Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    16,046
    Quote Originally Posted by gh View Post
    i can't imagine any "conversion factor" being worth a plugged nickel; at least in any event run at least partially in lanes, because the amount of downhill increases as you move out.
    I can't imagine banked tracks offering as much advantage as stated (1.24%) in distance races where runners run on the curb all the way. In a 200 run in lane 6, the advantage is probably greater than stated.
    Było smaszno, a jaszmije smukwijne...
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,423
    I think that is widely agreed that banked tracks are better for the fast races and the (big) OTs for the longer distances. However, the factors get smaller with distance and are smaller for women (because of slow speed). Note that I interpolated the 600m factor. The same factors are used for all athletes in the category and hence are somewhat flawed when applied to the multi-event athletes where the speeds are slower (the Men's Hept is the reason that the 1000 appears for men and not women) who do not have a 1000 at the NCAA championships).

    Distance Men Women
    200 1.0179 1.0155
    400 1.0160 1.0133
    800 1.0143 1.0115
    1000 1.0138 none
    mile 1.0128 1.0099
    3000 1.0116 1.0086
    5000 1.0107 1.0077
    4x400 1.0160 1.0133
    DMR 1.0136 1.0107
    Last edited by 26mi235; 01-23-2017 at 05:36 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    11,897
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235 View Post

    Distance Men Women
    200 1.0179 1.0155
    400 1.0160 1.0133
    800 1.0143 1.0115
    1000 1.0138 none
    mile 1.0128 1.0099
    3000 1.0116 1.0086
    5000 1.0107 1.0077
    4x400 1.0160 1.0133
    DMR 1.0136 1.0107
    ya gotta love the 'accuracy' to the ten-thousandths!
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Fishers, IN
    Posts
    7,540
    Super-accurate equivalent times built on a sand foundation
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indian Territory
    Posts
    13,780
    Just as in the field events, we can measure approximates with great precision.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,423
    You people are confused by the presentation; these are two-three digits, not five digits. The 1.0086 is actually 0.86%. Why would you think that when they have some sort of structure that it is better to round that to 1% so that all the adjustments are either one or two percent, and rounding to what you think is 'four digit' "accuracy" of 0.9% just throws away a little bit of 'accuracy'. It is actually a bit related to why there are different conversion tables for the vertical and horizontal field events going between metric and Imperial in the Gold Book.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui
    Posts
    6,592
    Quote Originally Posted by dukehjsteve View Post
    Super-accurate equivalent times built on a sand foundation
    I think there is more stability in the sand than in the table
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Tuariki View Post
    I think there is more stability in the sand than in the table
    TOTALLY off-topic, but I still recall how amazed I was to see my 1st (color) photo of NZ's black sand beaches!!
    Beautiful!!
    (Black is my favorite "color"!)

    "I see a red world, and I want it painted black!"
    Rolling Stones

    LOL
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    11,897
    Quote Originally Posted by aaronk View Post
    "I see a red world, and I want it painted black!"
    Rolling Stones
    LOL
    I'll just assume you realize that it was a red DOOR in the song, and the song was about DEATH.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    Touche!
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •