Tyson gay ran 9.69 later that year, Bolt ran 9.63 in 2012 and Yohan Blake ran 9.69 in 2012 but in the last 10 years the closest anyone has come is Gatlin's 9.74 from 2015.
So no one is within .16 of the record the last decade.
Noah Lyles' PB 9.79 is the exact same amount of time from 10.00 as it is from Bolt's record.
So thoughts? How long do you think this thing lasts?
Tyson gay ran 9.69 later that year, Bolt ran 9.63 in 2012 and Yohan Blake ran 9.69 in 2012 but in the last 10 years the closest anyone has come is Gatlin's 9.74 from 2015.
So no one is within .16 of the record the last decade.
Noah Lyles' PB 9.79 is the exact same amount of time from 10.00 as it is from Bolt's record.
So thoughts? How long do you think this thing lasts?
No more than 10 years but no less than 5
Tech, global exposure to the sport, and training advancement increases exponentially by the year. Its only a matter of time before the next super talent appears somewhere.
Imagine if countries like China or India become interested in athletics and raise their populations out of poverty. Tens of millions of potential athletes.
Tyson gay ran 9.69 later that year, Bolt ran 9.63 in 2012 and Yohan Blake ran 9.69 in 2012 but in the last 10 years the closest anyone has come is Gatlin's 9.74 from 2015.
So no one is within .16 of the record the last decade.
Noah Lyles' PB 9.79 is the exact same amount of time from 10.00 as it is from Bolt's record.
So thoughts? How long do you think this thing lasts?
No more than 10 years but no less than 5
Tech, global exposure to the sport, and training advancement increases exponentially by the year. Its only a matter of time before the next super talent appears somewhere.
Imagine if countries like China or India become interested in athletics and raise their populations out of poverty. Tens of millions of potential athletes.
I disagree. The 100m dash is the most immune race to technological and training advancement. It’s not like distance racing with the energy system.
This is an outlier performance. And it’s such an outlier that I doubt it will be broken. Sure a million monkeys typing a million years will write a Shakespeare. But I don’t know when we’ll even see another sub 9.70.
So I know that the scoring tables aren't perfect - but they aren't bad.
9.58 - the best track record in the sport according to the tables, clocks in at a whopping 1355 points. To put this in context...
That's an 800m WR of 1.39.27
A 1500m WR of 3.22.44
Think Jakob might break the legendary 3000m record of Komen in Silesia with a mark for the ages? Well to match Bolts 100m record he'd need to go a casual 7.12.25.
To put in context against the women, well the current record is the PED fuelled, +4.5 meter per second wind aided 10.49 from Flo Jo but 10.31 is the equivilent.
The record of Bolt is so absurd it defies description. It's not just that it's better - it's just so much of an outlier vs every other event we have it's simply not plausible. Can you imagine if Sedjati or Wanyoni ripped off a 1.39 low? Jakob went out in 1.48.0 in Lausanne, hit 1200 in 2.42 and closed out in a 40 point? You simply can't right. Think about how good you believe the other track WR's are - well they are pale in comparison to his 100 (and 200 but the 100 is marginally better).
The way this record can be broken is if you already have a sprinting super talent (like Bolt naturally was), with similar physiology (right at 6'4 or taller) and you (I really hate saying this but I sadly believe it), sophisticatedly dope them with impunity. Because you need to have a candidate that can go 9.85'ish clean but then really max out the benefits of a smart doping regime that can get you those 3 tenths of a second maximum benefit we tend to see with the pure anaerobic power events.
How long will it last? I truly believe I might never live to see this broken unless stuff gets really out of hand. What evidence do we have it could be? Seriously?
I think the 100m record is far superior to the 200m. Blake covered 200m on foot faster than any human in history, it's his horrendous reaction time from that race that prevented him being the current 200m WR holder.
If we reallyyyyy watch Kishane run, we can see his general form is a bit sloppy (at least compared to the other sprint supertalents), as well as his restrictions from training we know of --- a healthy season tells us what he's really capable of. obviously this guy isn't breaking 9.58, but I wouldn't be surprised (totally) if he broke 9.70 once in the next couple years. Beyond him, I have no idea who can come even remotely close. Certainly nobody on the circuit right now and nobody in the NCAA.
Tyson gay ran 9.69 later that year, Bolt ran 9.63 in 2012 and Yohan Blake ran 9.69 in 2012 but in the last 10 years the closest anyone has come is Gatlin's 9.74 from 2015.
So no one is within .16 of the record the last decade.
Noah Lyles' PB 9.79 is the exact same amount of time from 10.00 as it is from Bolt's record.
So thoughts? How long do you think this thing lasts?
So I know that the scoring tables aren't perfect - but they aren't bad.
9.58 - the best track record in the sport according to the tables, clocks in at a whopping 1355 points. To put this in context...
That's an 800m WR of 1.39.27
A 1500m WR of 3.22.44
Think Jakob might break the legendary 3000m record of Komen in Silesia with a mark for the ages? Well to match Bolts 100m record he'd need to go a casual 7.12.25.
To put in context against the women, well the current record is the PED fuelled, +4.5 meter per second wind aided 10.49 from Flo Jo but 10.31 is the equivilent.
The record of Bolt is so absurd it defies description. It's not just that it's better - it's just so much of an outlier vs every other event we have it's simply not plausible. Can you imagine if Sedjati or Wanyoni ripped off a 1.39 low? Jakob went out in 1.48.0 in Lausanne, hit 1200 in 2.42 and closed out in a 40 point? You simply can't right. Think about how good you believe the other track WR's are - well they are pale in comparison to his 100 (and 200 but the 100 is marginally better).
The way this record can be broken is if you already have a sprinting super talent (like Bolt naturally was), with similar physiology (right at 6'4 or taller) and you (I really hate saying this but I sadly believe it), sophisticatedly dope them with impunity. Because you need to have a candidate that can go 9.85'ish clean but then really max out the benefits of a smart doping regime that can get you those 3 tenths of a second maximum benefit we tend to see with the pure anaerobic power events.
How long will it last? I truly believe I might never live to see this broken unless stuff gets really out of hand. What evidence do we have it could be? Seriously?
Well said. You backed up my gut feeling with some numbers.
The only wild card you bring up is doping. If some new highly effective drug is invented, then might be possible. But that’s just a hypothetical.
Tech, global exposure to the sport, and training advancement increases exponentially by the year. Its only a matter of time before the next super talent appears somewhere.
Imagine if countries like China or India become interested in athletics and raise their populations out of poverty. Tens of millions of potential athletes.
You're smoking some good stuff if you think an Indian will run 9.5 seconds anytime in the next 100 years. The current Indian record is 10.26.
Imagine if Kenyanand Ethiopia raise their populations out of poveety? They might become as successful in athletics as Switzerland.
Tyson gay ran 9.69 later that year, Bolt ran 9.63 in 2012 and Yohan Blake ran 9.69 in 2012 but in the last 10 years the closest anyone has come is Gatlin's 9.74 from 2015.
So no one is within .16 of the record the last decade.
Noah Lyles' PB 9.79 is the exact same amount of time from 10.00 as it is from Bolt's record.
So thoughts? How long do you think this thing lasts?
There's a few things to consider in all this. From a kind of devils advocate/hypothetical direction, anyone who can get to 9.70 in basic can instantly have a shot at around an official 9.57 result (and a WR). BUT, even that requires so many intricate and "perfect" scenarios that it renders the whole ideal pretty much moot.
Having said that, if you:
1. Got to 9.70 capable in still conditions at sea level, and...
2. You went to some place like Texas El Paso, or that track in Florida, or some various places in Europe, or even Ethiopia as Omanyala has taught us, and...
3. You snagged a perfect +2.0 wind at altitude with the right heat and humidity...
4. AND made sure you ran your perfect race....
You could POSSIBLY run 9.57ish. At least according the the calculators.
Of course, the only people who ever COULD have theoretically had a shot at such bologna was a probably a prime and peaked Tyson Gay, whom Bolt obliterated, or perhaps a bit more likely a prime and peaked Blake, who Bolt ALSO obliterated.....and....that's practically it. MAYBE the perfect Maurice Greene race in '99 or '01 could have been capable of something like that. Like, if he ran uninjured through the line at Edmonton in '01....but the race was actually in a perfect wind in Johannesburg or something.
MAYBE a roided out Gatlin during his lost prime years would have been capable of such things (didn't he run a 9.5 or something with a giant fan behind him as a stunt while he was banned?). Perhaps a perfect Asafa Powell race at his peak (maybe his Rieti record was already his best example of that, so not even close) could have pulled it off. Even more of a leap might have been if Bob Hayes had been born in this era and had this perfect scenario.
But, the fact is, getting anywhere near 9.70 in basic is essentially outlandish in and of itself...and THEN you'd need to bend the rules with wind and altitude and crazy tracks to nudge you further along. And this is all silly talk these days because now, instead of pushing under 9.70s at ALL under SNY conditions, people are barely even pushing under 9.80s EVER....so we've actually REGRESSED. Anti-doping? Lesser talent after an epic wave of impossible talent all at once? I dunno, but nothing that we see today makes it seem likely that anyone anytime soon can have a sniff at the record, even in the above perfect scenario.
Another example; if Bolt had run that 9.58 in the scenarios I'm proposing, that 9.58 turns into something like 9.51 or maybe even 9.49 depending on how high the altitude really gets (Mexico City could have turned it all the way down into a 9.49 according to the calculator). So, in proper context, the record will probably last another 40 years, at minimum. So certainly probably more. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that the 9.62 "basic" record (which is what that 9.58 equates to) is nigh unbreakable. Like... maybe EVER, unless doping controls go by the wayside.
Tech, global exposure to the sport, and training advancement increases exponentially by the year. Its only a matter of time before the next super talent appears somewhere.
Imagine if countries like China or India become interested in athletics and raise their populations out of poverty. Tens of millions of potential athletes.
You're smoking some good stuff if you think an Indian will run 9.5 seconds anytime in the next 100 years. The current Indian record is 10.26.
Imagine if Kenyanand Ethiopia raise their populations out of poveety? They might become as successful in athletics as Switzerland.
lol. Good one. Only one Asian born sprinter, Su Bingtian, has ever broken 10 seconds. And you think they’re going to break 9.58?!
Blakes 9.69 at Lausanne actually adjusts to 9.70 exactly taking into account the wind which was basically negligible at -0.1 but the altitude of 2000ft (600m). Bolts adjusted time from Berlin is 9.62s which is clearly still a considerable margin.
Going back to our context, 9.62 is a 1.39.70 800m, a 3.23.4 1500m and a 7.14.4 3000m. No matter how you want to slice it, it's just so far ahead of every other outlier (WR holder) in every other it it just defies plausibility.