I hate to say this, but you are a liar. LolWhoa 10.69 wouldn't have made the 4x100 team on my HS team in central Nebraska. Shocks me that bronze in Texas is that high.
I hate to say it but you're wrong. I didn't remember exact splits so I tried to find it. Their time at state was 41.91. That's a sub 10.5 split average.I hate to say this, but you are a liar. Lol
I hate to say it but you're wrong. I didn't remember exact splits so I tried to find it. Their time at state was 41.91. That's a sub 10.5 split average.
http://nsaahome.org/textfile/track/abres00.htm#AB13
Districts they were a bit faster than that. I want to say 41.79.
To answer sarcastic question #2, correct none broke the state record that year in the actual 100, which was higher than 10.41 at the time.
Hope your crow is tasty.
Taking splits from a 4x100 isn't really a good way to judge someone's 100 meter time. Each leg besides the first runner starts there split at a run already as opposed to the blocks. This should result in a faster time since they are already near top speed and also it's hard to judge how far they actually run. Usually, the fastest runner runs closer to 110 meters due to the exchange zone, so the person running the shorter distance will obviously have a very good split.I hate to say it but you're wrong. I didn't remember exact splits so I tried to find it. Their time at state was 41.91. That's a sub 10.5 split average.
http://nsaahome.org/textfile/track/abres00.htm#AB13
Districts they were a bit faster than that. I want to say 41.79.
To answer sarcastic question #2, correct none broke the state record that year in the actual 100, which was higher than 10.41 at the time.
Hope your crow is tasty.
I hate to say it but you're wrong. I didn't remember exact splits so I tried to find it. Their time at state was 41.91. That's a sub 10.5 split average.
http://nsaahome.org/textfile/track/abres00.htm#AB13
Districts they were a bit faster than that. I want to say 41.79.
To answer sarcastic question #2, correct none broke the state record that year in the actual 100, which was higher than 10.41 at the time.
Hope your crow is tasty.
I agree totally. That wasn't the point I made. In fact the only point I am making now is that I wasnt lying. And provided the link to prove it.Taking splits from a 4x100 isn't really a good way to judge someone's 100 meter time. Each leg besides the first runner starts there split at a run already as opposed to the blocks. This should result in a faster time since they are already near top speed and also it's hard to judge how far they actually run. Usually, the fastest runner runs closer to 110 meters due to the exchange zone, so the person running the shorter distance will obviously have a very good split.
10.6 would have placed Sterling in the top 5 in Class A in Nebraska. Your high school had the 4 fastest guys in the state? Impressive!I hate to say it but you're wrong. I didn't remember exact splits so I tried to find it. Their time at state was 41.91. That's a sub 10.5 split average.
http://nsaahome.org/textfile/track/abres00.htm#AB13
Districts they were a bit faster than that. I want to say 41.79.
To answer sarcastic question #2, correct none broke the state record that year in the actual 100, which was higher than 10.41 at the time.
Hope your crow is tasty.
A 4x100 relay split =/= 100m dash. 3 out of 4 runners in the 4x100 have a running start. They should run a faster time than a straight 100m dash runner coming out of the blocks.
A general rule of thumb to get a ballpark idea of converting 4x100m split times to average individual 100m times is to add 2 seconds to the 4x100 time and divide by 4.I hate to say it but you're wrong. I didn't remember exact splits so I tried to find it. Their time at state was 41.91. That's a sub 10.5 split average.
http://nsaahome.org/textfile/track/abres00.htm#AB13
Districts they were a bit faster than that. I want to say 41.79.
To answer sarcastic question #2, correct none broke the state record that year in the actual 100, which was higher than 10.41 at the time.
Hope your crow is tasty.
couldn't wind be a factor? running with head wind vs tail wind can make a pretty significant difference in the 100Holy ******* ****, enough with the dog pile. This site is ridiculous sometimes and unforgiving always.
Ok yes I was comparing 41.91 divided by 4 to 10.69. Yes 10.69 wouldve been on my HS 4x100 team.
MY ACTUAL POINT AND WHAT I SHOULDVE JUST SAID WAS...Im surprised that 10.69 (even out of the blocks in a 100m race) is worthy of 3rd place in Texas.
I think it was 3rd place in 4A though, right? I'm sure there were some good times in 5A and 6A.Holy ****, enough with the dog pile. This site is ridiculous sometimes and unforgiving always.
Ok yes I was comparing 41.91 divided by 4 to 10.69. Yes 10.69 wouldve been on my HS 4x100 team.
MY ACTUAL POINT AND WHAT I SHOULDVE JUST SAID WAS...Im surprised that 10.69 (even out of the blocks in a 100m race) is worthy of 3rd place in Texas.
couldn't wind be a factor? running with head wind vs tail wind can make a pretty significant difference in the 100