You can’t just pick a single line in the chart and say,
column X => column Y
I think a common mistake is to project 100m times from 30m starts, and I don’t care whether you’re using reactime or hand time. Many novice sprinters (who have spent some time in the weight room) will have fairly decent 30m times…but the speed endurance isn’t there…and because the speed endurance isn’t there, the maxV also isn’t there, because it takes a certain amount of SE train MaxV to 60m.
So I think the first thing here is to not just take the 30m start, or even the 30m start plus the 30m fly, and expect to run 100m in X seconds. If you ALSO compare where you stand in 60m start or stand and 150m stand, you will get a truer picture of where you stand and what you need to improve on. If you use the chart this way at the start of a phase (and concentrate more on those things where you are week) you are more likely to improve. If you can do the 30m start, 60m start, and 150m stand on pace for a particular 100m electronic time, you will likely be able to hit that electronic time in a race.
The other mistake in the chart (not necessarily a mistake but something that’s frequently wrong) is the way 30m times are dissociated for slower sprinters. As I mentioned above, slower sprinters (I believe CF talked about this, remember the comments about the right side of the curve) can hit 30m times that are out of line with their 100/200 times due to SE lacking. The fact that Dick lists 30m times that are too slow for their SE simply means that Frank Dick didn’t have much data for sprinters much slower than 11-11.5 seconds FAT. But I think this causes a sprinter that can hit, say, 4.2 but is really a 12.0 guy, to think he is faster than he really is.