Denard thinks he could beat Bolt

[bleedingTNorange]

Hndog,

How about this...

Instead of finding wrinkles in what everyone else brings up to support your theory...

Provide your own, stone cold math and equation that shows bolt can run a 4 flat or less forty.

I'll wait...

 

[LSU-SIU]

Hndog,

How about this...

Instead of finding wrinkles in what everyone else brings up to support your theory...

Provide your own, stone cold math and equation that shows bolt can run a 4 flat or less forty.

I'll wait...

If he is right on that based on times then Holliday is just as fast as Bolt from 40 yards and out which is complete nonsense.

What is funny is your numbers were almost exact as the article study numbers.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

Here's the only hard evidence I really can find...

This is demps and holidays 100m on a track and their FOOTBALL 40 times

Demps 10.01 100m 4.29 40yard
Holiday 10.00 100m 4.34 40yard

This is Bolts WR 100M time

Bolt 9.58 100m

This is how much holiday and demps are off Bolts pace

Demps -.43
Holiday -.42

If you convert 100 meters to yards, then find the average of what Bolt would be up at 40 yards, this is what you get.

Demps -.157
Holiday -.153

Now, if you subtract those times from their 40, these are the times you could theoretically get for Bolt.

Bolt 4.13
Bolt 4.19

However, holiday & demps BOTH are much better in their first 50m than they are in their last 50m. So the margin would actually be a bit smaller at 40 yards, than than taken the average suggests, thus increasing bolts time up into the 4.2+ range once again.

Everything I find and work out, he's 4.2+, that's why I say, if you can present me with an equation that says less than that ill gladly listen.

 

[GatorBill]

dude is fast.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

dude is fast.

No doubt, but not sub 4 forty fast.

 

[hndog609]

Exactly it's all speculation. The only way for us to know is for them to race. I see nothing great about Bolt's 40 yard time, just my take. The rest of it is speculation.

God in Heaven. OK, this is where you simply crap yourself. WHAT is "speculation"? There's damn little speculation of what has been done on the track. If, IF, one limits oneself to trying to extrapolate exactly what that would mean running on grass sans blocks then it would be speculation. Let the record show that you have been much, MUCH more comfortable in engaging in that particular facet of this discussion than I. Please, please tell me you can see the difference.

I have no problems with Johnson saying he could beat him, at least he is willing to do it. Bolt will never race and for good reason.

It's hard to take a guy seriously that was claiming bolt was running a sub 4.0s 40. The other guy tried to tell you how stupid it was, other people tried to tell you, you are not going to listen.

Interesting. I don't ever recall claiming anyone to run a sub-4.00. I will make this claim right now and with no ambiguity; as of 8/23/12 I have never found any source that has taken Usain Bolt's 9.58 40m, converted it to yards, accounted for the RT of the runner and the FAT time vs how football players are timed and come up with anything slower than a 4.1. And actually that's fudging since most are well under 4.1. Why is that?

He looks like a 4.3-4.4 guy to me based on the guess work, but we will never know unless he lines up and based on other studies I see nothing strange about guys that run sub 4.35s at the combine claiming they could beat him at the 40, matter fact I would think it's very likely some would. End of story.

I can actually accept the finish here. You openly admit that your 4.3-4.4 estimation is a best guess. The rest of it is obviously speculation but you don't step outside the rational. When you manage to do this I've never given you grief.

I would like to comment on the part I underlined though. People don't need to "race" to get what we need. I say Bolt is faster than Carl Lewis ever was. They never raced. Do you agree with my assessment? Hell, get anybody that wants to give it a go (CJ, Holliday, Ford, Demps) and have them run a FAT timed 40m. Compare that to what we KNOW Bolt (or Gay, Blake, Greene, whoever) has done at that distance and there you have it, apples to apples.

 

[LSU-SIU]

apples to apples.

It's never apples to apples, that is why they race. Why do you think they have races? Just time everyone and use the time.

You are using times for an event then trying to transpose them, that is speculation. Nobody is saying any of these guys have a chance at 100m, they certainly do at 40 yards.

I think if Bolt showed up at the combine, you would be very surprised. Now you are using 40 meters instead of 40 yards... they are saying they can beat him at 40 yard dash. Whether that is on grass or a track I don't know... it's a setup.

Like I saw on another board on this subject, I think there are two people that have ran a sub 4.1s 40.... the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus.

Another thing that is not put in here, is you are using Bolts fastest times, you throw out all the other times he has not ran as fast. You use 40 times for guys that basically have 3 shots in one day to run a forty.

 

[hndog609]

Hndog,

How about this...

Instead of finding wrinkles in what everyone else brings up to support your theory...

Provide your own, stone cold math and equation that shows bolt can run a 4 flat or less forty.

I'll wait...

What, exactly, happened to you since posts 126/127?

Why would I want to do anything that would open me up to accusations of bias? What could possibly be more "honest" than accepting what the other person submits and incorporating it into one's own stance?

Do you think you screwed up your math? I don't. People will sometimes come up with something that moves things one way or another a few hundreths but hell, that's meaningless in the overall conversation. Frankly if I DID do my own math it'd probably look damn similar to yours. (take the 30-40 split, figure the time over yards, etc)

 

[hndog609]

It's never apples to apples, that is why they race. Why do you think they have races? Just time everyone and use the time.

Please answer if you agree or disagree with my assertion that Usain Bolt is faster than Carl Lewis ever was. If so, why?

You are using times for an event then trying to transpose them, that is speculation. Nobody is saying any of these guys have a chance at 100m, they certainly do at 40 yards.

You're almost right here but still miss the mark. What these guys (ANY guys actually) run on a track and are officially timed at is NOT speculation. The math required to get this into a 40yd format within a few hundredths isn't that big a deal. Your obsessive contention that doing so is tantamount to voodoo is bewildering.

I think if Bolt showed up at the combine, you would be very surprised. Now you are using 40 meters instead of 40 yards... they are saying they can beat him at 40 yard dash. Whether that is on grass or a track I don't know... it's a setup.

If you take the time to carefully look over MY contributions to this thread I've been playing that a lot closer to the vest than you present me as doing. Are you painting with too broad a brush and assertions made by others?
.

.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Please answer if you agree or disagree with my assertion that Usain Bolt is faster than Carl Lewis ever was. If so, why?

I would be speculating. It is reasonable speculation on my part based on times that it appears Bolt might have been faster at different times and events.

You're almost right here but still miss the mark. What these guys (ANY guys actually) run on a track and are officially timed at is NOT speculation.

It is speculation because track conditions are not the same at each event, further you are basically using 100s of times for Bolt and Johnson has almost no history of timed events. Further you are speculating as to non-equally condition plus the use of blocks and whether a track is being used or even cleats.

The math required to get this into a 40yd format within a few hundredths isn't that big a deal. Your obsessive contention that doing so is tantamount to voodoo is bewildering.

Yet your claim amounts to Holliday being able to run basically even with Bolt from 40 yard to 100m. I would say your have something lose.

If you take the time to carefully look over MY contributions to this thread I've been playing that a lot closer to the vest than you present me as doing. Are you painting with too broad a brush and assertions made by others?

All you have offered to date is speculation, some of it I have no problem with you speculating on but some of it is not reasonable.

What you fail to understand is the statements made by Johnson and Denard are a setup, just like the arcade basketball hoop. Go get Steve Nash, that guy is going to beat him. The 100m is not the same as running 40 yard dash.

Go get Bolt, put him on the line next to Ford, Bey, Johnson, Holliday and Demps... then you might be right... my bet is a couple of them beat him. Put them on grass or cleats, good luck to him with no block. That is the easiest way of solving this, you will never see it because the guy is not that stupid. He'll make a lot more money lettting some stupid guys think he runs a sub-4s 40.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. You keep on thinking Holliday could stay even with Bolt from 40 yards to 100m and the rest of us will believe something else. I assure you Bolt will never ever show up for such an event unless his career is over anyway, as it's better to keep the myth alive.

 

[Thunndarr]

There is no race that determines a top speed, the 100m race could exclude many guys that have a higher top speed. Top speed does not get you necessarily to the finish line first.

The fastest man alive is just a statement, it's all relative.

Breaking Down Usain Bolt In 100m - Track & Field News | NBC Olympics

According to bio-mechanical analysis of his 9.58-second world record, Bolt’s top speed was 27.45 miles per hour. Prior to that, the highest recorded speed by a sprinter was the 27.07 mph Donovan Bailey registered on a radar gun during his 9.84 world record.

Not wrong at all, it's your OPINION. You are speculating.

See above.

This all started by you saying the fastest 100m is also the fastest 40 yard dash guy, that is an opinion that I do not necessarily share.

No, what I believe I said was that I don't think anyone in the NFL could beat him in the 40.

Usain Bolt 100m 10 meter Splits and Speed Endurance

Interestingly, despite the fact that you claim I am speculating, the above page shows Bolt's top speed over 10 meter increments is 10 meters/0.82 seconds, faster than any other world record holder going back to 1988. And since these have all been faster than the men preceding them, it's pretty logical to assume that yes, he is the fastest man who's ever lived in terms of actual speed.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

What, exactly, happened to you since posts 126/127?

Why would I want to do anything that would open me up to accusations of bias? What could possibly be more "honest" than accepting what the other person submits and incorporating it into one's own stance?

Do you think you screwed up your math? I don't. People will sometimes come up with something that moves things one way or another a few hundreths but hell, that's meaningless in the overall conversation. Frankly if I DID do my own math it'd probably look damn similar to yours. (take the 30-40 split, figure the time over yards, etc)

Ok, so yea he's around a 4 second forty on his WR run, on a track, with his wind at his back.

I've redone math, took his average speed between 20-40 meters, converted to years and subtracted it from the extra distance of 40 meters compared to 40 yards.

After subtracting his rt, and the ft, I get 4.10.
That's what he ran, on track, off of blocks, with the wind behind him, a 4.10 forty.

So, I think it's pretty conclusive he's not running a 4.1 or less on a football forty.

 

[hndog609]

Ok, so yea he's around a 4 second forty on his WR run, on a track, with his wind at his back.

I've redone math, took his average speed between 20-40 meters, converted to years and subtracted it from the extra distance of 40 meters compared to 40 yards.

After subtracting his rt, and the ft, I get 4.10.
That's what he ran, on track, off of blocks, with the wind behind him, a 4.10 forty.

So, I think it's pretty conclusive he's not running a 4.1 or less on a football forty.

It's a small matter but let's not get too carried away with wind. The wind was less than half of legal.

As to the boldened I realize that is something you may have posted for the benefit of others. I don't ever recall contending otherwise.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

It's a small matter but let's not get too carried away with wind. The wind was less than half of legal.

As to the boldened I realize that is something you may have posted for the benefit of others. I don't ever recall contending otherwise.

If he's 4.1, with wind, off blocks, on a track, what do you think he is on grass/turf with no blocks? Definitely going up, not staying the same or going down.

And it was for everyone, so everyone can see, even on his WR run, he wasn't running even a sub 4.1 forty. So a football 40, he sure as heck isn't running that.

Like I've said the entire time, he's a 4.25-4.35 guy at best, which means its very likely there's multiple guys in the NFL who could beat him and many more who would be right with him.

 

[hndog609]

If he's 4.1, with wind, off blocks, on a track, what do you think he is on grass/turf with no blocks? Definitely going up, not staying the same or going down.

No question whatsoever in my mind. (And you're still pushing the wind thing at bit )

And it was for everyone, so everyone can see, even on his WR run, he wasn't running even a sub 4.1 forty. So a football 40, he sure as heck isn't running that.

You're 4.1 is on the slower side of most computations but I really don't care too much. (see my observation in post #181 how 4.1 is the slowest I've seen anyone go.)

Like I've said the entire time, he's a 4.25-4.35 guy at best, which means its very likely there's multiple guys in the NFL who could beat him and many more who would be right with him.

Speculation on the last part but that makes you no different than anyone else. The real wild card in that is the 40 times attributed to the football players in the first place. The deeper you get into that (the link about FAT timing at the combine should cast a loooong shadow) the more you wonder.

 

[Thunndarr]

Going back to that FAT timing calculation (which, btw, casts doubt on every 40 ever run at the NFL combine) Chris Johnson would have run a 4.44 40 if we are using the same rigorous standards we are holding Bolt to. Granted, no starting blocks. Still.

 

[hndog609]

I would be speculating. It is reasonable speculation on my part based on times that it appears Bolt might have been faster at different times and events.

I'm going to give you a reprieve on this one since my question unintentionally had a hint of ambiguity. My carefully worded rephrasing: I contend that, though Usain Bolt and Carl Lewis have never raced that Bolt is demonstrably faster at both the 100m and 200m. Agree or disagree? If not, why?

It is speculation because track conditions are not the same at each event, further you are basically using 100s of times for Bolt and Johnson has almost no history of timed events. Further you are speculating as to non-equally condition plus the use of blocks and whether a track is being used or even cleats.

Even though this sounds like babbling you had replied before I noticed I had a fairly incomplete comment. That my fault, not yours. Either way throw this part out.


All you have offered to date is speculation, some of it I have no problem with you speculating on but some of it is not reasonable.

I am now totally convinced you have no working understanding of what "speculation" means. For instance: Stating what we know with a very high degree of accuracy what Bolt can do on a track is not speculation. Anyone claiming they know what Bolt would do under combine conditions with a high degree of accuracy would be speculating.

What you fail to understand is the statements made by Johnson and Denard are a setup, just like the arcade basketball hoop. Go get Steve Nash, that guy is going to beat him. The 100m is not the same as running 40 yard dash.

Are you seriously trying to convince me that I'm somehow not aware of this?

Go get Bolt, put him on the line next to Ford, Bey, Johnson, Holliday and Demps... then you might be right... my bet is a couple of them beat him. Put them on grass or cleats, good luck to him with no block. That is the easiest way of solving this, you will never see it because the guy is not that stupid. He'll make a lot more money lettting some stupid guys think he runs a sub-4s 40.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. You keep on thinking Holliday could stay even with Bolt from 40 yards to 100m and the rest of us will believe something else. (What the hell are you talking about here?) I assure you Bolt will never ever show up for such an event unless his career is over anyway, as it's better to keep the myth alive.

There's a much easier answer. Bolt's best 40m is a matter of record. It is what it is. It's just sitting there. Have that list of guys go run wind-legal 40m and compare. (Actually I'd like to see a full 100m, just because, but the 40m split is what everybody really wants to see) That's it. Anybody that wants to see how they stack up against that rock-hard-established-benchmark can do so. If somebody beats it (or even gives it a really good run) this whole "myth" business you're espousing goes out the window, does it not?

 

[bleedingTNorange]

In the 40 yard dash. This kid is nuts. Bolt would run a sub 4 forty. He did admit he couldn't hang in the 100 meters.

Here's the OP.

That's all I ever was trying to prove, that this thought of a sub 4 forty is ludicrous, and I have.

 

[hndog609]

Here's the OP.

That's all I ever was trying to prove, that this thought of a sub 4 forty is ludicrous, and I have.

On turf with no blocks? I have a hard time even seeing sub-4.1. Of course, with the timing descrepancies alluded to in my previous post it's still messy. I'm serious. Look up Alexander Wright's 40 time if you doubt me.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

On turf with no blocks? I have a hard time even seeing sub-4.1. Of course, with the timing descrepancies alluded to in my previous post it's still messy. I'm serious. Look up Alexander Wright's 40 time if you doubt me.

I have a hard time seeing sub 4.2.

So the timing goes both way in its discrepancies? Some guys are under clocked and others are over clocked?

And what am I looking for with wright, that 4.09 wasn't at a combine. All these other numbers are.

 

[hndog609]

I have a hard time seeing sub 4.2.

So the timing goes both way in its discrepancies? Some guys are under clocked and others are over clocked?

And what am I looking for with wright, that 4.09 wasn't at a combine. All these other numbers are.

It's a mess. Holliday had at least one person give him a 4.22 at the combine. The NFL Network guys had his two passes at 4.27 and 4.32 and the "official" time at 4.34. If you can make sense of that give me some of what you're having.

So what if CJ's infamous 4.24 is really a pretty serious under-clocking? Not saying that, no idea, but given all the question marks, how confident are you that couldn't be the case?

 

[bleedingTNorange]

It's a mess. Holliday had at least one person give him a 4.22 at the combine. The NFL Network guys had his two passes at 4.27 and 4.32 and the "official" time at 4.34. If you can make sense of that give me some of what you're having.

So what if CJ's infamous 4.24 is really a pretty serious under-clocking? Not saying that, no idea, but given all the question marks, how confident are you that couldn't be the case?

And that's my point. We have established Bolt in a football forty if timed correctly would be around a 4.2-4.3.

CJ was clicked at 4.24, whos positive that it wasn't an error and he wasnt a 4.14? If that's the case it'd appear CJ would definitely beat bolt.

Point being, bolt isn't running a sub 4, and that there's a handful of guys in the NFL who could give him a damn good run and probably beat him.

 

[Thunndarr]

I think the idea is that Chris Johnson's 4.24 would have been in the 4.44 range if he'd been FAT timed, or if not that high, then mid 4.3's. (And every other player timed at the combine would suffer similar results, which is why in the FAT timing link posted above they are keeping the results private.)

Edit: Also, Bolt's numbers, as you've calculated, would actually be FAT timed numbers, so at the combine you'd subtract .2 seconds or so...

Edit 2: from the link around post 76 or so...

However, according to coaches and scouts who discussed this with The Sports Xchange, the FAT times are expected to be .20 to .24 seconds slower than the relative times recorded using methods the Combine has gone with since 1990, and before.

 

[hndog609]

And that's my point. We have established Bolt in a football forty if timed correctly would be around a 4.2-4.3.

CJ was clicked at 4.24, whos positive that it wasn't an error and he wasnt a 4.14? If that's the case it'd appear CJ would definitely beat bolt.

Considering this quote from you hasn't even cooled off from your typing it

I have a hard time seeing sub 4.2.

have to wonder if there's not some pretty serious bias in your thought process.

Point being, bolt isn't running a sub 4, and that there's a handful of guys in the NFL who could give him a damn good run and probably beat him.

Eh, maybe. Point is we have a HELL of a lot more reliable times for the track guys than we do the football guys. If the FAT timing guys at the combine aren't releasing that timing info due to fears of this:

"So suddenly adding .21-to-.24 seconds on the Combine times for prospects could result in some sort of psychological shock. As it is, some of the top rated athletes do not run at the Combine. If FAT 40-yard times became official, it is feared that even more players would refused to run at the Combine."

it looks to me like it's the football players who's times are at risk of being exposed. Else why the worry?

 

[volfanCLT]

So are we all in agreement that, if Bolt were to run a 40 at the combine tomorrow, he wouldnt come close to a sub 4?