Comments on: 60m to 100m Conversion Tables – USELESS! http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/ Success in Track & Field ... and Life Wed, 23 May 2012 21:21:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: adarian http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-73264 adarian Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:52:24 +0000 http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-73264 It would work if they ran the same race patterns. But often they run a different race pattern. Which would suggest run the same race pattern for 100m as would for the 60 if you want to run faster 100m times. Also it is still time to rethink conventional thinking about sprinting and race patterns. It would work if they ran the same race patterns. But often they run a different race pattern. Which would suggest run the same race pattern for 100m as would for the 60 if you want to run faster 100m times.

Also it is still time to rethink conventional thinking about sprinting and race patterns.

]]> By: Jimson Lee http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-50130 Jimson Lee Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:09:19 +0000 http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-50130 @Bobby - can you imagine the Crash Mats needed to stop him on an indoor 60? he's big and tall... I would not want to get in his way. @Bobby – can you imagine the Crash Mats needed to stop him on an indoor 60? he’s big and tall… I would not want to get in his way.

]]> By: bobby Mulligan http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-50113 bobby Mulligan Wed, 07 Oct 2009 03:32:53 +0000 http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-50113 wait!! why does'nt bolt run the 60m?? is he going to because i am not sure but that's a fast 60m!!! i mean i think they would run faster at a shorter distance than a 100m obviously but he has every other sprinting record why not go for it? he could work on his start? wait!! why does’nt bolt run the 60m?? is he going to because i am not sure but that’s a fast 60m!!! i mean i think they would run faster at a shorter distance than a 100m obviously but he has every other sprinting record why not go for it? he could work on his start?

]]> By: Ron Dodgen http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-49632 Ron Dodgen Sun, 04 Oct 2009 05:06:17 +0000 http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-49632 Bolt had .08 on Gay at 60m which means he should beat him by .13 at 100m that's prorated 9.71-9.58 = .13 Now the next is a lower class and Powell may not belong. But let's use him to gage what the rest should project. Powell 6.42 9.84 projected difference Thompson 6.45 9.93 9.89 .04 Bailey 6.48 9.93 9.94 .01 chambers 6.50 10.0 9.97 .03 Burns 6.52 10.0 10.01 .01 Patton 6.51 9.98 9.99 .01 (from semi.) Using your 1.53 with chambers=9.95 1.54 =10.01 the error was using 6.42 and not 6.50 which he ran. Now my projection has 4 runner's within .01 including Gay which is dead on. Using Powell works because his deceleration is about the same. Bolt had .08 on Gay at 60m which means he should beat him by .13 at 100m
that’s prorated 9.71-9.58 = .13 Now the next is a lower class and Powell may not belong. But let’s use him to gage what the rest should project.
Powell 6.42 9.84 projected difference
Thompson 6.45 9.93 9.89 .04
Bailey 6.48 9.93 9.94 .01
chambers 6.50 10.0 9.97 .03
Burns 6.52 10.0 10.01 .01
Patton 6.51 9.98 9.99 .01 (from semi.)
Using your 1.53 with chambers=9.95 1.54 =10.01 the error was using 6.42 and not 6.50 which he ran. Now my projection has 4 runner’s within .01 including Gay which is dead on. Using Powell works because his deceleration is about the same.

]]> By: Jim Hiserman http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-48627 Jim Hiserman Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:13:57 +0000 http://speedendurance.com/2009/09/28/60m-to-100m-conversion-tables-useless/#comment-48627 when you consider the race models for 60 and 100 usually differ in the amount of time spent in the acceleration phase, you could take 100 race times and use that formula because the race model being used was for 100 meters. When modeling a 60, the amount of emphasis changes in the acceleration phase to allow for a quicker transition. Just MHO. when you consider the race models for 60 and 100 usually differ in the amount of time spent in the acceleration phase, you could take 100 race times and use that formula because the race model being used was for 100 meters. When modeling a 60, the amount of emphasis changes in the acceleration phase to allow for a quicker transition. Just MHO.

]]>