When You Cheat But Break The World Record

[@wilhelmw3455]

Donovan Bailey looked embarrassed during his interview and knew he got away with a false start in that record 50 metres run.

[@orwellknew9112]

I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it. It was their problem, not his. Besides, it makes up a little bit for all the times they called a false start on Ben Johnson, just because his reaction times were very fast, even for a sprinter. Much faster than a few non-athletes used to set the 0.10 standard.

[@NazPhura2]

W/out the actual starting gun included for viewers here, it's not worth an argument either way. Silent video doesn't offer necessary info. Plus, narrative overdub only distracts viewers focus further. The false start controversy is basically the reality of how human error will always prevail over science, statistics, precision. Just let them all run in place til only 1 remains. The Ultimate Running Challenge: TURC!

[@GanJoanna]

At the time, this false start was allowed. Rules were different back in the 90s. But this 0.10 reaction rule is so f-ked up.

[@Tethloach1]

let it slide. Lol

[@dennisrobinson8008]

Even with the slight false it was a masterful run as soon as he left the blocks.

[@djxcel23]

A college meet with no electronic blocks. Thats a no no

[@unholywarrior9007]

Everyone is blood doping and on designer drugs steroids. Bigger problems

[@Ancient1341]

Honestly very few have them 😂😂

[@Boostedbakon]

In meets we time it's up to the timer to provide them, and that's just not an expense we can afford, then only use them a couple times per year.

[@ransomA.]

That almost never happens, I’ve never seen them in any meets. Including nationals

[@livingproof9622]

College no no. Correct

[@davidc6032]

I'm glad you're making some noise about the silly 0.1 second rule. The Devon Allen fake false start was so unjust, it put a damper on my enjoyment of the Worlds. You can only imagine how it affected him. Who knows, the 2024 Olympics are 18 months away, maybe he can take another shot along with Julien Alfred in her 100m specialty.

[@incomingincoming1133]

Sadly they will be extremely unwilling to change the rule, because of the appeals they would have to deal with from past athletes.

[@JohnnyBrook]

Awesome video, I really appreciate how you look back to past races and raise questions a lot of people had back then and since then. I like how you call it straight as you see it, and props for mentioning Flo-Jo's highly dubious 10.49. That race deserves its own video! It's time these races get more publicly scrutinized, great job.

[@philbertgrant3744]

Couldn't have said it better. 👍.

[@levidraughon3531]

The worst thing is that World Athletics did actually commission another study in 2009, also with Finnish athletes and similar testing methods. But that time they did record reactions as fast at .85 and the researchers recommended a rule change. For some reason World Athletics said the study wasn't robust enough to warrant a change.

[@Srioll]

You forgot the part where the Finnish study was on 7 amateur athletes, not even professionals... xD thanks for covering this. I'm glad it's getting more light as this really needs to change. Disqualifying people because they can react faster than some random non-professional athletes 30 years ago did is a huge problem.

[@Daniel-ng8fi]

yeah, it was probably one of his other videos, but when I learned about what all went into why they have the .1 rule, I was dumbfounded. Imagine being someone genetically gifted and super trained to start well, and getting effed by this because it was done on a mere 7 genetically who knows what, non trained people. You'd actually have to train yourself to NOT start so good, that would be hard.

[@onewhocollects6658]

Why isn't it just zero?

[@Daniel-ng8fi]

@@onewhocollects6658 Because then you'd get people who don't have a realistic chance at medaling trying to time it perfectly. Effectively gambling, and that would not be fun to watch.

[@Dracon7601]

@@Daniel-ng8fi I kind of disagree there, for one poker is fascinating, plus if you keep the rule where starting before the pistol is penalised then reaction time becomes still a huge factor.

[@ranirahn]

@@Dracon7601 This 0,1 second rule was not always there. I remember races when it was 0 and everyone could 1 false start. Every race took like 20 seconds (setting it up and running) up to 30 min. Can you imagine where every athlete tries to time it and it gets called back over and over again. Yes, that was happening back then. I don't want this shit back. Thats why this 0,1 rule AND 1 false start per race was implemented.

[@bjorneriksson2404]

One thing that would also be interesting if you could look into, is that one of the coaches (don't remember if it was Devon Allen's or someone else) claimed that the starting gun equipment at the World championships was likely miscalibrated, since there were an unproportionally high number of extremely fast starts (under 0.115 or whatever he said). He claimed that it would be statistically impossible for the number of fast starts to suddenly be many times higher than at previous championships unless the calibration was off. Again, if you have the opportunity, it would be interesting to hear more about.

[@brothaanthony8533]

That Donovan Bailey start was so obvious... But quick twitch reaction is everything in a race. #facts

[@charles7558]

We truly appreciate the effort you put in for these videos!

[@CharlieGW]

Indeed

[@HandsomeJelly]

Hell yeah! Can I get a what what?!?

[@BWolf00]

I do appreciate the efforts but can we call a spade a spade..."very likely made the wrong call"? Puuulzzzeee...meanwhile he's willing to definitive about the World Record error...why the equivocation on the race where it was a blatant early start. But I do appreciate the this video (do over) showing the race with the audio...that really shows the magnitude of error.

[@sweeney1965]

as a jumior athlete in 1984 I got a "flyer" in my county 100m. Finished 3rd. Our club got the clean sweep. I was a mid distance runner . This was in Ireland when we were still peeing in bushes as a function, never mind track technology. We used to study the appointed starters and try and guess their timings and habits. If you got a flyer it was considered a skill almost, part of the game. Linford Christie would try to go on the B of Bang. We would try to go on The line "I", before the two bumps for "B" appeared.

[@mansellindustries273]

Let's just also say we accept the officials are doing their best and we are so thankful for their efforts. None of us are perfect

[@henrybrowne7248]

In fairness to them: clean starting a short sprint is probably not possible with consistency now. It does not seem they have clearly defined what, exactly, a false start is. In my view, just cutting it off at 0.1 is illegitimate.

[@Laxit-fn8yr]

The rule should be a DQ if reacted before the gun and a restart if within 0-0.1 seconds

[@mattsavage9960]

Agreed

[@GardenChess]

At most 0.09 second false start imo

[@Messup7654]

Horrible idea

[@Laxit-fn8yr]

@@Messup7654 How so?

[@Messup7654]

@@Laxit-fn8yr they can’t determine who reacted before the gun and if they got within that time frame they earned it

[@GanJoanna]

I feel so bad Devon Allen. Getting a DQ by 0.001 difference. He went to a final for nothing.

[@donutbeeswarm.8035]

You have been amazing with the consistent uploads great videos

[@montgomeryfriesen6245]

Clearly a false start by Bailey … but I’ll stand by my Canadian with pride nonetheless 👍🏻

[@dennisrobinson8008]

For the Flo Jo "wind reading" theory... There is a 62 page scientific analysis of that run, i did a write-up before on this... No one elses time appeared to be wind aided in her 10.49 heat. Gail Devers was in the heat and some other well known names and they ran around the times that they run at high effort. So what may have happened is the wind may have changed directions during the heat, so it may have been windy but for the heat the wind was not at their backs but instead a crosswind because the heat information doesn't show anyone aided by wind.

[@mssha1980]

If I’m not mistaken I seen you post this on twitter? But Flo Jo runs will always be a thing of question

[@dennisrobinson8008]

@@mssha1980 I'm not on Twitter

[@michaelwang6809]

Unfortunately, too often statistics are misunderstood and misused. They can absolutely be a powerful tool; but you always have to check your understandings of them to make sure you're not founded on an error, such as I believe the 0.1 sec reaction time false start rule is based off. Ideally, they would do a new study of reaction time with a statistically significant number of athletes; divide the time into a gaussian distribution, then say take the 2nd sigma or 3rd sigma as the mark. This way you could be pretty confident that either 97.8 or 99.9% of people would fall within the range. You could also just add a straight modifier, like you did... so 0.1 sec minus 0.025 for 0.075; like you said, where 0.025 sec is the "fudge" factor.

[@wilhelmw3455]

The problem is that it should be physiologically impossible for an athlete to react before a given time to make it fair for everyone.

[@Daniel-ng8fi]

@@wilhelmw3455 yeah this. The people this rule would be effecting are already the top .1% of humans, so whatever the time is, it needs to be such that its physiologically impossible for anyone to go faster than.

[@ThePassionofSprinting]

I am still getting very sad when I am seeing the false start of Devon Allen (the non sense rule) It broke my heart 💔

[@judsdragon]

i totally agree, i think its long overdue for a more in depth study than 7 athletes and all from the same country, considering how many races are run both collegiate and professional 7 is just barely 1 race worth of competitors, the fairest way would be to have a designated amount of countries and pick 2 or 4 athletes (male and female) from each country so they have a good cross section to parse from, if people were getting away with a few hundredths of a second or even 1/100th its understandable to disqualify but 1/1000th or 5/1000ths for the lady? thats seriously harsh imo, yet another great vid from TRP keep them coming as theyre much appreciated

[@ancientremains1814]

I got another one for you: When Usain Bolt was disqualified due to his alleged false start in the 100m final of Daegu 2011, I was pretty sure that it was the winner Yohan Blake who actually caused the false start, not Bolt! I remember watching the start many times in super slow motion, and it was pretty obvious that Yohan Blake moved up his buttocks BEFORE Usain Bolt did. I think Bolt just reacted to Blake's movement, and was thus disqualified.

[@karlready7610]

7 Finn's. Well, being Finnish, I am quite sure these were the 7 fastest in history, correct? 😳 Wow! How did that get okayed by any organization? How did the Vikings win that game this year?

[@vernonfrance2974]

It's not just how you start but how you finish.😊

[@danielfarrugia3884]

@@vernonfrance2974 nice pun if you intended

[@AllInTheGame01]

If we're going after the Indoor 50m WR, then we gotta have a hard conversation about a bunch of Women's WRs from the 80s (100/200/400/800m, 4x4, Shot Put, Discus & LJ)!

[@omarholder9036]

Add the Heptathlon to that list too.

[@Ghoster311]

They are still doping today in Jamaica.

[@jordanjordannis2258]

@@Ghoster311 Let me guess. Bitter American

[@deszi6936]

All the top athletes are doping

[@wilhelmw3455]

And the men’s discus and hammer.

[@GreyBeard_Fit]

July 1996 Olympic 100m Finals in Atlanta, Donovan Bailey set the 100m Dash World Record in 9.84. **He was NOT a great starter** In fact he was probably in 4th-5th place, down by at least 1 meter at around 50 meters. Bailey’s top-end speed was insane as he became the 1st person to ever top 27 mph in a race. This was based on his fastest 10m split as he went from 4th-5th place to 1st place **LIKE WHOA** in that race. Loved Donovan as he was always entertaining in interviews.

[@f.kieranfinney457]

He probably should have been a 200m specialist but he loved the sizzle of the 100 spotlight. My guess is like everyone else in Atlanta, he was on HGH, hence the WR. That Canadian sprint team was smoking fast!

[@DriveandThrive]

Btw, the reason for this rule is to stop people from starting before they hear the gun. Hear the gun then go. Perfectly reasonable rule but I would increase it to 0.12 as no human is reacting at 0.1 consistently because they are just guessing the timing of the gun.

[@Robert_McGarry_Poems]

A worthwhile conversation. NEW STUDY!!!

[@Robert_McGarry_Poems]

What if you reached out to a bunch of universities and companies, get the ball rolling. See who wants to help fund this necessary work.

[@se9865]

There was a guy that false started the 3200 at state, and everyone at the time was pretty sure it's because he didn't want to lose after having been the 2 time champion. The reality is, only he knows what happened. The fact is he'd been 2 time champion at cross country, 1600 and 3200, then one guy beat him at cross country and the 1600 before he false started the 3200.

[@davidcarter6659]

If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying😂😂

[@davidkennedy6641]

As I said in comments on your video on Devon's disqualification, Armin Harry would be unable to compete in this environment as his reaction time was verified as below .09.

[@dennisrobinson8008]

What was it?

[@jwood5321]

That clearly was a false start,without any doubt! I saw the world record race in the womens' 800m and remember wondering to myself at the time ..."Why is there a man running with these women ?" Only to realize shortly there after that it was a woman running after all !!! She was definately on something...who in their right mind could deny that now !

[@Lotschi]

You clearly see him moving before the gun 😂 That can not be fair!

[@jaimeduncan6167]

You can cry all day long because your favorite got disqualified, and I agree that we should not be using humans to time the starts but a sophisticated computer control that triggers both the gun and measures the takeout force. Pretending to retroactively apply rules is just nonsense and a show of emotion getting in the way of rules that are part of the human justice system since classical Rome, maybe before.

[@AlexanderChilds]

Point made. Well done. I believe that your reaction time can be trained to be faster. If this is all these athletes are training for, and their sole purpose in life at that time, they will train harder, train better, and with the advent of digital blocks, we can track exactly how fast their start time is. Where there are digital blocks, why not just make the time 0? or 0.01? It doesn't really matter then what is possible... the only way the athlete would false start is anticipating the gun, and most likely would be taking off before the gun goes off. Currently, reflex action/reaction time can reach 0.08 seconds, which is within reason for athletes trained to use those muscles that quickly as opposed to using their brain to process the sound of the gun. Who knows, maybe this can be further developed with other techniques. At the very least, the false start time should drop to 0.05 or lower, all to accommodate those amazing athletes we keep finding.

[@barath4545]

Completely agree, TRP. This is also why FloJo's 100m 10.49 needs to go. There was obviously too much wind and no reading. In her memory her 10.61 should be noted as the real record from 1988 to 2021 when ETH lowered it to 10.54

[@dennisrobinson8008]

No one else's time in her heat appeared to be aided. Every one ran around what they run at high effort except her.

[@TheSriram28]

@@dennisrobinson8008 it was a quarterfinal though. So she obviously was much better than the other athletes.

[@dennisrobinson8008]

@@TheSriram28 4-5 meters ahead of Gail Devers and 6-7 meters ahead of Carlette Guidry, smoked the big names of the time by 4 tenths or more.

[@f.kieranfinney457]

Everyone in the heat did get wind assistance. Flo-Jo also got mega drug assistance. She was juiced to the gills.

[@dennisrobinson8008]

@@f.kieranfinney457 Here is the heat times: Quarterfinal I Wind +0.0 1. Griffith-Joyner 10.49 Q PB 2. Williams 10.86 Q PB 3. Devers 10.97 Q PB 4. Guidry 11.11 Q PB 5. Sowell 11.19 Q PB 6. Thompson 11.35 Q PB 7. Howard 11.76 Q Not in rankings list 5 + m/s would've given them about a 2 tenths boost. Here is the 62 page study: www.brunel.ac.uk/~spstnpl/Publications/IAAFReport(Linthorne).pdf

[@rpaleg]

Even with the 100ms rule you can still cheat. Let's say you're an athlete, and you have a 150ms reaction time, you could still decide to start before you hear the gun and effectively have a 100ms reaction according to the blocks, even though you reacted faster than you actually can. This rule is dumb, other methods like a delayed gun shot are so much better.

[@supersubzero]

Was that Maurice Greene in lane 1 in that 50m race? I know that stride anywhere.

[@nsxperformance]

Yes it was

[@newty82]

Donovan powell #2 Mike Marsh #3 Henry neals #5 Jeff lanes #6

[@newty82]

Shocking the biomechanical variation even at this level

[@free2roam674]

I believe that 84 ms is the theoretical fastest and they used the lower limit of all estimates. So why not make it 80 ms, just to be sure? Interesting that taller athletes will be slower because the neurological signal is distance dependent. Hence SAFP would have an advantage at the start over Usain Bolt. Hard to argue with Usain's top end speed though!!!

[@riccardogiovetti]

The advantage is almost 0. neural impulses travel through melinated axons at 50m/s, a 30cm difference in travel length would make a 0.006s difference. that's like the difference from 0.100 and 0.106 RT, not something to take too much in consideration, if you consider that the same athlete has usually way bigger differences himself in different races.

[@f.kieranfinney457]

If we’re keeping Flo-Jo’s, where wind was off and she was juiced, we keep this. You can’t go back and use modern tech to rewrite history. Donovan’s career ending injury denied us some amazing races. He deserves this one.

[@tornadodash]

I love your content, learning about these topics is great conversation in many contexts to avoid other sensitive topics.

[@brianwahome5789]

With modern technologies, instead of banning athletes, it would make sense to just adjust for the false start time to get the actual run time. This takes the pressure of timing as well as getting the perfect start out from them. Heck, if someone wants to remain back, they can and count down only starts when they say get their foot off the support bars. This would shift the focus on to objective running where the true fastest racer wins, not just the one who crosses the line first. That said, it would be in their interest to start together to get that split stream boost or motivation in chasing down or being ahead.

[@montybrewster7]

Finland? That legendary hot bed of international sprinting prowess!

[@dragorn3212]

That would also allow more people to completely guess a starting gun

[@СтефанЙорданов-с6з]

Yes, nice video. Another former 60m WR is suspect. The great Maurice Greene ran 6.39 in 2001. which looks like a false start, was a world record at the time, although he also ran 6.39 in 1998. perfectly legal.

[@Daniel-ng8fi]

"perfectly legal", heh

[@СтефанЙорданов-с6з]

@@Daniel-ng8fi :)

[@12volttavern]

Drag racing allows .000 reaction times. You even get bragging rights for cutting a perfect start. A -.001 is a red light though, no do over, you just are out. Any timed sport should allow for perfect starts, just make the consequences greater for a false start. Great risk, great reward

[@conanobrennan53]

Cheating? In professional sports?!? *theatrically faints*

[@CedricDubler]

The rule needs to change. I false started at the World Championships as well even though I didn’t guess the gun. Just felt like a great start then we were all pulled back. Luckily decathletes get a warning.

[@v0rt3xbeta]

it should be reduced to 0.05 s, it is wrong to disqualify athletes for literally reacting quicker than everyone else. also another idea. how about stopping the practise of shooting the gun too quickly? maybe a wait of atleast 3 seconds. The longer the wait time the harder it will be to predict.

[@Starstrike21]

this needs to be fixed before the next major international track championship

[@anthonybelz7398]

Solution : Electromagnetic Shoe-Soles for these competitions - To lock feet, until gun - Then there can be NO dispute (subject to shoe inspection)! 🕊🦅🕊

[@belmany]

Seek to change yourself, not the rules.

[@severtone263]

That flawed Finnish study must be scraped and redone with a larger sample of athletes from across the globe and at different altitudes. How that became the basis of a framework of rules today beats me.

[@arichidoru]

Why don't they just implement something like a "rollout" in drag-racing and start individual clocks for each runner from the point of pressure/force being applied to the starting block? That way it doesn't matter if someone jumps the gun or not, the run time is exact and does not include the reacton time.That's the leveliest field you can make, I think.

[@amalshankar]

why should reaction time be a factor in a race ? Why not simply give athletes a rhythmic countdown timer and let there be no surprises?

[@JPSenpai]

Should a reaction time be subtracted from race time (if reaction time is within ~0.2s)? It would ensure total accuracy, but would mean that the first to cross the finish line wouldn't necessarily be the winner. As someone who views time as more important, I would say yes. any way you do it, it's a strange thing to take into account.

[@ccbgaming6994]

This would completely take away the excitement and nature of the sport

[@shibasurfing]

I personally think it should be gun time as the standard. We should do our best to prevent false starts using the equipment we now have, which would mean updating the standard using medical research. But athletics should not become a time trial, kinda the entire point is that it’s head to head.

[@troliskimosko]

If you do that, a lot would change. Yohan Blake would have the 200m world record!

[@humanboy395]

This has to be the stupidest take I've ever heard

[@aodoemela]

If it was then Bolt looses his 200m world record.

[@apollosun2913]

If the legal reaction time was lowered to .07, as you suggested, is it possible that Terence Jones' reaction time was within this hypothetical limit?

[@michal.laskowski.]

there should be 0.00s rule only. how can you punish anyone for starting after! the starter signal.... thats totally unfair. luck or perfect timing should be beneficial to athletes not working against them

[@CYMotorsport]

2:10 objection. It’s always made sense. A human being is incapable of that reaction and by definition you’re objectively jumping the gun. I support it as someone disqualified for an infraction from lane 4 of the big east 100m final my senior year. Sucks. But it’s accurate. Didn’t appreciate it until I had to cover formula 1 and their jump start rules to be honest. Many studies have power and break out unconscious vs conscious. I’m willing to toss in elite level sprinters are unconscious or reflex though the case could be made bc the gun is at an unknown interval within the start sequence, you can’t train for it you have to interpret it. BUT if you literally studied 1 specific starter and their habits post setting the athletes perfecting their cadence, I’ll buy it. Even then the quickest peer reviewed reaction from reflex is 0.08 I’ve seen but happy to be proven wrong with a peer reviewed study.

[@ThunderJuice]

Why do I think Devon's DQ wouldn't have been so controversial if he wasn't American?

[@jeromenpar]

Take away the reaction. Put a sensor on each runner that triggers one's own timer. And then another sensor at each end to stop their time. Or at least make this another event. Another way is to put a latch that is triggered by the gun trigger and releases the foot of the runners simultaneously.

[@JohnPodobnikRMT]

Never been a fan of Bailey... and I'm Canadian, and this just adds to it

[@abone2pick]

Lmao what? It's the officials job to stop the race in case of a false start not his.

[@sir_sack]

What exactly did you want him to do?

[@76Aston]

@@sir_sack Yeah, I can see it now... Donovan requests an interview on national TV so he can tell the world that, hey, he just got away with a false start and that's plain wrong and unfair to everyone else in the race. He wants his name scratched from the results and the record books! If only...

[@sir_sack]

@@76Aston Well Carl Lewis decided to wait until years after he retired to admit to using steroids during his career. That's a little bit more unfair if you ask me

[@76Aston]

@@sir_sack I agree with you. Steroid use is cheating out-and-out. The blame lands squarely on the user. But getting away with a false start? That's a gray zone. The blame is more on the starter, the equipment and the rules than it is on the athlete. But what a different world we'd live in if, in cases like Bailey's, the runner would admit they false started...

[@kylehoffman1325]

I agree that there are some very questionable occurrences in the history of our great sport, but I respectfully disagree with the concept of retroactively changing long-standing results simply because we have a different way of regulating ourselves now. That is an extremely slippery slope. It makes for some fun hypothetical arguments over a drink, but shouldn't be considered a legitimate course of action to take every time a new rule is implemented. New rules will come & better technology along with it. New and better athletes will come along as well. In time, these older records will be surpassed & these questionable records will be left behind. It is the passion of the coaches, trainers, athletes, and spectators that will drive this.

[@michaelcarmean4906]

💥 They Stripped Lance Of 7 World Records 😵‍💫 Let’s Don’t Stop There💥

[@David_7171]

That 7 people Nordic study didn’t even include top world class athletes who are more highly tuned than your average Joe

[@TheSiameseDreamer]

I dunno, if you can train your brain and twitch to react and engage in under 0.1 seconds that shouldn't be a false start. That's pure practise and refinement. There should be no time limit. If you go after the gun you are in the clear.

[@Marozi1]

I still miss the old 2 false start rule, seen many good races ruined by the disqualification of a top athlete.

[@curioussand1339]

Ideally the sound recording should come from a point near to the athletes but between the athletes and the starter.

[@elliotmyers9071]

Just have pressure sensors assess the real time.

[@nolan2070]

False start=false record. Very simple. With technology, there should be no legitimate dispute.

[@JESSSSMITH]

If this is the case wouldn't Maurice Greene have the 50 record then? He tied the 50 record on 13 February 1999.

[@hantingchen5497]

I think the 0.1 second rule isnt the biggest issue. I think its more about having electronic blocks for world record eligible races. If donovan had electronic blocks then he wouldnt be a 50m record holder today

[@georgebeckwith7020]

Great video and 💯 percent facts 👏 👌 💯 👍 🙌

[@janbo8331]

IWhen judging false starts from video and audio, one needs to consider the positioning of the start pistol, the athletes, the camera and the microphones. Typically the microphone is not placed level with the athletes, so the sound travels a different distance for the TV viewer and the athlete. The equipment, especially in some of the older clips, also produce some small delay. In a millisecond game it all matters.

[@duaine4319]

world athletics, iaaf, whoever.. they need to see this video, because it’s straight facts.

[@dr.options]

This rule needs to go. There is no place for it.

[@grzlbr]

Armin Hary was proof that .06 wasn't enough. BTW by far the best 100m sprinter in history.

[@makecanadamorelikeamerica8957]

False starts should be just that. A false start, like acctually jumping the block before the gun. As long as the guns bang happens first it really doesn't matter

[@diegonalbandian]

Why not just 0.000, if you want to take the risk of been disqualified just do it.

[@Leonidas-eu9bb]

I have an idea that could help a bit. If two athletes have the same time (one hundredth of a second accuracy). The athlete with the slower reaction time goes in front. This is fair and can lead to less false starting in the shorter sprints.

[@Daniel-ng8fi]

lets just get rid of reaction times then, do it all time trial style. clock starts when you leave the blocks and stops when you cross the line.

[@krazed0451]

Can we have the audio so we can hear the gun... Pre-empting the gun and getting away before the other competitors is not illegal.

[@glentight]

You *can't* retroactively apply a rule that discredits previously accepted records... Return to 20 minute 100m races. Throw out the 0.1second reaction time rule. Let runners attempt to catch the gun, DQ them every time they leave early. But *DO NOT* apply current rules to past performances.

[@mr.boniato6402]

Wouldn't it be better for each lane to have it's own speed tracker? This way, it wouldn't matter if anyone starts first or last... it would be at the end where the runners will see who was actually faster because each lane would have a different time.

[@InsaneJetman]

I don't understand why reaction time should even be a factor in the sport of running. I'm a musician and every conductor can start a band or orchestra with much better than 100ms accuracy with a simple upbeat. A simple "3...2...1...GO!" should enable all runners to start with ~20ms accuracy.

[@shawnwattles5556]

I'll go 1 step further and say- set the DQ trigger at 0.0 seconds. Let the athletes try to time the gun if they want. 1 false start still means disqualification, so they are taking the risks. All this nonsense about how fast is "too fast" in a sprint race is simply ridiculous.

[@worldblazin4209]

So an issue with biasing about the 1996 Olympic Track and Field records is that once you agree on it being a problem, people will go as far as disqualifying his run. Perhaps some will take the better approach of recalculating his speed and slowing the final score down because he looks like he got an advantage, but a big mass of people who, frankly, dont care about Track and only care about "accountability within Olympic Games" will destroy this track athletes reputation and not only slow but completely delete his 50 meter run off of Seasonal Best (for 1996) on top of the lost Olympic World Record being kicked off.

[@KINGY2487]

Would be an idea to let the ppl get a second chance if they false start between 0-0.1, anyone who starts before gun to be disqualified.

[@awools1]

0.075 seems perfectly reasonable. I have seen high schoolers go under .1. It's ridiculous to have the rule as it is now.

[@Trizzer89]

They should change the rule to 0.05-0.1 you are still able to compete, but you do have to stop and redo

[@williamburdon6993]

he was almost up before the gun went off.

[@lwyatt6264]

Keep the electronic blocks but they shouldn’t disqualify runners on the first offense. Its stupid and not even proven that someone who false started actually reacted before the gun.

[@0x8badbeef]

What I want to know is how do they get it so close to the start. ESP? Flash from the gun? Sound travels 1100 feet/second. So 0.1 second is 110 feet.

[@k.alex.4885]

Yes, he fouled started and got away with it. It's obvious in slow motion. 🏃‍♂️ 🏃‍♂️

[@Twitch030]

the 0,1s rule is fair, no one can be faster than that without false starting.

[@darthvader1494]

Do you think a record should count if there are no electronic start blocks?

[@luisfernandes2522]

100% agreed that it shouldn't

[@spikenomoon]

Stupidity. At least don’t disqualify the first attempt.

[@MarkMetternichPhotographyLLC]

You are 100% correct!

[@Gtslmfa0]

You should do Marvin Bracy's 6.08 55m

[@jessisanturo]

I'm sure this was looked at 1001 times. It looks to me the logic they might have used behind not taking this race down to be a weird math formula subtracting the early reaction start to distance at the finish line with the closest guy behind the record holder. It seems to have been a grater distance number even after subtracting the early start or something like that, wich seems to be the most fairway to handle it without start tech blocks at that time. Where as now hence the use of electronic start blocks to judge early starts. It looks to me more like a technology evolution timing conundrum rather than a malice corrupted cheat plot

[@dinissantiago6729]

I have a friend in swimming that reacted 0.095 and was disqualified, i think he is still mad about it

[@fernandojustin1812]

I think they should leave it because it's too late...

[@HandsomeJelly]

Who else set it to .5 speed when it was already down at 70%?

[@IT_Farhan]

.25 here

[@gavinwu7367]

@@IT_Farhan omg same

[@HandsomeJelly]

@@IT_Farhan Hahaha... Did he jump the gun?

[@HandsomeJelly]

@@gavinwu7367 You guys have some balls. That comes to .175 speed... Mad respect. MAD!

[@IT_Farhan]

@@HandsomeJellyyes

[@andrewethansbreakroom2588]

It’s clear as day! He’s almost halfway out of the gate before any of. the other runners…