How Fast could Past Sprinters Run Today?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 бер 2023
- In this video we take a look back at 9 world record holders from the 20th century and estimate how fast they might be able to run in 2023 by taking advantage of technological advancements in the sport
- Спорт
Greene was on course to run 9.72-9.74 in Edmonton if we use his normal splits from his Seville and Athens runs. He was 0.08 ahead of his then World Record at the 70m and 80m marks. Dude took his body to another level of speed and it snapped.. 9.82 hobbling the last 15 was damn fast..
9.72 back then would have been Bolt-like back then. Would have made him faster than even most of the elite guys today despite their tech advantages
@@malligrub which is why I believed him when he said he would win in this era..
Greene is the 2nd fastest man in history I'm sure
@@malligrub. 5:06
1. The main thing to consider is how the athletes did against their competition at the time. 2. Bob Hayes stopped running at age 21. Most runners progress a lot after that age. Check out the times for some of the athletes like Bolt and others to see how much faster they ran at age 27 or so
Thank you for this video!!!
For your average elite athlete maybe yes, but the fastest men ever they peaked very early, usually before 24 or so. Bolt set all his WRs aged 21 and 22, same age as Hayes was when he quit. Similar with peak Blake, he also set his best between ages 21-22 in 2011 and 2012. We'll never know with Gatlin cause of the roids, Tyson Gay stayed in college to complete his double major so his trajectory was much slower over many years til he peaked at about 26 or 27. Asafa peaked between 23-26 and never progressed thereafter. The average age of the fastest guys ever was around 23.5 when studied, closer to 27 for 200m and around 30 for 400m.
Bob Hayes runs 9.6-9.7 in todays era with the nutrition, supplements, modern training, tracks etc.
100%. Fastest NFL player ever.
he ran 8:58 on the anchor leg of the 4x100 finals, cinder, flat spikes, rolling shoulders & fists.
Bob Hayes def runs 9.6 today
Bob Hayes and Armin Hary were given 10.0timea but the actual automatic times were 10.06 Hayes and 10.25 for Hary.
Exactly!
Good to see a mention of Armin Hary
He's often overlooked when discussing the sprinting greats
The video of him is impressive. So smooth & precise; a very efficient & powerful form.
He false started by a mile at 2:14
Hines and Smith ran those times at altitude, as another commentator stated. Bob Hayes’s official time was 10.06 at the Tokyo Olympics. Fully automatic timing was used in Tokyo. For the published times, they subtracted .05 from the automatic timing, which is why he was given a 10.0. He also ran a wind-aided 9.91 (also automatic timing) in the semifinals in ‘64. About his spikes, he ran with borrowed ones, IIRC. Calvin Smith’s best time under altitude is 9.97.
The amount of effort you put in this video. Keep it up 👍
Fully Automatic Timing was NOT introduced until 1968 (Olympics Mexico City)
Johnson is dreaming with his 9.3 lol
The only person who could possibly have ran faster than 9.58 was Bolt himself
fax bro
Think Ben Johnson would have and most likely Jesse Owen. People forget that when he ran the timing was when the last foot crossed the finish line. Probably .3 sec right there. They also handed him the slowest time out of all the stopwatches. The American coaches were handing out dianabol to the athletes back in the 1960's. As for Usain Bolt. You really believe the Jamaicans are clean? Their genetics are that much better? They never were until maybe 2005 or so. They get new coaches and suddenly their genetics are the best in the world. East Germany used to have great genetics too.
Hines and Smith ran those times at high altitude. Their times at sea level were 10.03 for Hines in '68 and 9.97 for Smith in '83, both SL WR's at the time.
perfect video !
I always wondered about Johnson's genetics in today's technology and yes my guess for him would be something around 9.62 to 9.69 if he could run next to a great runner in his personal best like bolt in berlin or tyson in Shanghai !
In Japan,
in 1993 in the ranking of high school boy 100m event, the 100th was 10.91sec,
in 2022 it's 10.66, though the number of 16-18 year population have diminished by half.
And in all Japan ranking, 10.74 in 1993 and 10.41 in 2022.
That is interesting
As much as I love this sport I don't like how spikes and tracks are directly affecting human performances. I used to think this sport was all about testing the limits of human ability. In this case human sprint speed.
Now I know spikes and tracks aren't natural, but older spikes just had studs/spikes that give you better traction and old tracks where just like sprinting on hard dirt or grass with the main benefit being that they didn't require the maintenance dirt/cinder tracks did.
I honestly which tracks and spikes stayed the same from '68. That way it would've been easier to compare athletes. I don't like this talk of "fast track" and "fast spikes" getting so much credit for athlete's greats performances.
Either way this was till an enjoyable video to watch. I've always wondered what previous athletes would've run today. I think Owen's would've run a 9.6 with today's tech and knowledge. Bullet Bob however will always be my favorite from that time so I think he'd also run a 9.6
There's absolutely no doubt that some tracks produce faster speeds than others...even today. That has to taken into account.
I hear you, but every racer benefits from now on. My hope is the spikes and tracks save the legs from injury and long-term breakdown
Great point man. Especially with nikes vaporfly lineup with the shoes eluid kipchoge wore to break records in thr marathon and the now banned sprint spikes giving a crazy boost in performance. I mean whether we like it or not tech has to advance overtime,but it is a lot hader to compare athlethes now
Ive always thought about this.. thank you
This was fascinating! The spinters get most of the glory, in track and field! They are exciting to watch, aren't they? I remember the running greats of 80s and 90s! Those guys; just, WOW!😮
Bob Hayes... because he wasn't a Track person. He was strictly Football and asked to run track.
Bob Hayes because he simply could not be beat. Equipment, technology, nutrition, and training (paid to run). If those metrics were applied to Hayes for 10 years (18 -28) he possibly runs sub 10 in the low 9. Is it possible he runs sub 9? We need AI and a quantum resource to accurately research this. By the way I saw him run (track and football) in the 60's.
Fascinating video
You are ignoring corruption, financial greed, and the drugs. I spoke with another medical professional, a Nike physician. Carl Lewis tested positive for steroids along with Ben Johnson but Carl was better financially speaking for selling commercial time. I was working with a clinic who worked with Charlie Francis, Ben Johnson's coach and associates. The conversations I had with Ben's team were eye opening to me. Regarding magic spikes...a poor craftsman blames his tools. All the best. Good luck on your videos. Keep digging deeper, important things happened before we were born.:)
What were those conversations with Ben's team?
Lewis fastest time came in 1991, not 1988 so what is your point here? He didn't test positive for anything in 1991 when he also jumped 29 feet.
@@ronester1 but why wasn't HD disqualified in 88
@Prince Blacksta IV my recollection was everyone except one runner in the 1988 100m final tested positive for something that subsequently was considered a banned substance after the fact but as of 1988 they weren't banned, and nothing was serious like steroids it was more over the counter or something that can be considered masking agents. Ben Johnson was the only person busted for illegal Steroid use and rightly so.
You are simply wrong about the facts. Ben tested positive for steroids, and Carl tested positive for a stimulant, not a steroid. Those are not the same thing. Stimulants appear in things like cold medicine and fat burners. Any one who claims that the two are the same shows a lack of understanding about basic performance enhancing drugs.
Today's sprinters are taller than in the past I think. Maybe there has been runners like Bolt before too but they didn't have today's tools to be victorious.
And they didn't have Bolt's genetics as well
@@razor_ramon_or the crazy steroids
@@charmsly9506 Bolt is just talented. He even got 3rd best 300m time without training for it
wow... Awesome video man.How do you tell the difference between a powerful sprinter and a top speed sprinter?
Power runners use more effort off the track since the surface doesn't give anything back. Top speed athletes run on top of the surface loosing very little at foot strike.
Nice job of analysis! Why no bump for vastly improved training regimens?
Very nice video young man.
Sadly, those that add negativity to your evaluations have done no research into their point-of-view.
Personally I think Hayes's deductions were not adjusted to their fullest.
But I appreciate your effort.
Great video but it is tough to compare such different ERAs. A big item missing - money. The ability to turn pro in high school or college. Todays elite runners can train all the want. Runners around the 80s or before had to deal with having to run as amateurs. I remember that being a big issue with elite athletes on food stamps , having to work 2 jobs while also training, or quitting to go into professional sports that paid. Todays super fast tracks and spikes are probably the biggest advantages.
Hayes would have run a 9.8 if somehow he had ran in 1968 Mexico City. Today, maybe a 9.6. Head to head with Bolt, Bolt would win. Bolt was around 6 inches taller and unbeatable in his prime.
I appreciate this content creator's detailed and in-depth analysis for this video, and I agree with the revised times he calculated for most of the athletes. However, in the case of Jim Hines (1968, Mexico City), he was too generous. Because Hines ran his time of 9.95 for the 100m AT ALTITUDE, and was never able to replicate it again, I say his time would almost be the same today, if run at sea level. I would give him a time of approximately 9.86, under today's conditions.
Interesting, good to see you didn't fall for the Bob Hayes urban legends. He ran 10.06 FAT on cinders in '64, that relay leg was 9s (not 8.6🤣🤣). Jim Hines ran 10.03 on dirt only 3 years later and could 'only' manage 9.95 at stupid altitude in Mexico City which is all just altitude assistance, not the track. Nobody else broke 10s on synthetic at sea level for 15 years suggesting no significant advantage at all from cinders to tartan. I suggest the track improvement from tartans to modern mondo etc is more significant,, perhaps 0.1s or so (1 metre to a fast guy) over 100m. All the fastest guys ever were pretty much the same if they had the same tech, tracks, training and nutrition but 1 guy was a 6'6" freak of nature that somehow still had the nervous system, biomechanical coordination and turnover of someone 5'10" feet tall, which explains why he was so different.
This still proves how exceptional Bolt was
@@srod2966 druggeeeee.....
Not only did Bob Hayes run on cinder tracks and wear inferior spikes, but he also retired from sprinting at the age of 21. Had he committed to a career in sprinting and run on modern tracks he would have been dominating the sport even today.
I think that the testing is much stricter today. So I think athletes of late 80s and 90s would have struggled to even hit the time they managed back then.
Very interesting, but I don’t think Ben Johnson should be on the list as already mentioned, thank you for the video.
Maurice G.
The first to break 9.80s
Johnson only ran 9.79 on a cocktail of sterroids though. Without them or with nnly a tiny sniff compared to the 80's, he was nothing special at all.
He ran with much more discipline than his competitors. Drugs didn't give him this. Training did.
I did the calculations for Florence Griffen Joyner she would have run 10.37 on a modern track with modern spikes
Her name was Griffith-Joyner - it's a shame your in-depth analysis didn't include knowing her name.
And obviously she was a cheat....
@@itsinthetreesitscoming7431 how obvious was it really, she holds the world record and never tested positive
@@ronester1 Gee - let me think.
She was a decent athlete all her career but never close to the best, then at the age of 29 she rocks up at the US Olympic trials looking like a different person and knocks a quarter of a second off the 100 metres world record. Her trainer was Bob Kersee, whose been accused of running a systematic doping programme by many of his former athletes. Then she died of a brain seizure at 37.
Yeah, I'm sure there's a perfectly honest explanation.....
@itsinthetreesitscoming7431 I think everyones physique would be different and would see improvement in their personal best if they do Olympic lifts for two years and finally dedicate themselves to Athletics only instead of holding down a full-time job and trying to compete against world class athletes with varying levels of success, she wasn't slow by any means, 22.00 ans 10.9 going into 1987. Look up the massive improvement Shericka made over the last two years and tell me if that looks suspicious 👀 🤔
@itsinthetreesitscoming7431 BTW, you are not clear on the facts regarding Flojos career, she was more than a "decent athlete but never close to the best" in the 1980s the 100m WR was 10.76s and the 200m WR was 21.71s. She ranked top 11 all time and top 10 all time with her 10.99s and 22.04s, that was from a woman that was working a full time job, and she did win silver at the 1984 Olympics which is very close to the best 😃 ☺️
do for the 200m and 100m women
I’m hoping for the same thing, I’d really like to know what my favorite female sprinter would run today. Evelyn Ashford former 100m WR Holder and former 200m American RH.
The drug testing has improved. No testing prior to 1960 and not much until 1972. Also, Jamaica didn't have much testing for awhile. See 2013 BBC article for details.
the fact that you are still using the 9.79 clip from ben johnson thinking it’s legal is ridiculous
Johnson was juiced! Juice up Bolt and he goes 8.95.
jesse owens ran a 10.0 today we are not that far from it 9.58
8:15 wtf happened? methanol fire on the shoes? wtf?
fast
I don't think it's fair to include form improvements in this, especially when the athletes were already not using the best form according to the knowledge of the era. It means they either couldn't use it or chose not to, in both cases it implies they wouldn't use the current best form either.
so Ben was on PEDs.. what if all of them were on PEDs.. lol
wonder what jesse owens could have gotten
10.2 on a dirt track with no blocks, no modernities and smoking a pack a day?
9.6 easy
@@ThunderJuice no chance but maybe late 9.7’s
@@itsnotme6316 nah he most definitely would've been running 9.69
You seem to forget his 10.2 was hand timed, that's 10.44 at quickest FAT, probably not quite under 10 I'd say
@@ThunderJuice 10.2 hand time nothing close to 9.6
Rumors out there that Maurice Green was like Juice-tin Gatlin.
Should Ben Johnson be included in this analysis due to his steroid use 🤔?
Jim Hines and Calvin Smith wouldn't see that much improvement because both of their fastest times were with the assistence of high altitude. I think it would be better to take their second best times into consideration than their fastests. Also, the 1996 Olympics and the 2004 Olympics were both ran on modern mondotracks, both of which were about 0.1 seconds faster than the Tartan tracks ran in 1992 and 2000 respectively.
Nobody believes in chakras, little do they know.. The soul the drive, the mind coherency and arbitrary coordinate areas and the body a conduit vessel of energy that the soul resides within. To cultivate the body, is to serve the creator in his creation. The most modest, patient and virtuous in the journey will be rewarded, even if the reward may be empty of riches or not, may end up filled with deep learnings that can be taken forever beyond. End to the means may be comforting, but it is that displeasure that makes you learn and grow within what are to be considered the normal healthy bounds that may be found at present in one's life. This is the intended purpose of physical cultivation, healthy expansion of range of motion in the profound self and acknowledgement of its very flawed nature to overcome it. Flexibility and range of actuation is superior to raw power and strength. Strength may be acquired with virtuous patience, letting the unpleasant sensations be. It is up to you to decide whether you wait before a training session or you proceed, being eager will be your downfall. If the body has closed off areas and add to that atificial dependencies on various vices of the modern human world then you have the conditions for a sickly life. Take the time to do what feels unpleasant, neurotypical or divergeant, you must feel the sensations as they are. Not dodging nor attacking, but preparing wisely for a succesful well balanced outcome free of mental imprisonement. Think what does this path, what does this action require and do in the end. You are your own driver. Drive wisely, cultivate for well being of self and others, and consideration of energy ripples through-out our lives, the places we go, the things we say, the things we do. Look. Listen. Stay quiet as the loud ones have their fill, take notes, and read between the lines. They are all simply expressions of chaos, chaos like all things is allowed to exist whether moral or not. Allowed as it may be, you are allowed to ghost the low vibrational humans and focus inward moving outward once basic health requirements of the primordial variety are truly satisfied and are moving in a direction of decent health. Broad strokes will, like in the nervous system will only make you fail quicker. Patiently walking, feeling every foot step as is and perhaps aiming for a 3d imaginary zone in which you wish to move a limb or you feet or toes and proceed to learn how to walk simply with coordination over gross careless movements that only worsen the sickness of posture.
Liure
Bob Hayes beats Ben Johnson
Interesting clip, but to much speculation and to little science for me. Kindly!
@Faustin Dutoy Bouley in that case aren't we just conjecturing? Sems pointless to me
I think carl lewis would run under 9.70
He would probably have the fastest anchor leg of all time
@@crabb9966 Unless Ben Johnson or Bolt is in the race.
@@richardgallimore5976 Powell got the fastest anchor leg
No Jesse Owens🤔
It has been shown by Wada that HGH makes athletes 4% faster. It's difficult to test for. With HGH a 10 second 100 meters becomes 9.6 seconds.
Very intersting but Maurice Greene best run was in 2001. His run before injuri in 70m was for 9.72 in headwind! Give now to Greene modern track Nike Maxyfly +2.0 wind and perfect reaction and his time will close to 9.50! This run is one of the best moment in athletics ever! Make analys to thise run!
Maurice Greene's personal best is 9.79, he's never ran 9.72.
@@richardgallimore5976 he’s talking about Maurice’s 9.82 which potentially could have been 9.72 had he not been injured during the race
@@JotaroKUJO-qh9qx Hmm, he's still making up ludacris numbers. A tailwind doesn't bring someone from 9.72 to 9.50 even assuming he was capable of 9.72 uninjured. It wouldn't even be under 9.60.
@@richardgallimore5976
Ludacris? Or ludicrous
Johnson ?? Come on, man. Drugs.
So was Carl Lewis and 4 of the top 5 sprinters in history (Usain Bolt being the exception).
1. There's NO evidence that artificial tracks are faster than natural tracks (clay/cinders, etc.)!
A. Lennart Julin, a track and field insider (including in the IAAF, now Workd Athletics), and my TV commentator colleague at Eurosport Nordic in Stockholm:
In the 1960s and 1970s sprinters were running on natural and artificial tracks, but there was no definite difference in the times.
2. The style some previous sprinters used while accelerating - especially getting upright after some 10 meters was and IS the best!
Here we go: In the fastest sprint race ever - the world record over 150 m on a cold day and a wet track - the record breaker Usain Bolt was upright after around 10 m!
3. Bob Hayes clocked a hand-held 9.9 seconds - the official stopwarches showed 9.8, 9.9, and 9.9 s - when becoming Olympic champion in 1964 with the official (and automatic) time of "10.0" s - the time was 10.06 s; but Armin Hary's manual 10.0 s WR was "only" 10.25 s auto!
There may have been a marginal difference between artificial and natural tracks in the 1960s and 1970s, but that was because artificial tracks were in their infancy of technology and engineering. Even then, when looking at olympic times during that era, Bob Hayes was an exceptional athlete who inflated the 1964 average times. He won the final by 0.2 seconds despite being in the worst lane that was worn out after the walk racing event. For comparison, when Ben Johnson and Usain Bolt set their world records, they only won their races by 0.13 seconds respectively. Also, the 1976 Olympic final was clearly much faster than the 1960, 1964, and 1972 olympic finals (about 0.1 seconds faster than all of them). By the 1980s, there was a much clearer difference in speed between the track surfaces used during that decade than either cinder tracks or the early synthetic tracks. Also, the mondo tracks of the 1996 Olympics and 2004 Olympics had an average of 0.1 seconds faster than the 1992 and 2000 Tartan tracks. In addition, sports journalist David Epstein quoted biomechanic experts that modern synthetic tracks are 1.5% (about 0.15 seconds) faster than cinder tracks. ua-cam.com/video/8COaMKbNrX0/v-deo.html
"The style some previous sprinters used while accelerating - especially getting upright after some 10 meters was and IS the best! "
This is just absolute and total bollocks.
You don't know the subject - and therefore obviously haven't heard of a Carl Lewis, a Linford Christie, a Usain Bolt (in his comparatively fastest sprint ever = the 150m WR), a Ben Johnson, a Leroy Burrell, a Andre Cason, a "Flojo"; plus so many others of the best and fastest sprinters ever - Mr. Ignoramus!
@@itsinthetreesitscoming7431
Who cares ? We'll never know...
what if . . .
Usain Bolt post retirement had taken PEDs and trained hard af . . . .>9.45 / 100m?
I mean non-competition times just for kicks. Because . . .why not?
You should not have included Ben Johnson as all his times are steriod based. Before he got on the drugs he was barely a top 100 runner.
Everybody on top juices
Should we include Gatlin and Montgomery, Who had drug induced records?
@@lerebele1 yes
Johnson should be totally excluded from the sport’s history since after he got caught cheating he wasn’t even above average for his events. Anabolic steroids was what made him competitive.
You do know that American coaches were legally giving out dianabol to runners in the 1960s right? Why do you think Hayes was so fast? They literally created the drug to help dominate the Olympics. Worked too.
Using your pseudo science, Usain Bolt would have run about 9.3 with improvements on technique and starts.
It’s hard to estimate the time Ben lost with the raised arm but his coach Charlie Francis a legendary sprint coach said it should have been 7.72-9.75. So with this further adjustment he’s possibly right at 9.6s.
I don't think he can run a 7.72
@jakerussell135
Obviously meant 9.72s