What is Digg?61 Comments
- mollysue111, on 12/02/2008, -1/+19The whole article is basically "he could have gone faster if he'd have gone faster".
- burden555, on 12/02/2008, -2/+13and they also predict the record for posting duplicate stories could drop to 9.48 seconds
- sockpuppets, on 12/02/2008, -1/+11Well if we're hit with asteroids then we'll probably momentarily run really fast, then we'll be consumed by flames and debris of overvalued homes.
- manjy90, on 12/02/2008, -4/+12Didn't Bolt slow down and start showboating, he could very well reach that 9.48. Then again, the showboating itself if the human element the that probably wasn't factored into the estimate.
- aserer511, on 12/02/2008, -0/+8his last name is bolt.
let's all appreciate the awesomeness of this - Junior612, on 12/02/2008, -0/+8We put some sprint in yo sprint, so you can go faster while you go faster!
- Junior612, on 12/02/2008, -3/+10Is this with or without 'roids?
- postitnote, on 12/02/2008, -0/+7Well, I think hemorrhoids would slow down the runner rather than speed them up.
- Dromeciomimus, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5It takes time to reach top speed from the starting blocks. In the second 100m of a 200m race, the sprinter is already at top speed and can continue at that pace until the finish line.
- ihendley, on 12/02/2008, -0/+3Exactly. Bolt ran the second 100 meters of his 19.30 200m in 9.34 seconds.
- Balath, on 12/02/2008, -0/+3100m GET
- V3NOM, on 12/02/2008, -0/+3http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzSpPaCIG0g
He could have smashed it. - Sheepsterbaby, on 12/02/2008, -0/+3protip: He actually is.
- Brassbud, on 12/02/2008, -0/+2Meanwhile, the average adult male today probably can't run nearly as fast as the average male 10,000 years ago.
- ultraseamus, on 12/02/2008, -0/+2Sure, and years ago I could have predicted that the rate at which time passes depends on an object's velocity relative to the speed of light, but if I was just some random schmuck with no credentials who has made no attempt to justify my claim, no one would have cared. What is your point?
- Julian88888888, on 12/02/2008, -0/+2The difference is you don't know what the hell you're talking about
- painting, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1you get a whole article and money just for guessing things.
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -2/+3He was showboating, but he didn't really slow his legs down much. I'm guessing he could have knocked off another .02 or so, from aerodynamics and weight distribution. And it was only for less than 20 meters.
- brandita, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1He should have waited to celebrate until he was actually finished with the race.
- iLoveGoogle, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1dropped from what? maybe you should include that in your title bitch
- Plasmodia, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1Kid thinks hes the next Donovan Bailey or something.
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1aaah god i'm an idiot, can't believe i missed that
- Trollbane, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1I'd like to see the method this guy used to come to this conclusion so accurately. I have a feeling he didn't have a sufficient sample space when he was going over the past records to make this exact a claim. After all, he could have easily said "under 9 and a half seconds."
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1Stole my record
- NuclearFalcon, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1Loss of bladder control while running is often due to weak kegel muscles.
Here are some excersises
http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=kegel+exercise ... - Archaic1, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1Of course he can do it faster, but Bolt is a showman. He did that showboating for articles just like this.
- mikesorrentino, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1Not to be a dick but yeah this was like the number 2 story a couple of days ago.
- PovRayMan, on 12/02/2008, -0/+19.24
You're outdated, son. - odxWallz, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1Wow. I really wish I gave a ***** about something this stupid.
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -1/+27 minute mile?
Take up a new sport. - inactive, on 12/02/2008, -0/+19.685
- originaldna, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1no *****!!!
- Aguyinachair, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1FTA:
"Norwegian physicist Hans Eriksen analyzed TV footage of the Olympic final and estimated that Bolt could have run 9.55 seconds if he had not slowed down." - moonboots, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1could get even lower if jamaica doesn't increase its out of competition doping checks
- Aguyinachair, on 12/02/2008, -1/+2"The women’s record in the 100 is 10.49, set by the late Florence Griffith-Joyner in 1988. But Denny used 10.61 seconds in his study because of “compelling evidence that the (10.49) race was wind aided.” "
That's right, he determines how fast women can run, and no woman can run faster than the times he says. If there's evidence otherwise, they cheated. - coolian, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1I distinctly remember an article about 7-8 years ago in which a scientist claimed that the theoretical fastest time possible for a 100m sprint would be 9.65s. Big whoops there.
- ihendley, on 12/02/2008, -0/+19.55 is a gross overestimate of how fast Bolt could have run if he had not celebrated early. He didn't really slow down that much. See this article: http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09/usain-bolt ...
- alexkball, on 12/02/2008, -1/+1Oh my god stop the presses!
- slayernine, on 12/02/2008, -1/+1I predict that the 100m sprint record will continue to be lower on a continuous basis at any given point in the future.
- MrFisty, on 12/02/2008, -1/+1Alternate headline could have been "Professor predicts the bleedingly obvious"
It's a bit of a "no *****, Sherlock" topic. Just look at old sprint records from a century ago compared to now. Evolving technology equals faster runners. - inactive, on 12/02/2008, -1/+1"At the Olympics, Bolt followed up his record in the 100 with another in the 200, running 19.30. Denny predicts that record could be lowered to a staggering 18.63"
Wouldn't an 18.63 200 m involve both 100s being 9.32, which is significantly faster than the 9.48 maximum the article says? Just saying... (not to mention that women could supposedly drop the marathon record to 2:14:97!) - pitdog, on 12/02/2008, -1/+1I hereby predict that some time in the future the record will go below 9.2. there. now gimmie a grant.
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -0/+0such vitriol
- dgre0612, on 12/02/2008, -0/+0but usain isn't human, so he could break 9.48
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -0/+0you forget, the world is 517 years old.
- bigbillybee, on 02/14/2009, -0/+0Some really cool sites. After you are done reading the article check them out as well
http://buycheapwiigames.stodan.com
http://best-caribbean-cruise.com/
http://stockdaytradingrobot.net
http://gillettepower.com
http://tightjeansdance.com - sadmib, on 03/06/2009, -0/+0bolts the man!
http://movingstill.com.au -
Show 51 - 61 of 61 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is