so…the greatest improvement would happen during the 0-10m portion.
You have to put markers on the track and film the race. Or use photocells but the bad thing is that it records the time for the first part of the body crossing it, so it can be the arms. Thus accuracy is not the best.
That depends on what you are looking for, but the best option, if you manage to find ideal position in the crowd which is always hard, place yourself at around 60m point.
To film are you using a normal digital camera (minDV) ?
Becuase this one has a fps of 25/sec,so you have a photogram every 0.04 .
Yes,you can do a “visual” interpolation…
but,finally would be the film more accurate than photocells?
I can have more frames on my camera, but you have to find the best compromise because of the light. The highest number of frames/sec, the darker will be the picture. With 0.02 frames/sec it’s enough to extrapolate and visually estimate the missing frame. Photocells takes the first part of the body crossing the cell (can be the arm) so it’s not as reliable as video.
Most of the manufactures has increased photocells triggering time to avoid arm error. I have timing system which has double beam photocells. It means that two beams, 15 cm distance each others, must be silence at the same time to trigger the timing. With this timer I am able to measure even 5 m distances very accurately.
IMO videotiming is good enough when the camera is in tilt position and you are able to separate fields from the frame. Panning increases errors a lot.
