Smoke wrote:Now that we are seeing these unworldly times in the 100, i.e. 9.9s from the regular sprinters. Are we entirely sure that qf round of the 100 was actually flawed??? Thoughts? I have always thought 9.9 from MLF that year was completely believable.
As I recall, the unbelievable part was the wind reading (-3 or so, wasn't it?). There was, in principle, nothing wrong with the "times" (at least numerically).