Marcell Jacobs has shown great potential in his 120m time trial, even setting the fast time in the flying 100m. Despite not yet reproducing it in a major meet, there is nothing stopping him from achieving this in the future.
Coleman came back from a long ban and still lost by only 0.003. He still holds the WR for the 60m but the fastest ever recorded 60m is by su bingtian at the world champs this year. In terms of that Jacobs still have a chunk to do. In terms of 100m, he has achieved a great time but is nowhere near the Goat of Usain or even others like Gatlin etc. Yes he is technically good, yes he has won a few things and if he continues he will be up there in history but training times mean nothing. An example is Ben Johnson, a great Canadian sprinter talking absolute rubbish that he ran times much faster then the WR in training on multiple occasions.
20m data is somewhat off. Gatlin was 2.70 (2.87 with 0.161RT) in 9.74, Ben Johnson 2.73 (2.87 with 0.132RT) in 9.79, Asafa 2.73 (2.88 with 0.150RT) in 9.72. As per Track and Field rounding (anything 0.001-0.009 is the next 0.01) same applies to RTs
This is called the Gold Medal effect. No disrespect to Marcell Jacobs but his best ever is 9.8. To even be considered in the arena of nipping at Bolt he should be consistently running in the 9.7s. I'm routing for him though.
The video is highlighting his flying 100m, the point isn't to compare with Usain Bolt's standing 9.58 but with his flying 8.65 100m split. A standing start isn't more or less accurate than a flying start, they are different runs altogether. F1 for example uses flying laps for judging fastest laps (I know it's not 100% comparable since it's cars and all)
Jacobs’ 11.35 confirmed by frame by frame analysis? I run it through my app that has been used to produce 100’s of split data used by Elite athletes and it is nowhere near 11.35 even without RT 😂 where are you getting this information from?
I handtimed it by the first step and I did this with every race. 0.55-0.6 off the actual time. I got 11.05 with jacobs. I figured the timing was 11.6 instead. For example I did this with bolt and got 9.03, 0.55 off.
You know for a frame by frame analysis the fact that everyone misses that it's literally impossible for that to have been 120m is absolutely astonishing to me. All you have to do is count his steps and then count the steps he takes to cover 100m to know this wasn't 120m. Unless of course you think he can cover 20m in only 4 strides....I don't want to burst the bubble but as fast as that training run was, that run on video here is NOT 120m. He took exactly 49 steps to the final timing eye and 51 to whatever that yellow cone is. Jacobs covers 100m in bang on 45 steps. So unless you think he's covering 20m in 4 steps, this is not a 120m. Gotta love simple math.
from were he started is the 120 mark but the real question is did he truly finish at the finish line.. I feel like this is truly 120m though because there would be no need to fake something like that but the time is def prolly not as fully accurate as there trying to say it is though.
@@iamjay3537 I agree it's highly likely he started at the true "normal" 120m mark but the time is fine. The issue again is that it's physically not possible to cover 120m in 49 steps. And that's true for any sprinter in history except Usain Bolt who barely makes it assuming he's hitting the 100 in 41.5. As for why the intentional mislead? I guess it's the same as most exaggerated things. Attention and relevance. It's always been this way. We just weren't historically aware of it because it wasn't recorded and put on a platform for viewing. I remember Carl Lewis's camp saying something back in the day that was equally ludicrous.
Agree that the numbers don't line up, but it is closer then what you make it. In his Olympics 100m, he took 14 steps for the last 40m, where he averages 7 steps for 20m in full flight. So based on his Olympics running style, for 120m it works out at 45 steps (100m) plus 7 steps (20m) = 52 steps. But maybe his form has changed since the Olympics to be longer stride ? As in the 60m World champs he only took 29 steps (verse 31 steps to 60m in Olympics), and if you add 14 steps for 40m in full flight, that would have him only doing 43 steps for 100m based on world champs 60m style. Add another 7 steps for an extra 20m, and you have 50 steps for 120m
@@Vinchiamo Not quite mate. He took slightly more than 14 steps for 36m in the Olympic final. He steps essentially half a foot in front of the women's 7th hurdle marker which is exactly 36m from the finish line. He then takes MORE than 14 to cover that distance. And of course he doesn't have a 2.86m stride obviously, which would be longer than Usains. This, yet again must I say is exactly in line with a 49 stride 110m, not 120m. It doesn't matter how anyone tries to cut it. I've done the calcs back to front and inside out. I even did it using his older start technique where he took fewer strides and therefore fewer strides overall but that was years ago. And so it's clear, the calc even if I presume it was exactly 14 steps for that 36m, which is being generous, then guess what? 36/14 = 2.57m. Four times this is 10.28m. and given it was actually just over 14 steps it's actually four times 2.52m. it's literally 49 steps to cover 110m.
Per una schiappa come Jacobs?😂😂😂 Non sai quante risate mi sono fatto al Golden Gala di venerdì scorso quando si è addirittura fermato per non prenderle.
Carl Lewis's split for the 4x100 relay at the 84 Olympics was 8.49 I remember them posting all the splits on the scoreboard and I couldn't believe when I saw his anchor leg split
It was 8.94 in 1984… 8.98 in 1983 (37.87), 8.86 in 1987 (37.90), and 8.75 in 1992 (37.40) often given wrongly as 8.85.. there is a video saying Carl ran 8.70 in 1987 Pan Am Games but I am doubtful of the accuracy of this
I can't find any sources on this. So I'm taking this as a grain of salt. This is no different from when I hear nfl draft picks running ridiculous 40yd dash times in training or in private workouts.
Just my opinion but I don't think anybody will ever beat Bolt's 100M or 200M world records. The guy was an absolute freak of nature being that tall (6'5") and that fast.
Michael Johnson in 2009 said (and I believed him), that next Usain Bolt was not born yet. He's an exceptionally rare talent. But records are made to be broken. Maybe in 2030s we'll see such a guy.
I think Bolt’s success is largely attributed to his height of 6’5”. He wasn’t too tall to the point he faced health issues due to his length but his strides are what gave him an edge over 6’1” and shorter sprinters.
@@razor_ramon_ That's not quite true. A 19.30 with a -0.9 m/s wind is a 19.23 with 0 wind. A tailwind of +2.0 doesn't help as much as a headwind of 2.0 hurts, so it's not like going up to a +2.0 would get him from 19.23 to sub 19. A 19.19 with -0.3 is a 19.17 with no wind.
We don't know at what point the stop watch was started in this time trial, so can't really compare the first 20m to a race from blocks. He may have started 1m behind the 120m line with a speed gate at this line, or the clock may have started on his first foot contact, both of which are common ways of timing runs in practice. This means he probably already had some momentum when the clock was started, thus covering the first 20m in significantly less than 2.75s.
A relay split won't be as fast as I don't believe you do a 20 meter run about before you get the baton. For sure Bolt, Blake, & Gay have ran faster 100m splits than this (potentially also Powell, Gatlin, Kerley, & maybe 1 or 2 more), but it's impressive and a cool statistic regardless. Jacobs hasn't been anywhere near WR form ever though, it's a huge exaggeration to say anyone currently running is "taking a stab at the WR". Other than the 3 fastest men in history (Bolt/Blake/Gay), nobody since 2009 has bested Tyson Gay's 2nd place finish of 9.71 in the race where Bolt ran 9.58. Look at how far Bolt is ahead of Tyson in that race, & then remember not a single person running today (other than Blake, but, he's far past his prime due to injury) can beat the 2nd place time in the race. Nobody is even the caliber below the caliber that Bolt is at. A runner will need to run consistent 10.6x to be considered having a shot at the WR, a 9.80 (LMJs best) is worlds apart from a 9.58.
The caption is decptive. Running the first 20m in 2.35 is quick but really not far off from 2.75 this does not mean you will win or break a 100m record. Although the start of the race is important the remaining 180m is also critical . Do you have top end finish to go into overdrive and defeat all the late starters who definitely have the top end speed to catch you and pass you on the tape. 100m is also a diffrrent race than 120m..Usain Bolt surely had that top end speed. I'm sure he would have clocked a less time on 120m at the top of his game before retirement.
Il discorso e' semplice. Ci sono corridori con caratteristiche diverse. Quella di Jacobs e' la velocità massima elevata ma raggiunta molto tardi. Per le sue caratteristiche 6.47 sui 60mt senza lancio finale agli Europei, corrispondono a 9.80 sui 100 a Tokyo. Domandiamoci: 6.41 con lancio finale ai mondiali indoor a quanto corrispondono sui 100?
@@TheWayToWin ricordo che con la velocità raggiunta al mondiale indoor avevano calcolato 9.73 sui 100mt. Questo nell'ipotesi che riuscisse a tenere un buon ritmo. Anticipó l'esordio sui 100mt perché era in forma e per approfittare delle condizioni favorevoli di Nairobi. Infatti quando all'ospedale gli dissero che la velocità del vento era stata 2.0 m/s disse che si era mangiato le mani. Secondo i calcolatori più noti in Kenia su quei tempi hai in vantaggio 0.13 secondi. Quindi siamo sui 9,60. Putroppo anche quest'anno vuole fare la stagione indoor. Per me è troppo cagionevole.
@@christiantagliaferro4123 Ero sicuro che avrebbe battuto il record mondiale a Nairobi. Tuttavia, si è scoperto che non era mentalmente pronto, perché è entrato in forma troppo presto.
He has an exceptional technique and all this training stuff is well and good. But replicating all that under stress is unlikely. 9.5 is on another planet. Jacobs hasn’t run 9.7 yet let alone doing that consistently. And even if he does the max I can give him is a low 9.7 with a flawless race and good conditions. I can’t even see him going 9.6
Yeah, a runner needs consistent 9.6s to have a shot at the WR. Coleman/Bromell/Kerley are all tied at 6th fastest ever at 9.76 & none of a realistic shot at it. Kerley has the best shot at it out of current runners as he has ran 9.7x the most, but that generally implies he may get a one-off high 9.6x race of his life, so not very close to 9.58. Tbh even though Kerley has the "best" shot out of current sprinters, he's not even in the discussion for who will beat Bolt's WR next, so someone who has broke 9.8 zero times for sure isn't in the discussion. The current people running in the discussion for breaking Bolt's WR are: ...
He has already demonstrated that he can DEFINITELY hit low 9.7s by what he did in Tokyo...just convert it. So, the lowest you think he can go is what he's already demonstrated? Illogical. He can hit low 9.6x.
Only people with insane genetics that are fast right now with shitty ass technique can exceed him by improving on it more. Marcel has impeccable form which is why improvement and breaking wr seems impossible to me. But that's just me. They can surprise without a doubt. Someone like marcel just needs to prove that it can be done and bet everyone will surpass bolt.
Bolt's 150m WR has the fastest flying 100m in it without a doubt, and Tyson Gay ran a 150m that would beat any Marcel Jacobs 100m fly as well. For real. Do your research.
@@TheWayToWin So. That doesn't disprove me. Their 30m to 130m time is that one that Jacobs hasn't touched yet. I'm not saying he won't someday. He just has yet to come close. Jacobs lifetime best 100m isn't even close to Gay, let alone Bolt. He needs a 9.7 something first before he even belongs in the discussion.
@@TheWayToWin Bolt ran 9.58 in 100m. His fastest split was 0.81 from 60-70 meters. After that the most he slowed down in a 10 meter split is 0.01 & the least he slowed down is 0.00. He got 0.82 70-80, 0.83 80-90, 0.83 90-100. Assuming he slows down the most he did in these splits (0.01) and can't maintain a 0.83, this would give him a 0.84 100-110 & a 0.85 110-120 which results in 11.27 & this is INCLUDING reaction time. Bolt likely ran 11.2x & 11.3x multiple times in training. His coach doesn't really feel the need to flaunt how well he's doing in training, Bolt shows it at the competition (9.58 vs 9.80). 9.63 is the same ballpark as Bolt, a high 9.6 is a tier below that, then come low-mid 9.7s, then there is Marcell, he is not in the discussion, nor is he close to being in the discussion. A 150m would not a yield a 20-120 as fast as a 120 meter run. 150s your first 100 is opened up in between what your 100m PB is & what you would open your first 100 of a 200 in. So if your PB is 9.69 or something like Gay/Blake & you open up the first 100 of 200 in like 9.95 let's say, you'd probably open up a 150 in 9.82~9.83 if you did it perfectly. A 120 you'd probably want to hit that 9.69 & then run 20 meters further. 150 data is based on like 2 or 3 races run by each athlete, while a split time in training would be the fastest split out of 100s of training runs he's done over time.
@@richardgallimore5976 Also don't forget Jacobs ran this with a curve which makes this even more nonsense. I had a conversation with an analyst NSX_Performance and using his timing app which he uses for splits, this doesn't come close to 11.35. Even without reaction time. We figured this was more of a 11.6 at best. In a straight Jacobs can run 11.5, but sprinting that with a curve is extremely unlikely, especially since he doesn't really run the curve well. Also, Bolt's fastest split has been figured to be 0.8015 by a few analysts which rounds down to 0.80. The 0.81 is from the 6.29 study which isn't widely accepted. 60-70m 0.80 70-80m 0.81 80-90m 0.83 90-100m 0.83 which is 1.61+1.66. Just a small fact. Yohan Blake and Tyson Gay in a straight 120m wouldn't even surpass 11.40, let alone on a curve. Gay's 90-100m was 0.84 and his fastest is a 0.81. If he kept going, the next 20m would be 1.71, which is 0.855 in 10m segment. That's 11.40 on a straight and on a curve, probably 11.6. We subtract reaction time and that's around 11.2, or 11.4 on a curve. The fact that Jacobs ran an 11.35 with that is bullcrap. This is the guy that ran 6.41 indoors which translates to a 9.8 even for him. Barely even sub 11.6 on a straight. This makes Bolt a freak. As you said if he kept going, 11.27 is likely. Based off his reaction time of 0.146, we take away 0.15 and that is a 11.12!! According to the analyst I mentioned previously, he said Bolt at most would sprint 11.45 including RT with a curve. If you subtract RT, that is 11.30. I respect Jacobs, but if you're a sprinter that sprinted 6.41 indoor and had a fair share of 6.5s, there's no way you ran 11.35 on a 120m sprint, even with or without reaction, even with a curve or not a curve. Sprinters need to show their ability and stop talking rubbish. Fred Kerley showed a 6.23 60m and a 14.01 150m. The first one was without RT so basically around 6.38-6.40 and with his top end speed, 9.76-9.81 which was perfectly predicted. We shouldn't take these training times seriously. Joe Fahn said he ran a 4.12 40y dash.
Great 100m runner but bolt's record will stand 20 years at least I believe and his 200m record will also take spectacular running speed and strength endurance to beat it Bolt and then Johnson are the greatest athletes in my life time.Johnsons records which were set in 96 and 99 stood for 12 years in 200m and 17 in the 400m so imagine if he had the sports science and real competition how fast he'd be today.A Jamaican and American are the greatest ever IMHO.
_´Marcell Jacobs has shown great potential in his 120m time trial, even setting the fast time in the flying 100m. Despite not yet reproducing it in a major meet, there is nothing stopping him from achieving this in the future*´_ *except failing mentally.
I don't believe it, plus Usain and Asafa likely didn't have a 20m start when they ran their 100m splits, which were in relay conditions I might add where they have no determination over how the 3rd leg exchanges with them, speed they approach at and how or how long the baton exchange itself takes (fumbling of the baton, changing hands holding the baton, and even holding the baton itself down the 100m home stretch.
He compared it to split 100s as well, but not perfect comparisons. A relay isn't an exact 20 meter run up & in a relay there is also a time you don't pump both arms as 1 arm is sticking out to get the baton for the exchange. Considering Bolt has run 9.58 & has best 10 meter splits of 0.80 or 0.81 I think, & that he generally slows down to 0.82/0.83 in the last 10 meters (based on his 9.58 & 9.63), I would guess his 100-110 is around 0.85 at worst, maybe 0.84, and his 110-120 is around 0.86 at worst, maybe as fast as 0.84. So adding 9.58+0.84+0.84 that gives 11.26. Also this is a 120m run with or without reaction? I assume he just starts running at the timer starts as that would be more advantageous for getting the fastest 120m time. Considering he's a 9.58 runner & assuming Bolt could run 11.26 for this including reaction time, 11.35 sounds too fast for Marcell, I'm guessing this is without reaction time included.
@@braykers2226 Did he? He showed Bolt's 8.65 & Powell's 8.68 relay splits. Still not accurate though as Marcell wasn't doing a relay split, but a different type of split with a longer run up & no exchange.
There is nothing "impossible" about his split time of 8.6 seconds. If you look at his lower body biomechanics, its perfect. Thats his secret. Assafa Powell had the same lower body biomechanics, which is why Assafa also holds the record.
@@TheWayToWin Im sure you do. By the way, in the not too distant future, you might be doing a vid about me. My goal is to break the 100 meter record for my age group - I'm 50.
It's made we wonder, why isn't the fastest human ever measured with a speed gun pointed at them??? Clock the velocity instead of how quick they can get from point A to point B.
“World Record Holder”? Maybe top for the year, but not faster than Bolt. Also, what about Justin’s wind-aided 9.45. “…..under any conditions”. Jacobs needs to set the records in a regular event. He needs to get a second gold medal in ‘24 to be closer to Bolt status.
@@aodoemela Correct. Maybe stress is why he is not racing. Coleman (100) and Lyles (200) were the ones who were to break Bolt’s records. Now it’s Jacobs (100) and Knighton (200). I don’t see it happening anytime soon. They would have to train under “real” conditions and FOCUS. Not happening.
@@aodoemela Maybe so, but the “experts” need to stop hyping it up that the person will be “the next Usain Bolt”. That is way too much pressure for any sprinter.
@@aodoemela Yes, it is about entertainment and hype. Still, saying that for the public to watch might be good, but a coach telling the athlete that would put too much pressure on them.
@@dave929 I doubt Lyles will break Bolt’s record. Knighton prolly will in the 200m, he’s only 0.3 seconds away and 3 years younger than Bolt when he set the record. Now for the 100m, no one’s breaking that for at least another generation or two of athletes. It’s been a decade since we saw the last sub 9.7, and that still puts you a world away from 9.58. Jacobs himself isn’t even the current favorite to break it, considering his best is 9.80; that title goes to Tebogo with a 9.91 at 19 (though still highly unlikely I will say)
A relay split is not as fasta as a pure time trial 100m segment. What's reallyf reakish is that based on splits, you could expect Bolt to cover the same distance in around 8.3s.. Jacobs is simply nowhere near as fast as the last generation like Blake or Gay let alone Bolt who was a full 0.5km/h faster at top end than even them. He has low 9.7s potential, won't go anywhere near tat world recordd, which is a whole other realm of fast.
@@TheJackOfAllTrades777 no it’s not what people said about Bolt 😂 Bolt was breaking junior world records, he was jumping in the sand. They are not the same.
@@TheWayToWin You're grasping at straws. Jacobs running this one 120-meter trial is not nearly enough to dictate whether he could tackle Usain Bolt's record, especially when there is so much nuance as to whether these splits are accurate. Even if it is accurate, fast times are not the only factor that goes into judging someone's ability to break a world record. Usain Bolt was virtually undefeated for years, basically winning every single race he was in while jogging the last 30 meters. Though Jacobs is an Olympic Champion, he is far from undefeated and constantly struggling with injuries. Then look at his actual personal bests in championship events; 9.80 in the 100 meters, and 12th all-time. You have set yourself some agenda that Marcell Jacobs in the next Usain Bolt and are now claiming it to be a "reality" based off of basically nothing. The only person who you could even argue could be a future challenger of any of Usain Bolt's records is Noah Lyles in the 200 meters, and even that is a stretch.
