http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/athletics/7429745.stm

9.72, thats more then ten meters per second! Do you think the 100m record will continue to to tumble or do you think there will be a time set that will never be beaten because its physically impossible to do so?

Scrap that, there has to be. There wont be a five second, 100 meter sprinter will there!......:rolleyes:

Well it's for sure that they'll never run the race in zero, so somewhere between here and zero is an ultimate limit.

Various scientists have estimated what that limit might be in the past, and every one of them has been wrong. The latest estimate is that, quite likely, no records will ever be set after about 2030, because we will have reached the absolute limit of human ability.

I'm betting - should I still be around to check - that this, too, will be wrong.

Should an athlete take some performance enhancing drugs and not get caught I suspect the time could drop quite a bit. But 'unaided' there cant be that much further to go.

Id agree, 9.69 has been run before but was not accepted as the runner had a wind behind him (not his own wind mind).

We have to be near the ceiling with the time ran yesterday. Phenomenally quick.

9.72 is an amazing run considering the fact that it was only the fifth time the guy had actually ran 100 metres in competition. the fact that the 200m is his specialist event could see michael johnson's super record of 19.32 go pretty soon. i've seen a guy from the bahamas (i think) run 9.69 - i think he was called thompson but he was heavily assisted by the wind - but it proves that anythings possible.

but there has to be a limit as to how fast a human can actually go, however the stronger the runners get faster the times will be. usain bolt has been critised by many coaches for his unorthadox 100m technique - but it just goes to show that technique isn't everything. somebody will come along one who is super strong, with perfect technique, on a perfect day and run something that will never be matched again. you never know, we may have seen it already.

all makes for a fascinating 100m at the olympics.

Read somewhere that in all endurance & power sports (cycling, swimming, weightlifting, athletics etc) we are reaching the limits of human achievement.

Technology & equipment, design & development will be the key to further record reductions.

Shoe technology for athletics, costume dev for swimming etc

They will Start timing it differently when we reach the peak. We have to set limits which can be broken or we wont push ourselves.

They will Start timing it differently when we reach the peak. We have to set limits which can be broken or we wont push ourselves.

thats true and it has already happened in the javelin - although that was the other way round. It was made harder to throw because the bloke who used to beat Steve Backley could almost through it out of the stadium...

9.72, that reminds me of the day back in school when I hit 100 meters in 9.81 second (the record at the time was 10.4 or something) my PE teacher offered to coach and pay etc and go for the record and olympics etc, but I refused as I hate sports :P

thats true and it has already happened in the javelin - although that was the other way round. It was made harder to throw because the bloke who used to beat Steve Backley could almost through it out of the stadium...

In fact that's been done several times with the javelin, the first (that I know of) being in the early 80s when Uwe Hohn was throwing the thing well over 100 metres. He could indeed throw it clear over the field and spike an athlete running the 5,000 metres on the track at the other side.

It's since been redesigned whenever the record gets ominously close to about 95 metres. Zelezny (the guy who used to beat Backley) was responsible for at least one of those, and possibly more than one.


Oh, and - pedantry alert! - technically it's not harder to throw, it's just that the change in the centre of gravity means a javelin thrown equally well, won't go nearly as far.

9.72, that reminds me of the day back in school when I hit 100 meters in 9.81 second (the record at the time was 10.4 or something) my PE teacher offered to coach and pay etc and go for the record and olympics etc, but I refused as I hate sports :P

I hope that is sarcasm.

I hope that is sarcasm.

not in the slightest... what makes you say that?

Ben johnson would've run close to that had he run 'through the line' in 88.

And regardless of what they tell you, i'd be willing to wager that most of the top sprinters are using some sort of sophisticated 'assisted training' still...

I reckon we'll see a sub 9.70 before the end of the decade, and within 20 years they'll be splitting the time down to the thousandths.

not in the slightest... what makes you say that?

Now I know you are being sarcastic for sure!

And regardless of what they tell you, i'd be willing to wager that most of the top sprinters are using some sort of sophisticated 'assisted training' still...


This is why I don't count myself a follower of athletics any more. If people who are known and proven to be using performance-enhancing drugs, are still getting beat ... how can anyone seriously believe that the people beating them are clean? Were that true, it would mean the drugs didn't help, which would mean nobody would bother taking them; but people do.

Now I know you are being sarcastic for sure!

no, whole heartidly, im not... im serious.. :/

no, whole heartidly, im not... im serious.. :/

Mate, I don't believe that ran sub 10 seconds over 100 meters. You are looking for attention.

Mate, I don't believe that ran sub 10 seconds over 100 meters. You are looking for attention.

ok, whatever, believe what you want... If I was looking for attention i'd say better than the 9.72 or whatever it now is, or i'd streak down the street or something.

9.72, that reminds me of the day back in school when I hit 100 meters in 9.81 second (the record at the time was 10.4 or something) my PE teacher offered to coach and pay etc and go for the record and olympics etc, but I refused as I hate sports :P

Cheers for the laugh.

9.72, that reminds me of the day back in school when I hit 100 meters in 9.81 second (the record at the time was 10.4 or something)...
...or you got your DoB wrong on the forum. The record ain't been 10.4 since 1930.

not sure how relevant this is but if your timing over 100m surely someone could do it faster if they were going at full pelt when they hit the 0m's line?? obviously you couldn't compare it to past records but it would surely be faster over 100m..............just a thought I'll get ma coat now :)

Anyone know the times for the last 100m of a 200m race?

not sure how relevant this is but if your timing over 100m surely someone could do it faster if they were going at full pelt when they hit the 0m's line?? obviously you couldn't compare it to past records but it would surely be faster over 100m..............just a thought I'll get ma coat now :)

You're entirely correct. That's why the 200m record (19.32) is less than twice the 100m record (2*9.72 = 19.44), despite 200m being run round a bend.

If you had a race over a straight 130 or 150 metres, and timed the last 100, you'd probably get the fastest possible (for current humans) time, and it probably wouldn't be much over nine seconds.

Anyone know the times for the last 100m of a 200m race?

I don't have the exact times, but it's well known that the second half is somewhat faster than the first, for exactly the reason KidPhunk suggests.

I agree that 9.81 was possible. I was thrown out of the school sports day in 1962 for doing the 100 in 9.79 on a cinder track with pumps on. I did get better by nearly three seconds the following year but my teacher said I had to leave my moped at home.

Course, there is the idea that men can go a lot faster when chased by a woman!........since the thread appears dead anyway.

Me and a mate ran the 60/70m (ish our tape measure in school wasnt great) in 9 seconds flat. I know it wasnt the 100m but we were only 13/14, and i thought it was pretty impressive at the time. That was back in the day we could run a mile without sweating....

As for ghozer, completly believe you mate, in school when the pressurs off you can just fly

9.72, that reminds me of the day back in school when I hit 100 meters in 9.81 second (the record at the time was 10.4 or something) my PE teacher offered to coach and pay etc and go for the record and olympics etc, but I refused as I hate sports :P

chin-chinnery-chin-chinnery-chin-chin-cheroo if i have a drink then you've got to have two :loopy: