I was wondering if there are races that have official recognition that are looked at with suspicion(for timing/wind/technical) by fans and experts in general. Obviously the most famous would be Flo Jo's obviously wind aided world record in a TRIALS QUARTER FINAL!!!! I have heard talks about Marita Koch's 47.60 being wind aided(wind switching direction out of the blue) and Marie Jose Perec 46.25 Atlanta run was on an illegal track? What say you about these things?
Some of my own brow raisers are Ivet Lalova 10.77 run barely out of her teenage years and she never quite reproduce that run again ever. How about Xuemei Li 10.79 run in still air also barely out of her teenage years and never replicated again. Fast people run fast if you break 11 seconds by that much of a margin at such a young age it should be duplicated over and over. That seems to be the rule not the exception( SAFP, Bolt, Blake, Jones, ETC). Any opinions or info?????
|
|
Doubtful timing
45 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Doubtful timing
Re: Doubtful timing
How about all of the records set in China?
Re: Doubtful timing
Maybe the most famous, it has a term of its own, is Beamon's LJ. Not only did it have the extreme altitude of Mexico City, but its reported maximum legal wind of 2.0 was most likely a 2.x, x>1; see the thread several years back that discussed this.
In addition, there is the Rieti track and its occasionally stunningly good marks, highlighted by 7:20 3000. Also, the Clermont, FL track has been disparaged as giving very fast times.
Re: Doubtful timing
Where have you heard this and who was saying it? No where EVER have I heard about a 400m race being called into question because wind pushed the athletes around the track. Ever. I think you're making it up and I'm surprised no one called you on it.
I think you mean 48.25, not 46.25 and Atlanta's track was not illegal.
Rule rather than the exception? Whose rule? T&F history is littered with one-hit wonders - especially ones who are barely out of their teen years. How can you not know this? Again, you keep saying that you have a guiding principle for the threads that you start but I don't see it. I figured that you mistyped a number on the '96 400 and many people have said that the track was illegal (it wasn't), so I can see where you may have been steered wrong, but "wind chasing 400's" and "early age times should be duplicated over and over again"? Come on.
Re: Doubtful timing
It's a very real footnote on Koch's 400m WR (and was previously on the GDR's former 4x100m WR). The idea is that Canberra Stadium's horseshoe design allow for wind to swirl around, pushing the athletes around the whole length of the track. See for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OD4OUTXvtRU I think she was inside 11 seconds at 100m, and had an unofficial split of 22.4 at 200m.
Re: Doubtful timing
Ivet Lalova had a MASSIVE flyer she's taken 2 steps before the others left the blocks
Jon posted blatant photos at the time In the UK we have an annual meeting at Loughborough that often comes up with ludicrous times including Montell Douglas' UK 100m record of 11.05 which she has never some anywhere near before or since There is also that ludicrous La Chaux-de-Fonds meeting in Switzerland. 2nd rate UK sprinters use it to get qualifying standards and then get nowhere near the times ever again, usually going out at the subsequent champs in the first round 
Re: Doubtful timing
La Chaux de Fonds works on warm days because it's at about 980m of altitude, and Geneva is at less altitude (only about 400m) but always produces excellent marks.
I can give you a good instance of a wind-assisted 400. In the Commonwealth Games of 1958, the second round saw English #3 Ted Sampson improve from 47.6y to 46.8y, with the wind following the runners around the whole way. Next day in less helpful conditions with strong cross-winds, Sampson ran 48.2 and failed to make the final.
Re: Doubtful timing
Marita Koch herself said she felt a headwind in the home straight, so you can forget any notion of wind assistance.
Re: Doubtful timing
And not only that, but if Koch was blown to a fast time, why weren't some of the other women in that race, and why weren't other events run on the same day assisted? Why only the GDR women's 400m and w4x100m? It's a bit of an (anti GDR) myth.
One race for me that has always been doubtful is the European women's 100m final from 1998. It was supposedly with the maximum allowable wind at +2m, but I am not so sure.The amount of PB/SB/NRs, 4 women under 11 secs (never seen in European Champs before or since) and the fact that Privalova and Pintusevich couldnt even break 11 sec again that season - Privalova's best outside the champs was 11.04 in Russia and Pintusevich's was 11.02 in Linz. (Thanou had run 10.99 in Greece) makes me raise my eye brows. (That was Privalova's 3rd fastest time ever, and she certainly wasnt a 10.8 athlete in 1998 and nor was 98 one of her best seasons. While Arron was obviously in fantastic shape in 1998 with numerous sub 11 clockings, I dont feel she was a 10.7 woman either) 1 Christine Arron France 10.73 ER 2 Irina Privalova Russia 10.83 SB 3 Ekaterini Thanou Greece 10.87 NR 4 Zhanna Pintusevich Ukraine 10.92 SB 5 Melanie Paschke Germany 11.07 SB 6 Petya Pendareva Bulgaria 11.12 PB 7 Anzhela Kravchenko Ukraine 11.16 PB
Re: Doubtful timing
And 10.95 (+2.6) in the heats.  One mark which was just as ridiculous was when Alena Neumiarzhytskaya ran 11.05 at the BLR Champs just before the European Champs where she then got knocked out in the heats of the 100m and 200m. Interestingly, tilastopaja have voided it due to irregular timing but it still stands as her PB on her IAAF biog where it sticks out like a sore thumb. I know quite a lot of people have queried Tatyana Chernova's 8.02 60mH from the Russian Indoor Championships this year too.
Re: Doubtful timing
While there is evidence to indicate that she got a false start, you can't really use her lack of replicating similarly fast times against her, considering that freak broken leg she got in 2005. She had legitimate speed -- in the year of that 10.77, she made the Olympic final of both the 100m and 200m, placing 4th and 5th respectively, and the year before that she was the world's fastest junior at 11.14. Without that broken leg I think she definitely would have run sub-10.9 on multiple occasions.
Re: Doubtful timing
Vladykina in second ran 48.27, the fastest time of her career by a good margin. The problem with assessing the conditions by the overall level of performances at that meet is that it was in October and many of the participants were simply way past their peak. The East Germans clearly focused on the World Cup as the main event of the season, but most of the others did not.
Re: Doubtful timing
It wasnt her best by a 'good margin'...she'd run 48.60 prior to Canberra, the then 7th best all-time and still the 11th best all-time, and she also peaked for the World Cup too. She was in fantastic shape that season,world number 1 going into the Cup, she also ran 49.84, 49.18 and 48.96, in the months before, gradually peaking towards september. Remove that 48.27 and 1985 still remains her best season time-wise, better than 87 and 88.
Re: Doubtful timing
Oh, well, if she said it then I guess it's settled... Last edited by Ned Ryerson on Thu Nov 29, 2012 5:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Doubtful timing
Why wasn't anyone else blown to a fantastic time when FloJo ran 10.49 with a +3m/s wind? Sometimes that's how the cookie crumbles.
Re: Doubtful timing
So what's your definition of a 'good margin', if 0.33 isn't it?
Which of course are very fast times, but all WAY off 48.27.
Re: Doubtful timing
Gabriella is right: .33 is WELL within the margin of improvement for a PB where you're chasing someone at 400m. I think almost the entire womens' final at 400m in '96 ran under their PB's by a similar margin (for most). I can even think of 200m PB's that approach that number. I Don't think Reynolds ever came within .33 of his then WR. It's just not that unusual.
Re: Doubtful timing
I'm not into conspiracy theories (knowing f'rinstance that Clermont's track and timing are legit, I assume that other tracks like Rieti are also - we'd surely (99.99%) have evidence by now if they weren't legit), but every now and then there IS a funky mark that comes out that we KNOW something is up. There have been measurement errors in field events; there have been timing and wind reading problems that went undetected; there have even been officials that falsified marks. It is our job (well, it's really meet management's job, but sometimes they are part of the problem) to question marks and seek explanations. I believe it is gh who invokes the 'Smell Test' on some marks and that's a prudent way to proceed.
Re: Doubtful timing
I think Sheila Echols ran 10.83 behind FloJo's 10.49 - that was by far her best. I don't think she broke 11 in the final. I think someone else was under 11 behind Flo Jo too. From memory there was a following wind in the final, but only 3 under 11, despite the fast quarter final times, and only FloJo broke 11 from her qf.
Re: Doubtful timing
have you ever looked at our Records or All-Time List sections? We carry Flojo as windy, and ignore Lalova altogether.
Re: Doubtful timing
Koch also ran 48.16,twice, 48.22 and 48.26....perfectly capable of having a peak moment of 47.60 without being "wind aided"....she also ran 21.71 and even 7.04 for 60m which speaks to her basic speed/acceleration and the 21.71 speaks to her level of speed endurance....there were other factors of course....but i don't think wind around the track was one of them..
Re: Doubtful timing
Relative to their previous/past levels of performance many people in quarterfinals 1 and 2 that day were indeed blown to "fantastic" times in Indy. Indeed, it was this mass breakthrough that pointed the finger at the wind as the causative agent. Bert Nelson put together a good set of stats on the subject at the time.
Re: Doubtful timing
Wasn't there an indoor track somewhere in the US that people used to regularly run ridiculous times?
Maybe Fayettiville 
Re: Doubtful timing
Fayetteville had lots of fast 200s and 400s.
Note that it's the same track that was used for the '93 World Indoor in Toronto.
Re: Doubtful timing
And the outside lanes are probably not legal by road racing standards because they have about the same gradient for the 200 as the Boston Marathon (just a guess, but it definitely is down hill).
Re: Doubtful timing
You sued to always see dodgy marks from Lagos.
The German jumps meeting in Bad Lagensalza always has suspciously good results every year, and the Weinheim meeting seems to do the same for sprinting.
Re: Doubtful timing
All of these are not doubtful timing, it's doubtful wind reading. However, Diane Williams' 10.86 IS doubtful timing, as the original time is 10.88 and for some reason has been compilled as 10.86.
Re: Doubtful timing
and then 8.29 in Istanbul
Re: Doubtful timing
This isn't a timing issue but I've always been doubtful of Tatyana Kotova's 7.42m from the Euro Cup in 2002 never seemed right.
I was there and saw her jump but it didn't look particularly far and I didn't take much notice. A few minutes later 7.42m flashed up and I remember looking at it and assuming it was a mistake. It was only later when I heard Jade Johnson shouting at her coach 'I got metered!!!' (She'd jumped 6.42m) that I realised it had been valid. The next longest jump in the competition was 6.65m. Whilst she was a great jumper I'm not sure she was in the same league as Heike, Jackie and Galina. I think her next longest jump was 7.12m.
Re: Doubtful timing
Anyone remember some dodgy 200 meter (homer) marks that caused some others to not get WRs?
Re: Doubtful timing
There were great conditions, she hit a perfect board, i've analysed the jump on video, i couldn't find any blatant measurement error.
Re: Doubtful timing
PRESTON DID I STEP ON YOUR TOE????? WHY DO YOU KEEP STALKING MY THREADS TO LEAVE NONSENSE COMMENTS. IT IS OBVIOUS MANY OTHERS PEOPLE HEARD ABOUT MARITA KOCH POSSIBLY WIND AIDED 400 METER WR RECORD RUN. I AM NOT A TROLL LOOKING FOR ATTENTION. I POST BECAUSE I WANT TO DISCUSS THOUGHT PROVOKING SUBJECT MATTER. I DONT TRY TO EVER BE CONTROVERSIAL BUT I WILL POST SOMETHING DESPITE ITS CONTROVERSY. YOU HOWEVER ARE STARTING TO BE LIKE AN ANNOYING GNAT THAT NEEDS TO BE SQUISHED.
Re: Doubtful timing
Preston is a known shit-disturber who walks the fine line. Advice from management, so you don't get caught up in a purge: keep your cool and avoid all-caps postings.
Re: Doubtful timing
While it is true that alot of young sprinters don't always progress into their later adult years it however is also true that once people reach into the upper echelon(time wise) or running it is very rare that is is a one off. For the women 100 meters i would say sub 10.80 is rare air. The majority of the women in that category have proven that it was not a fluke run( Flo Jo, Marion Jones, SAFP,VCB, Kerron Stewart, Carmelita Jeter). Likewise think of the men sub 9.80 sprinters(Usain Bolt, Asafa Powell, Tyson Gay, Yohan Blake). The 100 is one of those races that it is hard to get lucky with. If you reach the upper stratosphere of that event you are either genetically special or really know what the hell you are doing. Barring severe injury and the decline of good health I am a firm believer you should be able to do it again with the examples I gave above to back up what I say.
Re: Doubtful timing
Lalova's had a MASSIVE flyer the photos that show she had done 2 steps with other people still in the blocks used to be online but i can't find them now It was blatant and i would estimate add at least .2 to her time
45 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], iain and 19 guests |
|