Development trends in men's individual Olympic events


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Development trends in men's individual Olympic events

Postby mikli » Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:49 am

trackinblack2 asked in another topic (viewtopic.php?t=30758), what is responsible for the rapid improvement in the men's 100m running. The question led to vivid discussion, and finally to statistical analysis. While not directly answering the question, the statistics showed that development has been rapid, indeed, but only until 1996. Since then the development has more or less stopped, possible reasons being analyzed in the original topic.

Besides 100m running, one may ask what has happened to the other events. For my own curiosity (maybe this is of interest to someone else too), I try to provide similar data over time also for the other individual Olympic events, starting from 200m running.

Top 100 averages (performers) for men's 200m during 1976-2007 (manual times +0.24 included for 1976-1980; electronic times only from 1981 on; wind-legal only):

1976 20.75
1977 20.79
1978 20.73
1979 20.65
1980 20.67
1981 20.73
1982 20.67
1983 20.61
1984 20.56
1985 20.57
1986 20.58
1987 20.51
1988 20.51
1989 20.60
1990 20.60
1991 20.61
1992 20.50
1993 20.52
1994 20.54
1995 20.50
1996 20.43
1997 20.47
1998 20.47
1999 20.42
2000 20.41
2001 20.48
2002 20.49
2003 20.45
2004 20.45
2005 20.47
2006 20.47
2007 20.42
2008 20.43
2009 20.41
2010 20.46

The story seems pretty similar to 200m than what it was for 100m (no big surprise that the sprints are linked to each other). Olympic year peaks are maybe more visible here. Development was rapid until 1996, and has ceased after that. The year 2007 perhaps starts a new era of improvements. More sophisticated statistical analysis might also reveal something else, who knows.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:01 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:13 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's 400m:

For 1976-1980 both electronic and manual times (+0.14), electronic times only from 1981 on.

1976 45,95
1977 46,10
1978 46,00
1979 45,92
1980 45,89
1981 45,86
1982 45,76
1983 45,64
1984 45,51
1985 45,48
1986 45,46
1987 45,47
1988 45,34
1989 45,63
1990 45,66
1991 45,58
1992 45,38
1993 45,50
1994 45,51
1995 45,44
1996 45,22
1997 45,41
1998 45,32
1999 45,34
2000 45,27
2001 45,39
2002 45,50
2003 45,35
2004 45,35
2005 45,40
2006 45,34
2007 45,38
2008 45.34
2009 45.46
2010 45.36

400m appears to be an "Olympic year event", strongly peaking there. Again, no improvements since 1996, which is the best year so far.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:02 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:17 pm

Yearly top 100 averages for men's 800m:

1976 1.46.87
1977 1.46.86
1978 1.46.94
1979 1.46.87
1980 1.46.79
1981 1.46.59
1982 1.46.28
1983 1.45.96
1984 1.45.73
1985 1.45.88
1986 1.46.00
1987 1.46.02
1988 1.45.62
1989 1.45.99
1990 1.46.05
1991 1.46.06
1992 1.45.80
1993 1.45.92
1994 1.45.85
1995 1.45.78
1996 1.45.44
1997 1.45.59
1998 1.45.65
1999 1.45.48
2000 1.45.50
2001 1.45.61
2002 1.45.80
2003 1.45.63
2004 1.45.54
2005 1.45.71
2006 1.45.58
2007 1.45.83
2008 1.45.55
2009 1.45.72
2010 1.45.65

Strange event, showing practically no development since 1983. Not influenced by rabbited races (when did it start? - I don't remember), not influenced by awakening of Africa. This brings to my mind a topic, which I found when browsing the forum (viewtopic.php?t=29109). Perhaps 800m is a difficult event for human beings as it is a compromise between speed and endurance. 1996 is the best year so far, but the margins are small.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:04 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:53 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's 1500m:

1976 3.38,92
1977 3.39,50
1978 3.39,01
1979 3.38,36
1980 3.37,98
1981 3.38,25
1982 3.38,14
1983 3.37,43
1984 3.36,88
1985 3.37,53
1986 3.37,12
1987 3.36,94
1988 3.37,04
1989 3.37,27
1990 3.37,13
1991 3.37,01
1992 3.36,94
1993 3.37,19
1994 3.37,21
1995 3.37,03
1996 3.35,77
1997 3.35,32
1998 3.35,93
1999 3.35,48
2000 3.35,62
2001 3.35,47
2002 3.36,45
2003 3.36,02
2004 3.35,44
2005 3.35,79
2006 3.35,99
2007 3.35,98
2008 3.35,62
2009 3.35,52
2010 3.35.44

Practically no development from 1983 to 1995. Then a sudden drop in 1996, bringing 1500m running to the level where it is today. 1997 is the best year so far.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:04 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby 26mi235 » Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:17 am

I had a few minutes to start doing the regressions on these new data. For the 1500 the fit is 'good' but not nearly as good as for the 100. The first 'doping' dummy is significant (but not too large, ~1 second).
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby mikli » Thu Jun 19, 2008 7:22 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's 5000m:

1976 13.31.2
1977 13.31.5
1978 13.31.0
1979 13.29.8
1980 13.29.2
1981 13.29.5
1982 13.28.8
1983 13.29.6
1984 13.27.0
1985 13.29.3
1986 13.26.7
1987 13.27.7
1988 13.28.5
1989 13.28.0
1990 13.28.1
1991 13.26.9
1992 13.22.9
1993 13.22.6
1994 13.22.9
1995 13.20.6
1996 13.20.5
1997 13.21.3
1998 13.19.3
1999 13.18.0
2000 13.15.5
2001 13.17.7
2002 13.18.3
2003 13.16.5
2004 13.13.2
2005 13.12.2
2006 13.12.2
2007 13.14.2
2008 13.13.3
2009 13.12.7
2010 13.11.9

Relatively constant development. The rise of Africa is clearly seen in the big drop from 1991 to 1992. Last year was not a very good one.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:05 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby Marlow » Thu Jun 19, 2008 7:40 am

mikli, if you keep this up you're gonna get an a shiny gold Tafny statuette for Statistical Analysis! :D

Image
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Jun 19, 2008 7:50 am

mikli wrote:Yearly top 100 averages for men's 5000m:

Relatively constant development. The rise of Africa is clearly seen in the big drop from 1991 to 1992. Last year was not a very good one.


WCs in Osaka and championship years do not necessarily help the long distance events as those events are tactical as well as being slowed by summer weather. This year we will see another effect - since the 10,000 was run at the OGs, one of the big races of the year will not be held, since the meet is after the OGs.

There is the countering effect of qualifying times with a push in the range of the top 50 to 100 (bigger effect on top-100 marks?), although this is now pushed into the prior year due to the longer qualifying period.


BTW, I have some results from the 200 through 1500, and will add in more and try to make the results more readily presentable. It might be interesting to compare the evolution across events.
Last edited by 26mi235 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby mikli » Thu Jun 19, 2008 8:04 am

Marlow wrote:mikli, if you keep this up you're gonna get an a shiny gold Tafny statuette for Statistical Analysis! :D

Only a heart attack could stop me now that I'm this far (well, I already have a pacemaker). This is not very laborious for me, as I just make use of data that others have compiled. That's the tough part, to make the compilations! All my respect goes to Pino Mappa & co.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby Kevin Richardson » Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:28 am

Great work! Interesting stuff to discuss, regarding what we think is beind all of this. Keeping in mind the changes in track surfaces, and the move to more professionalism and longer careers, this is not unexpected. Still, I love it when we get into the numerical weeds. :D
Kevin Richardson
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, Alabama

Postby mikli » Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:37 am

26mi235 wrote:BTW, I have some results from the 200 through 1500, and will add in more and try to make the results more readily presentable. It might be interesting to compare the evolution across events.

Charts are more illustrative than the numbers, and they are very easy to make, of course. I have them on my computer, but I don't know how to post them here, so it is great if you can make the results more presentable (whichever way you plan to do it). Evolution across events is certainly of great interest, too.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:52 am

mikli wrote:
26mi235 wrote:BTW, I have some results from the 200 through 1500, and will add in more and try to make the results more readily presentable. It might be interesting to compare the evolution across events.

Charts are more illustrative than the numbers, and they are very easy to make, of course. I have them on my computer, but I don't know how to post them here, so it is great if you can make the results more presentable (whichever way you plan to do it). Evolution across events is certainly of great interest, too.


I also have trouble posting graphs/tables and might even e-mail them to those adept at the task. What I am working on will probably be either the fitted curves or smoothed curves with the time axis being time/100m so that multiple curves are shown on the same graph.

Mikli, when you provide the data you have been rounding to the nearest 0.01, which is rather granular for the sprints (esp 100m). (Believe it or not, the fact that the times are only reported to the nearest 0.01 is not relevant because we are talking about a mean which is a continuous variable.)

Finally, in the 100, I expected that the difference between the top 50 and top 100 would shrink over time as the pool got much more populated but gap is almost constant, with almost all of the differences 0.07 or 0.08. Of course, this means that the difference between the top 50 and the Second 50 is twice as large. Here is the list of the 2nd 50 for the 100m

Year … 2nd 50 … 1st 50 Difference
1976 … 10.39 … 10.27 … 0.12
1977 … 10.43 … 10.27 … 0.16
1978 … 10.40 … 10.24 … 0.16
1979 … 10.39 … 10.23 … 0.16
1980 … 10.38 … 10.24 … 0.14
1981 … 10.40 … 10.24 … 0.16
1982 … 10.37 … 10.23 … 0.14
1983 … 10.35 … 10.19 … 0.16
1984 … 10.34 … 10.20 … 0.14
1985 … 10.31 … 10.19 … 0.12
1986 … 10.32 … 10.16 … 0.16
1987 … 10.30 … 10.16 … 0.14
1988 … 10.30 … 10.14 … 0.16
1989 … 10.32 … 10.18 … 0.14
1990 … 10.32 … 10.18 … 0.14
1991 … 10.31 … 10.15 … 0.16
1992 … 10.28 … 10.14 … 0.14
1993 … 10.28 … 10.14 … 0.14
1994 … 10.26 … 10.10 … 0.16
1995 … 10.28 … 10.14 … 0.14
1996 … 10.23 … 10.07 … 0.16
1997 … 10.25 … 10.07 … 0.18
1998 … 10.24 … 10.06 … 0.18
1999 … 10.23 … 10.07 … 0.16
2000 … 10.20 … 10.08 … 0.12
2001 … 10.24 … 10.10 … 0.14
2002 … 10.24 … 10.10 … 0.14
2003 … 10.23 … 10.07 … 0.16
2004 … 10.21 … 10.07 … 0.14
2005 … 10.25 … 10.09 … 0.16
2006 … 10.23 … 10.09 … 0.14
2007 … 10.21 … 10.07 … 0.14
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby mikli » Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:26 am

26mi235 wrote:Mikli, when you provide the data you have been rounding to the nearest 0.01, which is rather granular for the sprints (esp 100m)

I think so too. Sadly, I was so unbelievably stupid to not save the 100m toplists, but I will collect them again with three desimals later at some point. Meanwhile, here is 200m with three desimals:

1976 20.753
1977 20.785
1978 20.733
1979 20.654
1980 20.673
1981 20.735
1982 20.665
1983 20.614
1984 20.562
1985 20.566
1986 20.581
1987 20.509
1988 20.512
1989 20.597
1990 20.604
1991 20.605
1992 20.504
1993 20.519
1994 20.538
1995 20.498
1996 20.427
1997 20.471
1998 20.466
1999 20.418
2000 20.413
2001 20.480
2002 20.487
2003 20.452
2004 20.453
2005 20.474
2006 20.470
2007 20.419
2008 20.427
2009 20.412
2010 20.464
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:06 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:38 am

Thanks, I will redo the regressions with the updated data.

There is another look at these data that I thought that I would try. I would take the data for 4-year period and go across the distances with a graph of Pace vs Log(Distance), which provides a surprisingly clean fit when using Championship distances. It will be interesting to see how that line looks over time. Does it compress at the top end or the bottom end, and how do some of the dummies (FS, 'drug regimes', etc) play out?

[note, this relationship changes down around the 200 where several factors come into play: 1) reaction time; 2) hard acceleration phase a larger part of the event; 3) different energy systems; and 4) non-linear wind resistance. A couple of these can be finessed, or instance by taking out the reaction time of about 0.15 for the 100, 0.20 for the 200 and 0.25 for the 400).

Maybe I will try to team up with someone with real credentials in the field -- JRM
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby mikli » Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:49 am

Relief, did actually save it and found it.

Top 50/100 averages for men's 100m with three desimals:

year top50 top100
1976 10.266 10.331
1977 10.271 10.347
1978 10.239 10.316
1979 10.231 10.306
1980 10.237 10.307
1981 10.245 10.317
1982 10.227 10.297
1983 10.194 10.266
1984 10.204 10.266
1985 10.191 10.254
1986 10.160 10.237
1987 10.162 10.228
1988 10.141 10.215
1989 10.180 10.250
1990 10.184 10.247
1991 10.149 10.225
1992 10.143 10.214
1993 10.136 10.210
1994 10.101 10.177
1995 10.138 10.207
1996 10.070 10.148
1997 10.075 10.157
1998 10.064 10.147
1999 10.068 10.146
2000 10.079 10.140
2001 10.099 10.166
2002 10.100 10.165
2003 10.073 10.146
2004 10.070 10.142
2005 10.088 10.169
2006 10.087 10.163
2007 10.071 10.139
2008 10.019 10.104
2009 10.012 10.098
2010 10.045 10.134
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:08 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Sun Jun 22, 2008 4:56 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's 10000m:

1976 28.17,7
1977 28.18,2
1978 28.15,8
1979 28.17,0
1980 28.13,1
1981 28.19,9
1982 28.13,1
1983 28.15,5
1984 28.07,2
1985 28.17,1
1986 28.07,8
1987 28.15,6
1988 28.05,2
1989 28.12,1
1990 28.10,4
1991 28.03,7
1992 28.05,7
1993 28.06,6
1994 28.09,7
1995 28.00,2
1996 27.57,7
1997 27.59,7
1998 27.58,8
1999 27.57,9
2000 27.53,0
2001 28.02,7
2002 27.56,6
2003 27.53,7
2004 27.49,7
2005 27.50,1
2006 27.56,6
2007 27.39,4
2008 27.36.5
2009 27.51.1
2010 27.54.0

Solid improvement, but with large deviations. This is understandable, as 10000m is nowadays run relatively rarely, and the yearly averages are influenced by what the pace in the few important races happened to be. 2007 is clearly the best year so far, but due to the large deviations, it might be a wrong interpretation that the event moved strongly on there.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:09 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:36 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's marathon:

1976 2:15:35
1977 2:15:56
1978 2:14:24
1979 2:14:04
1980 2:12:44
1981 2:13:00
1982 2:12:45
1983 2:11:32
1984 2:11:52
1985 2:11:37
1986 2:12:10
1987 2:12:12
1988 2:11:27
1989 2:11:58
1990 2:12:00
1991 2:11:41
1992 2:11:36
1993 2:11:30
1994 2:10:51
1995 2:11:08
1996 2:10:52
1997 2:10:03
1998 2:10:00
1999 2:09:35
2000 2:09:49
2001 2:09:53
2002 2:09:26
2003 2:08:49
2004 2:09:33
2005 2:09:35
2006 2:09:21
2007 2:09:04
2008 2:08:33
2009 2:08:11
2010 2:08:00

Extremely fast development until 1983, followed by slow or no development for the next 10 years. 1997 marks the beginning of the "modern" era, peaking at 2003.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:10 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Wed Jun 25, 2008 10:04 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's 3000sc:

1976 8.30,79
1977 8.32,04
1978 8.30,91
1979 8.31,15
1980 8.28,13
1981 8.30,24
1982 8.29,21
1983 8.27,62
1984 8.27,21
1985 8.28,41
1986 8.26,82
1987 8.28,11
1988 8.26,77
1989 8.28,99
1990 8.27,67
1991 8.27,74
1992 8.26,11
1993 8.27,66
1994 8.27,51
1995 8.25,34
1996 8.25,51
1997 8.24,87
1998 8.25,00
1999 8.22,58
2000 8.23,04
2001 8.23,64
2002 8.24,32
2003 8.22,93
2004 8.21,48
2005 8.22,38
2006 8.22,60
2007 8.22,65
2008 8.22,65
2009 8.24.54
2010 8.24.28

Not much to say. The event has moved on, which is not a big surprise.The years in late 80s / early 90s were not particularly good. The level has risen since, thanks to the Kenyans. 2004 is the best year so far.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:11 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:51 am

Top 100 averages for men's 110m hurdles (manual times +0.24 included for 1976-1980; electronic times only from 1981 on; wind-legal only):

1976 13.839
1977 13.861
1978 13.868
1979 13.841
1980 13.816
1981 13.823
1982 13.774
1983 13.750
1984 13.698
1985 13.715
1986 13.680
1987 13.651
1988 13.614
1989 13.689
1990 13.636
1991 13.631
1992 13.579
1993 13.602
1994 13.585
1995 13.553
1996 13.503
1997 13.532
1998 13.540
1999 13.521
2000 13.531
2001 13.569
2002 13.554
2003 13.533
2004 13.478
2005 13.519
2006 13.533
2007 13.488
2008 13.477
2009 13.476
2010 13.502

Same as with the other sprints: Rapid development until 1996, nothing since. 2004 the best year so far. Olympic year peaks are clear.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:12 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:50 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's 400m hurdles:

1976 50.29
1977 50.44
1978 50.36
1979 50.30
1980 50.14
1981 50.21
1982 50.04
1983 49.90
1984 49.76
1985 49.80
1986 49.66
1987 49.68
1988 49.70
1989 49.89
1990 49.79
1991 49.80
1992 49.65
1993 49.70
1994 49.60
1995 49.51
1996 49.30
1997 49.39
1998 49.40
1999 49.33
2000 49.29
2001 49.35
2002 49.36
2003 49.35
2004 49.28
2005 49.28
2006 49.50
2007 49.40
2008 49.54
2009 49.57
2010 49.57

First rapid development until 1986, then a stop for several years. Then again rapid improvements from 1993 to 1996, and no thereafter. 2006 and 2007 were relatively weak years.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:12 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby oldtimer2 » Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:34 pm

Mik,
Great job! Any chance you'll post the field events as well?
All the best,
oldtimer2
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby mikli » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:02 pm

oldtimer2 wrote:Mik,
Great job! Any chance you'll post the field events as well?
All the best,

Thanks. Sure I will, just wait.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:36 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's high jump:

1976 2.207
1977 2.217
1978 2.223
1979 2.231
1980 2.240
1981 2.245
1982 2.258
1983 2.275
1984 2.283
1985 2.285
1986 2.279
1987 2.282
1988 2.290
1989 2.281
1990 2.288
1991 2.281
1992 2.283
1993 2.285
1994 2.282
1995 2.279
1996 2.282
1997 2.278
1998 2.275
1999 2.268
2000 2.275
2001 2.267
2002 2.269
2003 2.268
2004 2.271
2005 2.274
2006 2.277
2007 2.280
2008 2.279
2009 2.275
2010 2.269

Rapid development until mid 80s, which was the "golden age" of high jump, introducing exceptional talents like Sjöberg and Sotomayor. But clearly, there was more in the 80s than those talents, a sort of a surprise to me, as the overall level was higher than today. The level slowly started to decrease after the peak at 1988, reaching bottom in 2001. The level has constantly increased since, whilst not to the level of 80s, yet
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:14 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:53 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's pole vault:

1976 5.320
1977 5.303
1978 5.342
1979 5.386
1980 5.453
1981 5.472
1982 5.511
1983 5.539
1984 5.575
1985 5.598
1986 5.623
1987 5.615
1988 5.631
1989 5.614
1990 5.613
1991 5.627
1992 5.656
1993 5.647
1994 5.652
1995 5.648
1996 5.686
1997 5.662
1998 5.681
1999 5.660
2000 5.675
2001 5.644
2002 5.639
2003 5.641
2004 5.664
2005 5.651
2006 5.644
2007 5.658
2008 5.645
2009 5.640
2010 5.605

Extremely rapid development until 1986, followed by further increase, while with slower pace, until 1996. The level has slightly dropped since, perhaps due to the change of the rules.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:15 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:32 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's long jump:

1976 7.922
1977 7.890
1978 7.900
1979 7.924
1980 7.950
1981 7.949
1982 8.006
1983 8.017
1984 8.063
1985 8.053
1986 8.062
1987 8.098
1988 8.107
1989 8.066
1990 8.060
1991 8.080
1992 8.087
1993 8.080
1994 8.092
1995 8.080
1996 8.114
1997 8.101
1998 8.077
1999 8.086
2000 8.104
2001 8.048
2002 8.070
2003 8.102
2004 8.108
2005 8.075
2006 8.081
2007 8.076
2008 8.090
2009 8.108
2010 8.081

Rapid development until 1988, no improvements after that. 1996 the best year so far. I would have guessed that the level had dropped from the late 80s, but that does not seem to be the case. While there were a couple of expectional talents back then (Lewis, in particular), the overall level was about the same as today.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:15 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:19 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's triple jump:

1976 16.431
1977 16.449
1978 16.514
1979 16.529
1980 16.566
1981 16.673
1982 16.742
1983 16.827
1984 16.853
1985 16.935
1986 16.958
1987 16.950
1988 16.980
1989 16.885
1990 16.886
1991 16.924
1992 16.931
1993 16.931
1994 16.892
1995 16.886
1996 16.924
1997 16.872
1998 16.845
1999 16.774
2000 16.837
2001 16.793
2002 16.810
2003 16.782
2004 16.928
2005 16.836
2006 16.886
2007 16.887
2008 16.926
2009 16.919
2010 16.862

Extremely rapid development until 1988, then a clear drop in 1989, followed by a slightly decreasing trend until 2003. The level has been improving for the last few years.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:16 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Re: Development trends in men's individual Olympic events

Postby olorin » Sat Jul 05, 2008 3:57 am

mikli wrote:trackinblack2 asked in another topic (http://mb.trackandfieldnews.com/discuss ... hp?t=30758), what is responsible for the rapid improvement in the men's 100m running. The question led to vivid discussion, and finally to statistical analysis. While not directly answering the question, the statistics showed that development has been rapid, indeed, but only until 1996. Since then the development has more or less stopped, possible reasons being analyzed in the original topic.

Besides 100m running, one may ask what has happened to the other events. For my own curiosity (maybe this is of interest to someone else too), I try to provide similar data over time also for the other individual Olympic events, starting from 200m running.

Top 100 averages (performers) for men's 200m during 1976-2007 (manual times +0.24 included for 1976-1980; electronic times only from 1981 on; wind-legal only):

1976 20.75
1977 20.79
1978 20.73
1979 20.65
1980 20.67
1981 20.73
1982 20.67
1983 20.61
1984 20.56
1985 20.57
1986 20.58
1987 20.51
1988 20.51
1989 20.60
1990 20.60
1991 20.61
1992 20.50
1993 20.52
1994 20.54
1995 20.50
1996 20.43
1997 20.47
1998 20.47
1999 20.42
2000 20.41
2001 20.48
2002 20.49
2003 20.45
2004 20.45
2005 20.47
2006 20.47
2007 20.42

The story seems pretty similar to 200m than what it was for 100m (no big surprise that the sprints are linked to each other). Olympic year peaks are maybe more visible here. Development was rapid until 1996, and has ceased after that. The year 2007 perhaps starts a new era of improvements. More sophisticated statistical analysis might also reveal something else, who knows.

I am not really sure what you capture with average of top 100 athletes. I believe that when people talk about improvement in an event they are talking about the sharp end of the distribution (something like the top 10). Among 20-100 most athletes are armature or semi-professional and are likely to lag behind any improvement in an event.
It would be interesting to see the comparison between this list and top ten average.
Regardless, good work!
olorin
 
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Development trends in men's individual Olympic events

Postby olorin » Sat Jul 05, 2008 4:15 am

Looking at the list it does seem that 1996 was the best year in men T&F so far. This is true especially for spring and jump events (can you post the throws average?). I believe that this is very interesting since 1996 is not related to major changes in drug policies (unlike 1988 for women). I think that there is a good chance that 2008 will be able to pass 1996 since we are witnessing amazing results from all over the globe.
olorin
 
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby mikli » Sat Jul 05, 2008 4:21 am

Olorin,

Thanks for your comment. The top100 averages capture the overall level, not only that of the very top. Usually, these go hand by hand. Not always, however, as top10 is influenced by exceptional performances of the very best athletes, whereas their influence is marginal in the top100. Anyway, less than top100 would be sufficient for this purpose, as shown by the top50 averages posted for 100m. But 100 is so nice round number :wink:

After the season, I may come back with top10 or top 20 averages. By doing this, I should be able to go to the very beginning of modern athletics, which should place the "recent" developments into a larger perspective.

i will post the throws + decathlon in about a week.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby olorin » Sat Jul 05, 2008 4:39 am

mikli wrote:Olorin,

Thanks for your comment. The top100 averages capture the overall level, not only that of the very top. Usually, these go hand by hand. Not always, however, as top10 is influenced by exceptional performances of the very best athletes, whereas their influence is marginal in the top100. Anyway, less than top100 would be sufficient for this purpose, as shown by the top50 averages posted for 100m. But 100 is so nice round number :wink:

After the season, I may come back with top10 or top 20 averages. By doing this, I should be able to go to the very beginning of modern athletics, which should place the "recent" developments into a larger perspective.

i will post the throws + decathlon in about a week.

Mikli
The 100 is rather special event with relatively a lot of money. This suggests that the armature bias is less likely to effect result in this event. Can you just satisfy my curiosity and post the correlation in 2-3 events between the top 20 and 21-100 over the years (shouldn’t be that difficult as you already have the data) and compare that to the 100.
Thanks
olorin
 
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby mikli » Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:01 am

I guess this should answer. Correlations coefficients between top20 and top100 averages for the events posted so far:

100: 0.98
200: 0.94
400: 0.94
800: 0.96
1500: 0.96
5000: 0.96
10000: 0.94
Marathon: 0.98
3000sc: 0.95
110h: 0.98
400h: 0.97
High: 0.97
Pole: 0.99
Long: 0.96
Triple: 0.97
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby olorin » Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:42 pm

mikli wrote:I guess this should answer. Correlations coefficients between top20 and top100 averages for the events posted so far:

100: 0.98
200: 0.94
400: 0.94
800: 0.96
1500: 0.96
5000: 0.96
10000: 0.94
Marathon: 0.98
3000sc: 0.95
110h: 0.98
400h: 0.97
High: 0.97
Pole: 0.99
Long: 0.96
Triple: 0.97

Sorry to be a pain, but you should really examine the correlation between the top 20 and places 21-100. Doing your way will tend to produce high correlation. Thanks for the effort!
olorin
 
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby mikli » Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:54 pm

olorin wrote:Sorry to be a pain, but you should really examine the correlation between the top 20 and places 21-100. Doing your way will tend to produce high correlation. Thanks for the effort!

No problem at all. Is this what you meant?

Correlation coefficients between top20 and position 21-100 averages for the events posted so far:

100: 0.97
200: 0.90
400: 0.91
800: 0.94
1500: 0.93
5000: 0.93
10000: 0.88
Marathon: 0.97
3000sc: 0.89
110h: 0.97
400h: 0.96
High: 0.95
Pole: 0.99
Long: 0.93
Triple: 0.95
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:16 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's shot put:

1976 19.715
1977 19.545
1978 19.689
1979 19.762
1980 20.060
1981 19.879
1982 20.061
1983 20.286
1984 20.431
1985 20.251
1986 20.333
1987 20.220
1988 20.218
1989 19.896
1990 19.813
1991 19.471
1992 19.787
1993 19.566
1994 19.455
1995 19.424
1996 19.702
1997 19.593
1998 19.739
1999 19.670
2000 20.030
2001 19.878
2002 20.014
2003 19.998
2004 20.136
2005 20.056
2006 20.104
2007 20.066
2008 20.191
2009 20.047
2010 20.037

Rapid development towards the 80s, peaking at 1984, and gradually decreasing after that until 1988. What followed was a huge drop from 1988 to 1989 (for a reason we all must be aware of), and then another huge drop from 1990 to 1991, dropping the level below to that of the mid-70s. The level recovered for the time of the 1992 Olympic year and then immediately dropped back, the level of 1995 being the lowest in the last 30+ years. A new era of improvements started from there and has continued until today (or until 2004, at least). Nonetheless, we are still a long way back from the level of mid-80s.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:18 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Mon Jul 07, 2008 1:29 pm

Yearly top 100 averages for men's discus throw:

1976 62.41
1977 62.13
1978 62.40
1979 62.90
1980 63.83
1981 63.04
1982 63.65
1983 63.83
1984 64.41
1985 63.81
1986 63.85
1987 63.53
1988 64.12
1989 63.00
1990 62.78
1991 62.47
1992 62.79
1993 61.75
1994 61.08
1995 61.77
1996 62.73
1997 62.47
1998 62.84
1999 63.03
2000 63.77
2001 62.89
2002 63.08
2003 62.55
2004 63.34
2005 62.81
2006 62.77
2007 62.99
2008 63.60
2009 62.81
2010 63.21

The level strongly improved until 1984, followed by decrease until 1994, very similar to the trends in the shot. After 1994, a very poor year, the level sharply improved again until 2000, but unlike with the shot, has been perhaps on slight decrease thereafter.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:18 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby Mennisco » Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:20 pm

This is wonderful stuff Mikli. At some point perhaps you'll be able to give us some idea of how the expansion of the sport into many more nations [since 1976] contributes to the numbers.
Mennisco
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm
Location: Canada

Postby mikli » Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:22 pm

Mennisco wrote:This is wonderful stuff Mikli. At some point perhaps you'll be able to give us some idea of how the expansion of the sport into many more nations [since 1976] contributes to the numbers.

Thanks Mennisco, perhaps at some point, not very soon, however. Once I get the present stuff finished, I will most probably have a break until the end of the season, and after that, go for the years before 1976.

By the way, I would like to post the development trends as charts, but I don't know how to post pictures here. You seem to be capable for doing that, so could you help me?
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby mikli » Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:23 pm

Yearly top 100 averages for men's hammer throw:

1976 71.86
1977 71.38
1978 72.19
1979 72.86
1980 73.70
1981 73.02
1982 74.89
1983 75.86
1984 76.65
1985 76.62
1986 76.54
1987 76.71
1988 77.18
1989 75.79
1990 75.85
1991 75.10
1992 75.51
1993 75.14
1994 75.14
1995 75.40
1996 75.41
1997 75.07
1998 75.91
1999 75.74
2000 76.48
2001 75.34
2002 75.47
2003 75.61
2004 75.83
2005 75.27
2006 74.97
2007 75.22
2008 75.99
2009 74.45
2010 74.66

Extremely rapid development until 1988, followed by a huge drop in 1989 similar to shot and discus. Practically nothing has happened thereafter, the peak at the 2000 Olympic year is notable, however. We are currently living at the level of 1982-1983.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:19 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Postby 26mi235 » Tue Jul 08, 2008 10:43 pm

mikli wrote:
Mennisco wrote:This is wonderful stuff Mikli. At some point perhaps you'll be able to give us some idea of how the expansion of the sport into many more nations [since 1976] contributes to the numbers.

Thanks Mennisco, perhaps at some point, not very soon, however. Once I get the present stuff finished, I will most probably have a break until the end of the season, and after that, go for the years before 1976.

By the way, I would like to post the development trends as charts, but I don't know how to post pictures here. You seem to be capable for doing that, so could you help me?


When I get some time I will present some partially finished statistical analysis on these data. BTW, my priors on the time-trend structure on a couple of these weight events is to have the post-1988 dummy interact with the time trend and not just be a shift term.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16334
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby mikli » Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:29 am

Yearly top 100 averages for men's javelin throw:

1976 82.79
1977 82.89
1978 83.43
1979 83.73
1980 84.81
1981 84.49
1982 84.44
1983 85.16
1984 85.49
1985 85.68
1986 78.24
1987 79.56
1988 79.74
1989 79.99
1990 80.48
1991 81.37
1992 80.08
1993 79.90
1994 79.69
1995 80.28
1996 80.47
1997 80.37
1998 80.33
1999 80.64
2000 81.06
2001 80.83
2002 80.66
2003 80.05
2004 80.65
2005 79.60
2006 80.02
2007 79.96
2008 80.26
2009 80.56
2010 80.23

Fast development until 1980, then a notch for two years, and again improvements until 1985, the last year with the old model. Not surprisingly, the development with the new model was fast at the beginning, reaching the highest average in year 1991 due to the thereafter forbidden rough tailed javelin. Note the drop of about 1.3m from 1991 to 1992. Further improvements took place until 2000. The level has been in decrease since. From this data, I would estimate the conversion from old to new model to be about 0.92-0.93x. Using 0.925x, Hohn's 104.80 would convert to 96.94, about 1.5m short of Zelezny's WR.
Last edited by mikli on Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:21 am, edited 3 times in total.
mikli
 
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:45 am
Location: Finland

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], rsb2, Rye Catcher and 8 guests