The 45.15 heat was nice stuff at the SEC, but how about his 44.50 anchor? Former T&FN statistician Shawn Price looked at the FAST Indoor Annual and checked for splits and it looks like that's the second-fastest split ever. The sub-45s in the book:
actually, gotta remember that while open 400 times indoors are invariably (cuz theyr'e set from an outer lane) aided by a drop in elevation, the relay times ( anchors at least) are run with no such aid.
In any case, it's the relative merit that matters, since all the relay legs are the same. If Lendore's is the second fastest ever, it's worthy of merit.
Yes, it merits attention -- speaking of merit - that was an even better 400 on this track.
[as for the drop in the 400, I was trying to highlight the differences between the two events and that drop is one reason that the standard differential between the two times might be smaller than the differential outdoors (since the anchor runs a 'flat' race and the flat 400 runs a downhill race....).
gh wrote: it looks like that's the second-fastest split ever. The sub-45s in the book: 44.4 Darold Williamson (Baylor) 2005 44.50 Deon Lendore (Texas A&M) 2013
Second? I realize there's inequal errors in hand-timing splits (same amount of reaction time), but don't we treat ALL hand times as at least .1 inferior, leaving Lendore at =1?
Also, I find it increasingly difficult to assess ANY indoor mark as 'remarkable' unless the same outdoor mark would similarly amaze me. A 44.50 outdoor carry is certainly notable, but not extraordinary. I realize some marks, like Coghlan's indoor sub-3:50, are AMAZING, given the detriments of an indoor track, and I also realize that 'compared to' other indoor splits this is at the top (apples vs. apples - Fayetteville's layout swiftness notwithstanding), but I'm just not buying that this mark is tantamount to even the 10th fastest outdoor split (which I assume is in the low-to-mid-43s - I looked for the list and couldn't find it).
Marlow wrote:[... Second? I realize there's inequal errors in hand-timing splits (same amount of reaction time), but don't we treat ALL hand times as at least .1 inferior, leaving Lendore at =1? ....
1. If there's any reaction-time error in a relay it happens only on the first leg. 2. If the race is auto-timed, and the splits have been adjusted so they add to the final time, you can't be adding anything more.
I get that part, but don't we treat hand-times as also inherently inaccurate, i.e., +/- .1 sec? An auto 44.50 is always 44.50, but a 44.4h can be 44.3-44.5 . . . ?
The 'standard error' on a hand-timed relay (integer lap) relay leg is smaller than the that on a race start because the reaction time is not the same. [This is why the method for reducing the bias in hand times always seemed to be trading bias and accuracy. The method is to have the timer reacting to the gun with a substantial uncertainty, and then reacting to the finish by not tracking the runner but reacting to crossing the line. And, not only do you have to pay a price in reduced accuracy, but others reading your recorded mark will adjust for the bias inherent in (most) hand timing and put it in, so you get both bias and greater uncertainty.