Big Turk Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 says Track and Field reporter Larry Rawson.... He claims that electronically timed, Bolt would still run a 3.97 second 40... Wonder how much Al Davis would pay for that?!?!? Bolt 40 time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 That's insane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 That's U-sane! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazed and Amuzed Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I love this line in particular "We can't say exactly what's in the heart of Raiders owner Al Davis – probably methane, metal gears, bats – but it seems safe to assume that he would be willing to spend something like $194 billion over five years for a guy with 3.73 speed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 says Track and Field reporter Larry Rawson.... He claims that electronically timed, Bolt would still run a 3.97 second 40... Wonder how much Al Davis would pay for that?!?!? Bolt 40 time... I doubt it. The guy is amazingly quick off the start for a big guy...but guys 6'4' start pulling away at about the 50.And if you look at Bolts races he blows them out starting at the 50.That being said I'd say 4.05 or 4.1---and thats absolutely insane for a 6 4 guy.-Thats absolutely insane for a 6' sprinter. I would love to have seen him run against Bob Hayes---who had been unofficially timed in the 8s for the 100 yd dash..and whose split in the 4x 100 is the fastest in history.in other words he was running at the highest speed a human had ever run(in modern times-u never know about the waaypast). Having treated a few olympians in my day...and having talked to them extensively...NONE of the track and field medalists are clean now(since the late 80s).And that includes all the household names. I'm not sure what they were doing in Bob Hayes' day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I doubt it. The guy is amazingly quick off the start for a big guy...but guys 6'4' start pulling away at about the 50.And if you look at Bolts races he blows them out starting at the 50.That being said I'd say 4.05 or 4.1---and thats absolutely insane for a 6 4 guy.-Thats absolutely insane for a 6' sprinter.I would love to have seen him run against Bob Hayes---who had been unofficially timed in the 8s for the 100 yd dash..and whose split in the 4x 100 is the fastest in history.in other words he was running at the highest speed a human had ever run(in modern times-u never know about the waaypast). Having treated a few olympians in my day...and having talked to them extensively...NONE of the track and field medalists are clean now(since the late 80s).And that includes all the household names. I'm not sure what they were doing in Bob Hayes' day. cocaine... It's way more impressive to win medals and records when you're high on street drugs than it is to win stuff when you're high on performance enhancing drugs. Way way more impressive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 That is not true at all. Anyone who knows anything about track and field understands that is completely false. You can't just take a guy's time and divide. It doesn't work that way. That's assuming a person runs the exact same split time the entire race, which isn't true nor is it possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach55 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 The math is totally wrong. Per the link, thru 40 meters he was at 4.64 seconds. Assuming he was running the whole time at the same speed (which isn't the case as the last 3 yds would be the fastest), he would have ran a 4.24 40. Taking into consideration his reaction time of .146, he would have ran ~4.1 in an NFL style 40. Their calculations are massively off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metzelaars_lives Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Go get 'em, Russ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Insane indeed. However he does not have a football body he would be killed on a football field, and the last I knew being a WR you have to be able to catch a football as well. Not sure he can do that. Plus could he survive a cold weather game? I dont think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Insane indeed. However he does not have a football body he would be killed on a football field, and the last I knew being a WR you have to be able to catch a football as well. Not sure he can do that. Plus could he survive a cold weather game? I dont think so. True there is more to football than flat out speed but it is interesting to speculate what that pure burst could do in a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I don't believe it for a second, not even for 3.73 seconds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 True there is more to football than flat out speed but it is interesting to speculate what that pure burst could do in a game. Absolutely nothing, seeing how your average CB could put bolt on his ass with a simple hand check at the LOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bflojohn Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 The actual time I heard was 3.82 in the hand timed 40 the NFL uses at the combine. I Tivo'd the ESPN segment to make absolutely sure I caught the correct time. If I understood the whole analyses, it accounted for a sprinter's stance and take-off, so essentially he did say that the conditions would be highly similar. Just trying to clarify what I percieved from the spot ESPN ran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 They broke down the film of Ben Johnson breaking the world record in the Olympics, on a track, with spikes, against the greatest runners in the world, with Ben on performance enhancing steroids, and Johnson covered the first 40 yards in 4.38. There is no official world record for 40 yards. The shortest distance that the IAAF, track and field's international governing body, recognizes for world-record purposes is an indoor 50 meters, or about 54 yards. It is 5.56 seconds and it was set by Canadian sprinter Donovan Bailey in 1996. There is also a world record for 60 meters – 6.39 seconds by American Maurice Greene in 1998. But it is another Canadian, Ben Johnson, who is believed to have run 40 yards faster than any human in history. Johnson is best known for injecting copious amounts of steroids and winning the 100 meters at the 1988 Olympics in Seoul in 9.79 seconds, only to have his gold medal and world record stripped after failing a post-race drug test. Timing officials have since broken down that famed race into 10-meter increments, and Johnson was so preposterously fast that he went through 50 meters in 5.52 seconds and 60 meters in 6.37 – both under the current world records at those distances. He went through 40 yards that day in 4.38 seconds. http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20..._1s18forty.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 cocaine... It's way more impressive to win medals and records when you're high on street drugs than it is to win stuff when you're high on performance enhancing drugs. Way way more impressive! so true...just think what they coulda done without the cocaine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts