The Sprinting World Record That Shouldn't Exist
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 05. 2024
- The wind said it, not me...
Link to the study: web.archive.org/web/201209160...
Link to contacting World Athletics: worldathletics.org/about-iaaf...
Big thanks to @metandyhill for providing some info as well! - Sport
If you share the same sentiment as I do, PLEASE consider sending a message to World Athletics regarding your concerns: worldathletics.org/about-iaaf/contact-us
A link to the study is also in the description for you to send to them as well!
*Flo Jo didn't run 10.49 on Eugene's altitude and Haywards Field fast track, if she had on that day, that record would still be 10.49 or 10.35 - 10.37 with 2.0 wind. On the other hand, Elaine couldn't have run 10.54 on any other track in the U.S. especially the Indianapolis track that Flo Jo ran in near sea level in 1988, because of that, Elaine's time isn't as impressive either for those who know about the PB fast times at Haywards Field which Flo Jo' didn't have the benefit of either.* ALTITUDE AND TRACK ALSO MATTERS!
@@imo1933 Eugene is at 126m, that is not considered altitude (if anything, it's basically sea level) what on earth are you on about. Hayward field might have a faster(er) track in terms of the way it's built, but it's not at altitude if people are running 10000m world records there lmfao.
@@RunnerBoi
*Haywards Fields is recognized as the fastest track in the world, that's why the U.S. holds it's Olympic and World Championship trials on that field because some athletes need qualifying times to compete and no there's no better field to achieve that than Haywards Field, and those PB's being produced at Haywards Fields are rarely achieved anywhere else.*
@@imo1933 Yeah and are tracks not allowed to improve over time? If you're gonna go down the route that you're going, then you might as well say that Jesse Owens holds the men's 100 world record because Usain Bolt, etc. ran their times on better tracks. No one's disputing that Eugene is a fast track, but it being so is a *good* thing, not a bad one. Also, do your research, as (stating what RunnerBoi has already said) Eugene is not at altitude, so that argument is completely invalid. Go cry.
@@AthleticsEditz
*As a track fan, I don't put much stock into the times achieved on Haywards Field, not by Americans or other international athletes, therefore, I didn't go crazy over Noah Lyles 19.31 200m time or Shericka Jackson 21.43 200M or Elaine Thompson 10.54 100M time nor Sydney Mclaughlin 51.41 400M Hurdles world record, until I see those times achieved on other fields, those are more gifts from the track more than the real ability of the athletes.*
Yes, get rid of Flo-Jo’s record but not before wiping Jarmila Kratochvílová’s 800m WR which is the most obviously juiced record this side of Barry Bonds.
Yes lol talk about a slap in the face to the women who are training their hearts out to even come close to that 1:53.
"Obviousness" isn't enough.
It needs proof.
Marita Koch's 400 is even more egregious! People have literally found letters she wrote complaining other people were getting higher steroid doses than her!
@@relaxchamp Most definitely! But I don't think it would take much to provide definitive proof. Even a cursory examination shows that the Czech women's track team at that time was part of the Soviet doping program, and that includes Kratochvilova. That has indeed been proven. The only thing missing (I believe) is her name. But kind of like this Flo-Jo / wind thing, all it takes is a) someone putting those pieces together into one place and b) officials taking notice of it. But when something is that freaking obvious, it can be proven.
@@davids5980yep.
Bro, I didn't realize this was a controversy until now, and the data right there. World athletics needs to change this NOW!
It isn't controversial except from those that prefer someone else
@@derekhough-jm9gc a minority considers her clean.
Her record won't be erased though.
Its been controversial for years. Between the wind gauges and the likely ped use, Flo Jo's record has been suspect for years.
@@anthonyanderson9303 Indeed.
No they don’t need to change it. They investigated it at the time and ratified the record. The starter said he waited until the wind dropped before firing the pistol and the reading was 0.0. That leaves no basis for overturning the record. The way she tore away from the pack was mind boggling and then she followed it up with a 10.61 the next day, just 0.12 slower which isn’t surprising given it was her third run in less than 24 hours.
As for peds, she tested clean so no basis for record removal there either. You can speculate all you want but there is no hard evidence that would justify removing her record.
Any sprinter knows that it is very difficult to reduce their 100m time by just a couple tenths of a second because it is an average 11-12 seconds for a professional race for women. Flo Jo was an average “professional” sprinter who came in 3rd and 4th to great sprinters like Evelyn Ashford. In 1985 Flo Jo ran 100m in 11 seconds and sprinters like Evelyn would beat her by 3 to 4 strides.Speed is 85% “God given” and the rest is training,diet,coaching etc. During the 1988 Olympics Flo Jo suddenly can beat every top professional female sprinter by 3 to 4 strides at 10.49 seconds. She was definitely using high doses of testosterone and Human growth hormones but would wean off the drugs 4-6 months before each track event in order to pass the drug test at the race. Then the US track Association initiated “year round” random drug testing after the 1988 Olympics in 1989 and Flo Jo suddenly retired the same year. SMH
She changed her stride pattern to not waste energy, and that's when she started winning. I saw a whole documentary on that and how she used a computer program to figure it out. She started training just to set the record. As far as drugs, I can't say. When she started training differently, her body reflected that. Lord knows!
@@motherofthreeb6337
The “changes in her stride pattern” was the result of very high knee lifts(late in her career)which is one of the classic signs of a sprinter of taking PEDs(performance enhancing drugs). Again speed(less than 200m)is mostly God given(85%) the rest is training etc. She was obviously a drug cheat. SMH
If you're going to tell a story, AT LEAST tell an honest story! Flo-Jo's signature race was the 200m, not the 100m. Most 200m-400m sprinters tend to do exceptionally well when they drop down to the 100m. Usain Bolt, Fred Kerley, Elaine Thompson, Noah Lyles, Shericka Jackson, etc, have all done quite well in the 100m once they focused and trained specifically for that race. So it is no surprise that Flo-Jo would do exceptionally well, too, once she began to focus and train for that specific race.
The thing you fail to mention (or even realize) is that Flo-Jo never took track and field seriously until 1987. She wasn't giving the sport her all because she had to focus on other things - particularly working several jobs in order to provide for herself and her family (if you were familiar with her story you would know this). And despite not training 100%, she was still placing within the top three in most of her races, which is a testament to her greatness. 1987 was when Flo-Jo dedicated herself and really began to train 100%. That was the difference! Nothing more, nothing less.
And for you to say "she was definitely using high doses of testosterone" without ANY PROOF shows you're an empty-headed goofball. Either provide proof or zip it, Sherlock! 😅
@@lyrical20 Not correct. None of the professional sprinters you mentioned improved their 100m time by 0.51 seconds in one year. Again, the race is less than 12 seconds and is difficult for a professional sprinter to reduce their time by that much unless are taking PEDs. This is why anyone who was ever a sprinter knows that Flo Jo was a drug cheat.
@@daw7773 well said, except for one massive factor you ignored.....Genetic factors, THEY ARE ALL on PEDs including the white and chinese athletes that finish last in the 100m, for example. The "PED" argument for me is a weak and a borderline unscientific one, it makes the suggestion that the only difference between you and say, Usain Bolt is a 6-month cycle of Test, which is laughable!!! btw lol Nobody would use test for speed above say compounds like Stanozolol or Dianabol
OK
Let's also reconsider the women's 400m world record and 800m world record
Why? I'm not a sprinter but the video was talking about how the tailwind wasn't measured correctly.
@ericzhou8980 no no no forget tailwind. The weather was not in flo-jo's control
Why is there more videos on why flo-Jo's world record isn't legal, than how juiced up the women's 800m and 400m record holders are.
@@ericzhou8980he’s saying that off topic of the video but relating to it by saying those records also need to be removed because records like the women’s 400 and 800 were done when those olympians were juicing off their minds
@@ericzhou8980 Because they're just as fraudulent as the women's 100 WR.
Especially the women's 400 meter world record....the longest standing track and field record of all times....40 years and counting.
did no one in this comment section actually watch the video before commenting??
Heartbreaking that some of these female records from the 80s still stand...100m, 200m, 400m, 800m
One day, I hope to see at least one of these records fall, the "easiest" is the 200m imo
The 100m is a bit of an outlier because it wasn't run under legitimate conditions.
The real big travesty is the women's shot put. When a generational talent like Valerie Adams can't come anywhere close to it, how is it helping the sport to ignore the reason performances have changed.
It's simple. it was during the cold war and the USA wanted all the records away from the russians and the east germany. the wind read 0.0, in the interview after the race, the reporter asks flo-jo if she felt like the wind was zero. to which flo-jo replied, " Yes, the wind wasn't as strong as the first round'. Note, she said the wind wasnt AS STRONG. which confirms automatically that there WAS wind. Not only that, she adds by saying her coach told her to watch the men's triple jump and if their wind was down go for the world record. If that was true, the triple jump before her race read +4.3ms 😂 so she knew it was windy. And why would a coach tell their athlete to go all out in a QUATERFINAL when she can save energy and the best possible time for the finals? make it make sense.
i don't think anyone whos watched the video can defend the record
America wanted to be seen as superior over rivals countries they even claimed to plant flags on the moon 😂😂😂😂
The Russians and East Germans were clean victims…LOL…
"Wanted all the records away from the Russians and East Germany." That's cute. You'd be really hard pressed to find any East German records that are legitimate over multiple decades--in any sport, but especially track. I have no idea why the IOC lets the East German records stand. Dozens of athletes were so damaged by all the drugs they took -- especially the testosterone -- they underwent a sex change later, i.e., basically giving up the idea that they could return to passing as female. It's an incredibly sad story. Most of them had no choice. If they didn't agree, they'd be kicked off the team and their family would lose all the state-sponsored benefits they'd gained. So, in short, one shouldn't worry too much about stripping records from the East Germans.
So you think it came down from the Reagan administration and they somehow MAGICALLY knew it was going to be THAT windy, that DAY, that AFTERNOON, like it was ALL planned in advance, because it was SO CRUCIAL for us geo-politically to have those records?
How many track meets have winds that high during a track meet?? 1 in 50? Less?
I’ve been saying for years, it is an absolute embarrassment that this record still exists. Elaine is the TRUE WR holder in my book. World athletics, DO THE RIGHT THING AND REMOVE THIS RECORD FROM THE BOOKS.
the same should be said for those women’s 400m and 800m world records. In order for our sport to continue to gain legitimacy and respect, we must get rid of the obvious doping and/or the technical error records. Having a blatantly untouchable world record is unfair to athletes.
Indeed. It killed the excitement potential of the W 100m event. Travesty.
Just because flo jo was black
..
@@StGCfiLife Even if you deleted it, her 2nd best time would have remained the record until 2021. And there's certainly been no lack of excitement around Thompson-Herah, SAFP, Shericka Jackson & Sha'Carri Richardson.
@@mnqobimzelemu The 2nd all time is black too your argument doesn't make any sense
Your an embarrassment along with this channel....Def unsubscribing
Im surprised no-one knows how this happened. Its really simple. The operator just didn't press the button to start it. I've seen this happen with my own eyes. And I've tested it myself to see what it looks like if you think you've done it but haven't. It shows you 0.0.
Very interesting I'd luv someone to find the person and ask about the 1st 2 rounds of the 100 but it's not likely 30 years later. This might just answer a 36 year old mystery.
@@michaelkidd7896My guess is a mistake like that gets taken to the grave. And of course they may literally have actually thought they did it. I'd also like to hear from people there that day in any capacity and ask them what the wind was during that ten seconds. I think we all know the answer 😅
Well I guess he forgot two races in a row
@@thebigpicture2032 Yep absolutely possible. Whether he forgot or simply didn't start it properly, it's almost certain that the machine simply wasn't started rather than there being something wrong with the machine, especially since it worked perfectly for every other race before and after. What's quite hilarious is there is clear video footage of the wind gauge saying 0.0 and five metres behind it in the same shot thr triple jump wind gauge is +4.9 or something 😅. And also interestingly there's no operator in the shot, which would be really strange as they normally sit behind it to, well...operate it.
Maybe Al Joyner snuck over from the TJ and turned it off?
wind aside in this event (the mens TJ running parallel was +5m/s all day and within seconds of this race)- plot FloJo's 100m progression versus her age.
You cant ignore drugs and jedi hand wave her as being 'one of many'.
There are PEDs and there are PEDs.
Some PEDs will give you 0.3-0.5s advantage, and others will give you 0.02s. Thats a huge difference.
Like Ben Johnson, FloJo went from a perennial finalist to smashing WRs after getting well into her 20s.
also like BJ, her physical appearance changed dramatically. and her voice noticably dropped an octave or more..
@timn4481
*Everybody now has their own wind speed of that race, just Shut Up!*
She spoke like a MAN😂
You can see the guy in green with a white hat at the end of the race has his t-shirt flapping due to the wind.. Anyway, I still have to find a single person, even remotely aware of the facts, that believes Flo-Jo's 100m record it's legitimate. And most likely I will never meet one, because I live across the world from her family and friends.
Just as family and friends and fans can be biased towards their own, if you are about fairness and truth, you gotta factor in any bias of envy from those who are not her fans. ( Not saying if her record is bunk or not, just adding in to what you are implying here. )
@@machtnichtsseimann You say bias, but I tend to believe that that record is invalid based on pretty strong evidence, not opinions or preferences
I think it's legit. She dominated at the Olympics that year also. She ran with regular shoes instead of the springs the use now. Now you can remove your comment
And trust me, there’s more, but in a different direction. Remember the testing wasn’t as it is now either.
Does anyone know what flojo's time would have been if we simply adjusted the wind from +4.3m/s (hypothesized from the triple jump times addressed earlier) down to +2.0m/s?
a website told me 10.55 so Elaine would of just broke her record which is crazy 😭
@KorZen10
*These Are The Accepted Effect Of Various Wind Speeds By The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) On A 100m Time Of 10.00 s.*
*With a +1 wind you're adding 0.06 to her 100M time of 10.49 which equals 10.55*
*With a +2 wind you're adding 0.10 to her 100M time of 10.49 which equals 10.59*
*With a +3 wind you're adding 0.14 to her 100M time of 10.49 which equals 10.63*
*With a +4 wind you're adding 0.18 to her 100M time of 10.49 which equals 10.67*
*With a +5 wind you're adding 0.21 to her 100M time of 10.49 which equals 10.70*
*Any wind aided time between +1 to +3 is still a fast time today considering the track Flo Jo ran in 1988 and we're not even considering the shoes they're using today.*
@@jaredbowen3527 The wind was likely ABOVE +4ms, so adjusting to 2ms max wind she should have recorded between 10.59s to 10.63s, average say 10.61s which was her actual real PB. 10.49s is absolutely out of the question.
I've studied this for over 25yrs. There's are as many videos/studies addressing this.
However, one fact remains. Once a record is ratified, it's ratified.
Retrospective changes would need to be made to over 647 disputed results and records.
How many soccer matches (before electronic referees) had disallowed goals, that afterwards were seen to be valid by playing back the video?
Same for tennis.
The record shouldn't have been ratified, but what's done is done.
Her record has galvanised runners.
@@jaredbowen3527well at 8:11 someone apparently claimed that the wind was 2.8 Ms at quarter final 1.
Finally an American not defending this obviously faulty record. The rest of the sprint world knows it's busted.
Flo Jo's 100-m record will be immortal.
Why is there a headwind limit 😭 isn’t it way harder with headwind anyway
I think it's in case if they can't get the direction
He's asking why there's a headwind limit of 2.0
Maybe it's a generic cap on all track and field events, because if for example you did a 400m+ race, there would be one leg where you're in headwind and one in tailwind. Momentary fluctuations in the wind could give you an illegal boost.
@@ARCANEmateCLANit’s not though, pretty sure wind limits don’t apply to any events with a full lap
@@ARCANEmateCLAN I'm not sure why it exists, but this rule is for 100m, 200m, Long Jump and Triple Jump.
I don't know what the rules are for wind in 400m+.
LOL any true track fan worth their salt knows very well that that "record" is a farce. Even athletes know this but they know they can't speak up because that would literally be going against their employer. Flo-Jo is an absolute legend with a technique that is only matched by a fit ETH, but as much as i love what she did on the track, reality must be faced. I will not be contacting world athletics because i simply adore Flo-Jo too much lol. Still doesn't mean that we have to ignore the FACT that her best time was indeed 10.61.
and 10.61 is absolutely insane. Testament to her talent and technique. way ahead of her time.
@@ozzy9348agreed. this is the record that should have been ratified and it would still stand for 35 years
Can we adore our athletes WHILE expecting accuracy and integrity as well, or are we enabling cheating and/or inaccuracy to rule the day? Maybe it's not about "winning fair and square", but entertainment and that's all it is.
Does anyone believe that this record would have been ratified were she a Non-American?
It wouldn't have.
For me, it was Performance Drugs. Look at what distance she is in front of everybody, the Wind would have Helped Everyone!!!
Everybody's on PEDs
It was the wind definitely. Other athletes set personal best times in that heat and never ran that fast again. I looked up their individual professional profiles.
What about the women's 400 and 800 meters world records?
Also BS
What about the best American 400 hurdler. SHE LOOKS juiced.
Allso disnt compete for
6 months at a time
They are clean
Those white girls are natural
@RJ12347 To be honest I don't trust any of them I cludung all of today's athletes.The female American 🇺🇸 400m hurdler seems real suss.She takes 6m9nths off each year from races then comes back like Ivan Drago from Rocky from Rocky.
Athletics officials need to watch your video!
This is not even the most questionable world record in women's sprinting. The fact that Marita Koch still holds the record in the women's 400 is an absolute travesty. And that's WITH proof that she was using PEDs.
The difference is that there isn't a question about Koch actually running that time.
The 100m record clearly didn't have a valid wind reading. Anyone with a brain can look at the evidence and see that it was wind aided, it's obvious without even going into it very far.
@@HamishGarland Well FloJo also "actually ran that time". I'm not sure your complaint makes a lick of sense. There is a ton of speculation about the 100 record which I generally think is credible. The 400 though? We have the records of the doping program, doses, drugs, and when they were administered. We KNOW she was cheating. We don't KNOW how fast the wind was blowing for the 100 record. I stand by my statement: the womens 400 is the most questionable world record in womens track and field.
Stop whining and go beat it.
Really well-produced video..
In that quarterfinal one wold expect the wind to help all of the athletes similarly. While many had PBs the Flo Jo's margin of victory was huge. Her improvemnt over her times earlier in the season was about 0.3 sec, a huge amount in the 100m. I think it most likely that she was on PEDs and also aided by the wind to reach that world record. Kersey was her coach and he is still coaching world class athletes.
Excellently researched
Women who ran that year also ran times that they never ran ever during that race and never did after. The whole record is a sham.
Yep. That's one of the strongest red flags for doping. Having one outstanding year (or not even a year in Flo-Jo's case) with virtually no run up to it and then vanishing after. It's still circumstantial evidence but it tracks nearly perfectly with every doping case. Example: Bolt - who didn't juice - has 7 of the top 20 all time fastest 100s over a span of five years. Joyner has 3 of the top 20. 2 are from 7/88, one is from 9/88. Same pattern as all those Soviet era lab rats. Burst on to the scene, demolishing everyone then...nothing.
The World Record belongs to Elaine Thompson Herah. No question.
No me
Well, in your dreams!
How so? She didn’t run that time until after the Covid year shut down testing… Same with Shelley Ann setting a personal record after not being tested for a whole year.
The world 100 m and 200 m belongs to Florence Griffith Joyner aka flo Joe’s so dirty mind fool fool foolishness people sometimes you have some people that is gifted by JAH YOU ALL hatters keep chasing flo Joe’s you dirty mind dumb people and women of track and field that is hating on flo Joe’s that is why you all will never get that record you know why because you all is carrying a dirty mind on for Florence Griffith Joyner aka flo Joe’s every time big track and field time come around you all start to disrespecting Florence Griffith Joyner aka flo Joe’s keep on hating you all still chasing and she is resting in peace with JAH IN MOUNT ZION ware you foolish people will never go
Jamaicans just be wanting to be included
Wow.Amazing video!👏
In that race she ran maybe the most beautiful technical race of all time! However, the wind gauge was clearly faulty. I mean it spinning so fast if you put your finger in there it would have cut it off!😳
are you disputing the 800 and 400 as well?
The progression of world athletics records publication from WA has for years noted alongside this record the +4.3 wind speed in the triple jump just before the race, the wind blowing across the track explanation by Omega, the possible incorrect alignment of the gauge, the possible warm up problem of the gauge etc. The 2024 publication which has just been released includes a further note stating "subsequently the gauge was removed by the IAAF Technical Committee from the list of approved anemometers after clinical tests were carried out supporting the “warm up” problem."
Thanks bro, I have always considered this record an anomaly including the 800m and some others from the 80s.
There were crazy times and jump distances in that meet that were all wind aided.
LOVELY RUNNING ACTION
Are wind speeds still recorded by a single device? Seems like a problem waiting to happen if you organize around a single point of failure.
Great analysis
Dope video as always. Def wind Assisted...or at least a high probability.
Most Def. A coach who was in Indy told me as much. The winds were off the chain and no way was there any wind legal race that day. He told me that ETH is the true WRH.
Juice + wind
I dont understand, if there is a video from start to finish line, why cant they recheck? Is that difficult?
Fascinating. Didnt know there was a controversy. What this video is missing are reports of female runner times in events where the racers had a 3+ m/s tailwind.
Bless up Mr investigator ur finding is very accurate and logical
What is the reason why a -2.0 headwind would make a time (or distance in the long jump) invalid?
Obviously, no meaningful record or even PB eould occur, but it seems odd it would be in the rules.
Elaine Thompson Hera is the official record holder in most of our eyes. 1:49 that 10:54 was legendary
No
NO. Plus, Elaine is running 11:30's this year. LOL
@user-sy4vw1vb2g All great runners fizzle out eventually. Thompson-Herah set her 10.54 legitimately, regardless of what she's doing this year, and it is more legit than that fake record from FLO-JOKE.
@@daowonimdee Are you still crying? Officially speaking, Flo - Jo owns the record. Now you can rest in peace.
@user-sy4vw1vb2g Just as "officially" as records that were records until cheaters got exposed. Flojoke is an asterisk. Deal with it.
Forget the wind issue...she ran the 100m in around 11sec and the 200m in around 22sec all her career and suddenly during only 3 Months (June-July-August 1988) she ran all her incredible times, improving almost 5 tens of a second. Suddenly she retires after the announcement that there will be random doping tests in that sport, beginning 1989. Comeooooooon. Don't come with "she was never tested positive", neither were Marita Koch (GDR 400m WR) and Jarmila Kratochvilova (TCH 800m WR) and we all know they were juiced. It is not possible that FloJo wasn't juiced.
Agree on all counts. It's not actual proof - only circumstantial evidence - but it's the biggest red flag for juicing there is. Going from pretty good to suddenly superhuman for a few months. And all those runners you named did exactly that. Jarmila K. is the most egregious to me. One outstanding year of running, looking like a male bodybuilder then nothing. It's wild. Then look at the time progression of athletes for whom there is no suspicion (Allyson Felix, for example) and it's totally different. Slow, steady building to greatness. Not like Koch, whose coach complained to the Soviet steroid distributor that Marita wasn't getting enough steroids and that the other coaches were hogging them (true story!).
I agree with the egregious mistake with Flo Jo’s 100m recorded. Elaine Thompson should be the world record holder. All things being even with all people being on the sauce. Good video.
I would love to see a video on people who "bandit" races
This is Sooo Interesting! However, wind or no wind, She still blew out the entire field.
Yeah, with drugs.
The one variable you cannot discount is the outlier. There may have been a window of no wind for the 10-20 seconds the race was ongoing. When it's windy out it's not windy 100% of the time. There are periods of SEVERE wind and there are points of ZERO wind. It's not always a constant wind gust... and unless there is a storm it's NEVER a constant, and even then it's going to slow at points. Everyone knows that at tracks meets wind can be gusting in all different directions and at times it can go against the direction it has been trending. Did the wind gauge that was working the whole meet suddenly stop bc there was no wind? Did it break during that race? Was it broken the whole time? I've heard reports stating all of these... Now we're just getting into conjecture. But the eye test might be the best tell yet. No one has really gotten close to breaking the record. With all the technological advances in shoes, coaching and training someone should've gotten closer or at least broken it by now. Many records stand for a long time; some were because of drugs and some bc they are set by a truly amazing athlete ( Bolt, El Guerrouj...etc). But until we know otherwise its all a guess. Can we say in those few seconds the wind didn't die down? No. The record will fall eventually, all records fall. Let sleeping dogs lie.
The fact that today there is better training better supplements and diet, better shoes better tracks and no one has yet broken the record nor even with similar wind aid came close says it all she was gifted beyond measures. She was the first Usain Bolt as so his record will never be broken neither not less someone as gifted comes along
There is likely archival tv footage showing the anemometer and screen over the duration of the heats and potentially of the triple jump perspective at the same time. If the footage of the 2 can be reconciled or if it shows someone working on the anemometer around the heats then there will be actual proof that it was windier than the orange presidential candidate.
Agreed. Same with Marita Koch in the 400m.
Get rid of that JUICED record as well.
Do you know how I know she was on Testosterone?
She had a Koch.
Was their hair blowing at the start line?
Idk I feel like someone will break this record Elaine Thompson came so close with 10.54
I see University of Indiana how much friction os goong on in Indiana now? I grew up on this time. One of Jamaicas top runners, Merlene Otay raced for both Jamaica and Slovenia. What were the track clubs? Carl Lewis had issues with Ben Johnson as well.
great video. Has there been an illegal wind time close to 10.49 that anyone has seen ?
It was the only race in history with wind. The wind actually only blew in flojos lane.
How dare you people and racist says this record should go FLO JO has won this race fair and square some people always have to try and be so negative and taking away whats rightfully theres REST IN PEACE FLO JO we all know you are the best ever in the 100m and 200m lets say someone did break her record people still wont be satisfied because then they will say something negative about that STOP HATING
Maybe I missed it but did everybody in her race also set a new personal record?
How they make such on error
New WR loading at Paris Olympics
Very nice deep dive but ultimately speculation on the anemometer and not quantifying “way off the curve” really presents no reason to disregard, especially after 35 years.
just found this channel, amazing content!
Well Elaine Thompson Herah 10.54 ran close to it so it breakable.
Have been aware for a while, but am thankful for the call to action. Just sent them (World Athletics) this:
Flo-Jo's 100m WR was very clearly wind-aided, and should be annulled. If you do even fairly minimal statistic modelling, you see this, and the more you consider alternative explanations, the more you realise that they do not hold water. The most likely reason (assuming no conspiracies) is an electrical problem, particularly some sort of cable connectivity issue with the anemometer. It's shocking and awful that the record was ever ratified, but the much worse thing is that we continue to pretend to believe this absolutely absurd nonsense. For past 35 years female sprinters have suffered the consequences of competing against an impossibility that never really happened. Do your duty, and make sure that future women don't suffer the same.
Then I guess Usain Bolts 9:58 isn't real either huh??? smh
Let us know if you hear back from them!
You little snitch lol get a life bozo
Defenitley need to get rid of the record
I think that record was wind aided and drug assisted 😅
YES😂😂
Well that's your Opinion... The fact is that she the WR Holder
@@RJ12347 lol 😂 I still believe she was a drug cheat! And there’s a lot of evidence her time was also wind aided
@@Page1travelfitnessyour Jamaican beliefs don't mean deadly squash it unless you have hard proof so suck it up buttercup the record stands
Excellent, EXCELLENT analysis. Now I can stop acknowledging that ridiculous "record" because I knew it was tainted: either by juicing or....now...by this new information.
The fastest woman in the world comes from Jamaica. And her name is Elaine Thompson-Herah..
I think there’s more to this story Though I think the wind might be a large factor. But the fact remains there’s a massive problem in your logic and is why they had to ratify that you’re objectively incorrect to ignore: if you can’t find the fault with the reading, simply calling it “strange” and not ratifying is highly problematic and legally not sustainable. The every fact that meteorologically it’s possible to have gusting, shifty wind that can confuse instruments then be something different or atleast appear different 100m later is why it’s inappropriate to say this is wrong to ratify. It would be irresponsible to just flat out say this is ridiculous to ratify. Bc you can’t ACTUALLY say the reading is wrong. It’s strange, but that’s not proof it’s wrong. There’s quite a few holes in your argument that interestingly I think it more open minded, you might have been able to close off while telling this story. But rewatching this knowing you missed this stuff imo changes how one thinks of this time.
Ultimately, this was IMO a wind aided time but I wouldn’t say too far over the limit given her performances that uniquely aligned to alleged enhanced performance of a particular cycle at that time to which IMO was hard to ignore. If it’s deleted, it’s not bc of wind. BUT it should stand as the instruments were investigated and if anything this was a problem that wasn’t an error and more so a product of difficulty measuring information in particular gusty conditions . Meaning this would have happened 10/10 regardless of the instrument. For that reason you must ratify. You can’t rely on the technology every time but once then simply ignore the weird one. You have to problem the error then solve for it but there was no major flaw in the technology at the time that could be determined. For instance, was the immaculate reception a catch? IMO hell no, the angle simply doesn’t seem possible. Franco Harris’ hands simply couldn’t be under the ball given his body position. but lack of video evidence showing the angle needed can disprove that. Shall we say that no longer counts in the moment bc it looks weird? Nope. We use the data we have and trust. Bc that’s what we have . Until we can prove otherwise which you haven’t here and can’t be done . The other factors below tilt the story back to the more “credible” as you’ve made things sound impossible that actually aren’t.
For starters, 4:39 did you actually look this up though? Bc Devers is not correct for instance. And it was really early in his career. It was her PB but there’s also some element of this was the biggest stage of some of their careers. Same with Echols. Hers I agree is more problematic but she ran 10.9 a year before this was early in her career with no win recorded and a day after this PB you mention she broke 11 with a legal wind then 11 flat in the final. Diane williams ran 10.9 a year prior with a wind aided 2.3. She ran a 10.94 with a 0.6 legal aid years before. My point is, those are very doable. Out of context atleast. That’s step 1 bc youve framed them as if they aren’t. That’s not true but we should level set this stuff BEFORE diving in. Otherwise you’re at risk of confirmation bias.
Additionally, you compare the quarters to heats in terms of wind and that’s entirely out. That’s a red herring. Heats were at 1310; quarters at 1545. WAYY too much time between. Adding to that, I’ve run at IUPUI before - the winds do whip at times like they do at the chute in Eugene down the stretch. For instance on the men’s side at the 88 trials, the wind went from heat 1-4 as such:
+3.1
+2.0
-0.6
+1.9
We only say 0.0 is strange bc it’s literally NO wind but don’t forget it’s 1988 and while tech has advanced there were still things hard to read. A cross wind was aknowledged on the broadcast before the race. It’s famously hard to read crossing winds. If you get shifty winds at the start of the race, it may not be the same wind at the end of the straight. For Indianapolis that’s truly not insane.
And Anecdotally, I can say from personal experience it’s not true to suggest you don’t set PBs in qualifiers or heats early. That’s uniquely untrue. In fact it’s very common. You’re most relaxed and in flow state so when alone if you have lane 4, you can drive your knees and not think. I ran a 10.3 then false started the Big East final haha I means it’s funny now but wasn’t back then. Even FloJo at Seoul set 3 Olympic records in the build up to her gold medal that same year. Moreover, speaking of the games there were not one but TWO readings of 0.0 in the string of many heats back to back. So to say it’s odd to have 0.0 readings is again not in good faith bc it’s not. It’s strange to have wind of 0.0 as well as +4 within 20 minutes. But not impossible.
Please send me literature that suggests that "swirling winds" can cause 0.00 readings. Hell, even find me a case where a crosswind has produced a 0.00 reading on an anemometer in any fashion. And if you think it's a crosswind, a 91 degrees reading would not have posted an exact 0.00m/s reading on *two separate occasions*, because that's not perfectly perpendicular to the track. I'm aware that athletes run differently in various rounds of a championship event, but the paper does use biomechanical analysis to adjust accordingly when plotting their points on the "expected performance" curve; something I clarified to prevent this very comment.
Furthermore, PED's are not relevant at all here. It was 1988; the entire world was on very robust and in some cases, life-threatening doping protocols to where the level field was even-ish anyways (the women's shot/disc were doping beyond doping but that's a different story on its own). This was remedied slightly after stricter testing came into play, but obviously designer compounds and smarter dosages became the standard very quickly after.
I disagree that we just have to trust the people behind the timing equipment in this particular instance when they've gone on record making shit up about this record (e.g. the swirling winds theory that for some ungodly reason people subscribe to) The idea of a crosswind happening in back-to-back heats also has to be discounted too because the triple jump right next to the track recorded exclusively tailwinds for every single solitary jump.
In essence, you're effectively arguing a miracle beyond a miracle that would also signify these miracle winds allowed runners to run the best times in the world in such a superficial stage of the trials (for some at least). Because remember, this was two heats *in a row* this happened, not just one isolated instance, which is what so many people forget that make this infinitely less likely. The odds of that happening while another event parallel to it was recording exclusively tailwinds is effectively impossible. The sport is not new to equipment malfunctions or shaky rules, and it's especially not new to not properly answering to said concerns when it's not convenient for them to do so. Sure, empirically, it can't be proved that the wind gauge messed up, but statistically speaking, it overwhelmingly favors that the record was not investigated and ratified properly, and you can even find newspaper articles of the record very quickly getting ratified with almost no proper diagnosis or second-thoughts about it.
Wow, someone saw what he wanted to see in the video. He never "simply" called it strange. He went to great lengths to not only show how the 0.0 reading has negligible probability, but that it is demonstrably untrue given the triple jump that was running simultaneously. He also didn't say that no one sets PRs in heats - only that it's uncommon to go all out when you have the victory. Any track runner (including me) will confirm that. The real thing here is that none of these arguments ALONE are slam dunks. It's when you put them all together that it becomes pretty irrefutable. You are picking them apart (and in some cases misinterpreting them) in an effort to cast them as straw men. Swing and a miss, though....
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate....
She trained with Ben Johnson and suddenly went from a good college runner to setting a time that no one has come close to since.
"One of the few records from the 80s that still stands"... umm, actually the women's 100m, 200m, 400m and 800m world records were all set in the 1980s and they all still stand.
nicely put together and i totally agree, iv never considered this to be a legal world record ever since i saw it live and subsequent repeat viewings, without a doubt Flo-Jo was an awesome sprinter with such a fluid style that ate the track up but thats not the issue
That championship record you see on the screen a bunch is also tainted, courtesy of Marion Jones.
I recall reading an article in one of the leading American Running magazines of the 80’s prior to the Olympics, praising Flo Jo’s gym training & her ability to bench press such phenomenal weights for a female- Having little knowledge at the time, along with most people, re use of steroids- I didn’t connect the dots until after Ben Johnson’s dq in the men’s 100 m & all the information came out that each & every finalist, in that event, including Carl Lewis, had been using PED’s - It transpired that what was happening in pro cycling well b4 the Lance Armstrong debacle had also been the case in athletics where both sports officials & sports companies knew their was widespread drug use going on but contrived to cover it all up & ensure it didn’t come to public attention- There is a very interesting similarity in the careers of FJG & Armstrong in that for years they had produced good but far from exceptional results , then quite suddenly, in the space of two seasons, they both put in some of the greatest performances of all time !
You convinced me. The raw numbers was enough of the wind from the other heats. Now I’m a keep watching to see if he addresses why the clock said 0.0.
Shouldn’t they know if the wind reader was not working.would have thought someone would have said something. Especially since they fixed it.
Tail wind plus jacked up in go faster juice - cancel the record
Prove it
@@evilsimeon well, the video does a good effort to prove that the wind direction was not as stated. And then for 100 m and 200 m she set comfortably the biggest record improvement there’s ever been and ran faster in both by half a second, than she ever did before - for one season - which again is unheard of, and then she immediately retired! Purely in terms of biomechanics that’s virtually impossible to improve that much out of nowhere in one go over one season.. Yes, she passed every drigs test as most athletes did back them and was subsequently found to have cheated later as testing regimes got better- but as I said, she retired so was never tested again. If that’s not enough for you to have any suspicion then that’s on you.
100ms position SET
“Go faster juice”..😂😂😂😂😂
Original commentary at the time suggest before the race that it will be the fastest run ever but wind aided. At the end of the race both commentators instantly dispute the wind gauge 0.0 reading! You can see the official at 14:51 onwards white flag blowing hard just as they start too!
I just realised there is a song that goes " Flo-Jo mojo" in my playlist 😂
So why didn't the others post their all-time best times then 🤔
Does anyone know if the other women in flojos record breaking 100m, smashed their personal bests? Cause I'd imagine the wind wasn't just blowing in flojos lane. If most of the other athletes ran personal bests by 0.2+, than maybe this could be true
I recall seeing her race and obviously more muscles than suoerman
What happen every time the doping agency tried to sneak up on bolt and the crew
Thanks VERY MUCH for this correction! The wildly FAST times for FLORENCE and others in these two Heats have been widespread knowledge among those present at TAC National Champions in the latter1980s. I was there in Indianapolis. The wind WAS at least 5 mph behind her when Florence ran 10:49. The race should have been disqualfied for Record consideration there and then. That was not owes less to nefariousness than to LAZINESS during the era of OLLAN CASSELL as head of TAC, Please let me know any way I can assist in negating this false WR. Cheers and the best, DON PAUL
Truth! So damn obvious. Gake it off the books
I'm glad the record stands. If those who were actually there verified the reading, and at no time made any claims to there being issues with the equipment, then their ruling should be respected. This record will be beaten. When will that happen? Only time will tell. I just hope the measuring equipment (anemometer in particular) is working at that time.
Did the other women in the race run significantly faster as well?
Its a bullshit record... and it 100% needs to be removed
Does IT ON YOUR MARK POSSIBLE?
Either asterisk 100m-800m or don't do anything at all.
Everyone ignores bolt's rapid progress too. HOW ON EARTH do you go from performing a personal best ever (world record) mid 9.7 to months later hitting low 9.6? (I realise he clocked 9.69, but almost every sport scientist agrees he lost almost a tenth of a second with the celebration.)
Bolt was doping, he was extremely lucky for many reasons. First of all, Jamaica had no testing when he was competing, secondly, he came at a time when track and field was declining due to steroid allegations so they needed someone with charisma, and that’s was very talented and likeable to save the sport - something that Bolt has. Thirdly, it makes his story more believable because he performed well as a teen, so it makes sense why he will also be good as an adult.
So basically, many things worked in bolts favour but it’s obvious he was using something. Out of the top 5 sprinting times he’s the only clean athlete lol😂.
Secondly this guy went from 10.03 to 9.69 in a year
If not this record, what time would you like to give her? and why do you even care? What you are saying is simply ludicrous🙄😵💫
I believe this so strongly man. Elaine Thompson-hera is the real WR holder
The wind couldn't have only favoured Flo Jo...the gap between her and the others is very indicative!
Maybe that was a PED factor ?
She said that her coach told her to run full out- the other athletes were running conservatively since it was the quarterfinal, not the final.
*I can't stand all this Flo-Jo hate. Flo-Jo's blood was as pure as snow that has been on the ground for 5 days in New York City.*
❤❤❤❤❤flo Jo
Did you watch the video? There's no mention that Flo Jo's record is faulty because of suspected steroid use but because the equipment recording the wind was faulty during that time. It wouldn't have changed the fact that she would've still been the fastest woman for decades with the 10.61 record.
@@amimi92, apparently someone doesn't understand that it's possible to watch a video while joking about the reputation of the person depicted in the video. Would you also act like a huge Karen if I made a joke about inappropriate urination under a CZcams video discussing R. Kelly's greatest hits?
@@ROFusion So you’re saying that your initial comment was a joke? Its kind of hard to detect sarcasm just from text alone
You know what? It took me a few tries but I can see the sarcasm now 😅
That world record race must have been everyone's PB if wind was a factor or am I wrong?
7 out of the 8 runners set PBs in that race
correction. at least 6 of the 7
@@sharkwave1661 By how much? We talking 0.01 or like 0.1 - 0.3?
Tbh, as good as this video is, it doesn't really make a huge difference... only purists will argue this one...
I take WR loosely. Yes, it's great if you have one, but there is soo many variables at play here... as well as a bit of luck. Put simply (unpopular opinion here, so I'll get attacked I'm sure, lol) that the record still stands, because if you get rid of it, suddenly we will find ourselves being super suspicious of the equipment in future Olympic games...
Let the record stand. I know, I know, that may be inaccurate... but consider this... it allows us to focus less on the equipment, and instead focus on the actual athlete proving what is possible for human achievement, which is in the true ethos of the Olympic games.
(Think of it like this. Lets assume you are 100% correct... we have the games coming up this July in Paris. When I see the times on the board, I'm now going to immediately be even more cynical... it takes the joy out of watching a Human Being compete at the highest level...)
You may be right, you may be just close... who knows... equipment, politics, anything can (and will) influence the times... Lets just appreciate what she and Elaine TH did years later as brilliance of what women can do at peak performance...
That's my quick opinion... only purists will argue (rightly or wrongly)
Great video and analysis, don't get me wrong. Thanks for being brave and posting this ;-)
Wake up babe a new runnerboi video just dropped
the 800m woman world record is the one that truly shouldn't exist. That was a whole dude running on the field lol
Absolutely. I wrote about that earlier in this thread. Someone also pointed out the women's 400m as well and they're right. Both runners were straight up science experiments.
4:50 Incorrect interpretation of the graph. It shows how the windspeed affected an athlete's time with varying finish times, identified with what heat it was. It doesn't show that athletes typically get faster through heats.
I should have clarified that the *effort* gets harder/reflects better performances over time; not just the times themselves. My bad haha.
@@RunnerBoiI looked at it again, and you are correct. Early heats are above the plot line and later heats are below - showing they run easier in early rounds and harder in later rounds. I didn’t catch that the first time, thanks for taking the time to reply
I think it's a matter of time that the wr will be awarded to Thompson Herah. Flo-Jo was great, but it's obvious there was something wrong.
It shouldnt have been ratified. However since it is ratified it cannot be proved to be of illegal wind because there were triple jumps at the same time and more than one of them was actually within the legal limit (+1.1 , +1.0, +2.0 the latter shortly after Flo Jos heat). The wind gauge gave a faulty 0.0 reading, but you cant prove that Flo Jos run wasnt +2.0 or under because the triple jumps confirmed legal wind readings were possible that day.
Flo Jo was indeed capable of a 10.49 with +2.0 wind
therefore it technically must stand as the world record.
I think if you look at (if they exist) the wind readings for the foul/passed jumps youll find more wind readings below +2.0
The data from the 2nd round of triple jumps proves beyond doubt that Flo Jos 10.49 couldve been +2.0 and must stand as the WR.
McFadgen jumps and theres a +4.8 wind reading, Cobb jumps next and its a legal +2.0 , the very next jump the wind is back up to +4.2
Not only is it possible for the wind to have dropped to +2.0 for Flo Jos run but it literally happened in the triple jump minutes later for a short period of time.
Round 5 shows again the wind was capable of going up and down by a huge amount in a short space of time meaning that a +4.3 reading just before or after Flo Jos race was no proof whatsoever that it was indicative of Flo Jos race, the data actually suggests that Flo Jos race couldve potentially been as low as +1.0
The two foul readings of Kimble and Harrison before Flo Jos race would be quite interesting to find out
Yes the race itself suggests it was windy but theres no way of proving it wasnt TOO windy
Some of the other athletes in the race that ran very quick times compared to their other races were actually capable of running those times with +2.0 wind
Sorry about that.
I mean, yeah you're right. But just watching the officials flag as they leave the blocks tells you there is absolutely 100% an enormous tailwind as the gun goes off. Correct you cannot measure it but anyone who has spent time at a track can look at that alone and know everything they need to without anything further to be added.
@@duncanharvey2209 its the average wind over the distance though so theres something like a 15 second duration where the wind is recorded and couldve dropped from +5.0 at the start to +1.0 at the finish and given a +2.0 average. you are right to recognize the wind while they are in the blocks as being likely over +4.0 you could even prove that but over the duration of the race its possible the wind changed dramatically
@@cattycats4 Yep I know. It's done over ten seconds and you're absolutely correct. It's why I absolutely hate wind gauges. When I was competing there would be times you run fast and register headwinds, because it would be a headwind when you were running towards it but then that wind was slightly right to left and had "moved off" the track by the time you got there and vice versa. Certainly we can't do anything about it as you say. It's annoying as she may well have run 10.60 or something anyway.
@@duncanharvey2209 true , also if the 10.49 wasnt ratified I think Flo Jo wouldve run it or very close to it before retiring. Flo Jo also said she was definitely going for the WR in the quarter final run as she knew she had been faster than it in training and it was a goal that day. The last bit of evidence is the comparison of the race to her other fast times, she gets a much better start in the 10.49! enough for maybe a whole tenth compared to the 10.54 windy which equates to 10.49 being realistic on a perfect day with a great start
This is a fair assessment, but I think my biggest disagreement overall is based off of the fact that we can rule out beyond a reasonable doubt (imo of course) that the wind was 0.00 by any metric, and that this would then qualify under "faulty equipment", and therefore shouldn't be ratifiable as a world record. Could it count towards a seasons best list or as a qualifying time towards the Olympic standard? Sure, but the IAAF (especially back then) wasn't exactly the most diligent or stringent with the way that ratified records, *especially* on the roads given how reckless they were with ratifying a slew of courses that wouldn't count as records today. Perhaps that's a false equivalency, but my point is that World Athletics as a federation has a history of not having all their T's crossed when it comes to implementing/enforcing their rules properly. World records in particular need to be treated with a lot of care and nowadays take much longer to be ratified thankfully. In this case... that's not what happened.
More conspiratorially, Flo-Jo's 10.49 was such a crucial precedent going into the 1988 Olympics and is still one of the most celebrated records to this day. It quite literally changed the landscape of the event and was a *massive* help in maintaining the mainstream nature of the sport during this time too. To not count this record would have sent the sport into flames temporarily imo, and you can even find articles of how hastily the record was ratified too without much (needed) investigating.
Appreciate the comment though!
Considering the wind analysis, you have concluded that that was a PEDS run to victory.