TFN declares ETH's 10.54 as the new 100m women's world record

Guy next to a guy who farts. Walks to a guy 30 feet away. "Hey, did you smell that?"

The official women's World Record for the 100m is 10 49 who cares what haters think 😳

TFN are haters?

didn't know Erik Ten Hag was a sprinter.

So you were there?! What was the wind like in the stadium?

You know this race and 5min in the history of time has really become folklore and it's fascinating to look at it. 3 aspects:

- Visual/verbal evidence from the footage
- Evidence from other events around and at the same time as that round of
the 100m
- Quantifiable evidence in terms of the times run by other athletes, the
wind speed adjustments and how that fit into their performance level for 1988

Also important is to understand what a 0.0 wind is. It's not a "well it's not that windy is it?" situation, it's absolutely NO wind and even on what we would say are "perfect condition" days/nights there is almost always some type of breeze that triggers a wind gauge reading. It's just very rare to get 0.0 wind readings and especially on an afternoon like July 16 1988 in Indianapolis where at midday the stadium gauges were already reading over +2.5 (all 3 heats 2 hours prior were +2.7 or greater) and only picked up as the day continued (the mens final an hour later at 4.35pm was +5.2). So we know it was really windy that afternoon in Indy - the chances that the wind stopped dead for a 10-15 second period that afternoon? Well come to your own conclusion.

Visually and verbally we see the women go to their blocks and there is a closeup of Carlette Guidry from Texas and we see her pinned number on her back being filled like a sail. So even if you want to argue there is no wind at all (which you have to for a 0.0) that is clearly incorrect. Post race Flo-Jo of course has that wonderful hairdo and as Diane Williams comes to congratulate her she turns around and that hair is simply blowing in the wind. Again, the argument isn't legal wind, it's 0.0 wind and there is clearly wind and it's immediately (like within seconds) before and after she runs. More telling is Liquori on commentary saying prior to the race even happening (so he has no idea that this will happen hence is completely agenda free) that it's been a great year for her (FGJ) but due to the wind "of course the wind will mean that it (this race) won't count". You don't make a comment like that even unless it's obvious there is a zephyr coming up the home straight. You even don't make that comment if there is a possibility you could hit a +1.8/+1.9.

Not only does the wind have a pattern of getting steadily stronger that afternoon, there is an event happening at the same time on the same straight in the same direction literally 10-15 yards away from the race. The mens TJ was happening at the same time (it started at 2.30pm, FGJ's race was 3.45pm) and every single jump - all of them, in the final were wind aided and not just by a little. The "best" wind of the entire competition was a +3.0 for Carroll Cobb. Willie Banks jumped 18.20 which was way over the WR but he did it with a +5.2. The wind speeds of the top 8? 5.2, 5.2, 4.3, 3.3, 5.2, 4.9, 4.8, 4.8. Anyways if you don't believe me here are the facts for yourself.

Finally, the relative performances of the field. So even if you want to believe that FGJ magically catches fire for this one race, the stadium wind drops to absolute zero etc etc - it is almost completely implausible that the other athletes in that race would "catch fire" to almost the exact same degree and then revert back to the same degree in following races. Diane Williams who was second in that race never broke 11 seconds apart from this day when she ran 10.86. In the semi the next afternoon she ran 11.27 with a +1.6 which gives a wind-zero adjusted mark of 11.37. A Young Gail Devers ran 10.98 and a day later ran 11.24 with a +1.3 which gives a WZ 11.33. Guidry ran 11.11 and a day later ran 11.37 with a +1.3 which is a WZ 11.46. So in this fabled race alone the women were performing consistently between 3 and 5 tenths of a second faster from one day to the next. That is also the same for Flo Jo who ran 10.70 with a +1.6 (WZ 10.79 so right at that 0.3 conversion) - "but she was just taking it easy after the WR" - okay, she turns around in the final and runs 10.61 with a +1.2 which converts to a 10.68 - good but still waaayyy off 10.49. Even in Seoul where she clearly is giving absolutely everything to win the gold, she runs 10.54 but it's with a +3.0. Want to guess what that conversion is? It's a WZ 10.69 - 1/100th off what she did in the final in Indy and still 2 full tenths away from her allegedly wind-zero WR of 10.49

What was the wind that day? When you look at the TJ final, the numbers of all the athletes not just her - it was almost certainly in the +3.9-4.1 range. That would have given her a wind-zero adjusted time of 10.68 which was right at her level for 1988. It puts Diane Williams at 11.06 which is exactly what her level was (11.04-11.07 between 1984 and 1987). It puts Gail Devers at 11.18 which exactly her level in 1988 was for every race other than this one.

But if someone has a better case than that as to why/how this could possibly have been legal, let us know :D

Both on the PEDs, Flo and ETH.

All of that is irrelevant.

The w400/800 were drug enhanced. We all know this, yet WA still have those marks as WR.

It is obvious WA will not change them until someone breaks em.

BTW what do you say of FLO-JO's 200 WR? Was that wind aided as well?

Yeah, okay 👌

about time. a bunch if us have lobbied for years . with video evidence let alone the known charlie francis protocol they ran to go from 11.2 100 in peak years to the windy 10.4x.

cudos to Garry owner for taking the initiative. could throw out beamons super windy super altitude jump in mexico as well. and all mexico sprints...

that altitude is worth 0.15 0.3 and 0.6 in the 100 200 400 respectively . which places the times in line with thr PR

Good post.

But I think Liquori's comment was not based on the actual wind conditions in the race but more that this unreal time just HAS to be wind affected.

Out of topic - like always from Steve the id*?&t.

No - he makes this statement BEFORE the race even starts (like literally as they are down in the set position).

Post race he drops the classic "ahhhhh, can not be - no one can run that fast....the heat must be doin' somethin to the electronics" (probably the exact case).

Btw - not many people realize this but they hadn't managed to fix it by the second heat either where Echols won in 10.83 in also an alleged 0.0 (which to get back to back 0.0's on what even the biggest believer has to admit was a windy day is simply impossible). Her second best time ever was 10.99 run with a +1.3 which again is an 11.07 zero-wind and matches all of her career best efforts. By the 3rd QF they clearly had fixed it and what was the wind reading? +5.0 for Gwen Torrence who ran 10.78 and must have been secretly annoyed they had clearly fixed the gauge by then as that probably cost her a ton of money in bonuses and appearance $$$ in Europe!

I have always felt it was really this simple - no conspiracy at play. Remember this was technology back in the 80's and it was like 100+ degrees there. You know how your iPhone shuts down when it's too hot to protect itself? Yeah it's not crazy to think a wind gauge might just have not started because it was cooking. Of course Omega made the statement all was fine - what else are they going to say?! "Whoops sorry we had a woman run under 10.5 and our equipment crapped out so I guess we will never know?" Of course not. Also imagine how this would have gone down - you have embarrassed officials, an embarrassed timing provider. You have Al Joyner and her camp out there screaming blue murder about how the wind died down, even though everyone knows it didn't and why - because he and his wife are making bank if this WR goes through! Like who steps in and makes the call? By the time the IAAF even bother to ask what might of happened there are so many moving parts they simply default to "well it's good for the profile of the sport heading into Seoul" and "it'll get broken soon anyway....right?" completely oblivious to the gravity of a 100m WR being broken by a full three tenths of a second. So with nobody able to paint the picture they have no choice but to ratify it and here we are 36 years later and the closest we have come in within 0.05 seconds which actually in sprinting terms is historically a considerable amount. I don't believe anything but a series of unfortunate circumstances and an era of the sport that was far more wild west than it is now.

I was in the stands for both races. Indy was a very windy day for Flo Jo's race. I don't remember anything unusual at Pre 2021.

Flo Jo ran very fast (10.54) in the Seoul 100 final also. I don't remember if it was wind aided.

10.54 with a +3.0.... ^^

Agree, FJ wind-aided. But wind is tricky. Actual ws for three long jumps: -0.6; -0.8; pass; +2.4. Yup

(Hit the wrong button) my winning jump was wind aided. Also, once ran a 400m in a closed in stadium with a swirling tailwind all the way around. Glorious!

The Fauci Network?

look at the flag vid end.. track and field has maybe a dozen witnesses if not officials.

this was a joke

and a "new" baratone voice, overdone makeup to distract from the man provile from roids.

Yeah and all of the wind gauge folklore aside this is the final point.

We can be pretty sure that FGJ was a high 10.6X runner in the 1988 season (almost all of her focus performances come out at this number when accounting for wind in either direction). What we can't forget is that from 1983 to 1987 she ran between 10.96 and 11.06 and then basically retired after Seoul.

So something took her from the high 10.9's to the high 10.6's in the space of a year at the ripe age of 27. In 1988? Doubt it was just sports drinks and creatine powder.

I'm beginning to narrow down to a ballpark number the impact PED's can have on top sprinters. Interestingly we have the same situation with Marcel Jacobs who ran 9.80 in Tokyo but like FGJ that one season and the performances are massive outliers with the rest of his career where he struggles to (ie. can't) even break 10.0 seconds. He has multiple seasons in the 10.0X range and this one golden summer where he hit 9.80. Simple math but it's not unreasonable to suggest that doping can impact a 10.0 male and an 11.0 female in the 2-3 tenths of a second range and that is not something I had thought about before (like an actual figure). Even when you look at Bolt a natural performance in the high 9.8's seems plausible for his level of talent. He was a perfect candidate for PED's at his height and body type so that 0.3 second advantage takes us right to his WR of 9.58.

As for ETH? Well, yeah.