BBC Focus Magazine

[Lateralman]

...if allowed to run the 100 metres this way.

I was reading the feature ‘Beyond Usain Bolt’ in this month’s Focus Magazine when an odd thought occurred to me. Is the 100m sprint a true representation of how fast a man can run? Should the period of time to get up and running from a standing start be included in the measurement of how fast a man can run?

Alternatively, should someone’s speed only be measured over the distance of 100 metres when he has reached his top speed after first passing the start line over that distance? This would mean that reaction time and acceleration first take place a few yards behind the start line with only top running speed recorded by a camera at the start of the race and at the end.

I realise that this would make the 100m sprint a 110m sprint but it would be more accurate in terms of what true speed man is capable of continuously ‘running’ a 100m distance.

We do not measure the speed of a cheetah while it is crouched in the grass.

Just a thought...

[M Paul Lloyd]

It could happen, just as it has with aviation, time was a time record run across a given distance would be measured from take off to landing but in more modern cases it has been from a predetermined point once the aircraft is airborne to one before it commences its final approach to landing and yet others where it is simply over a given distance between two points at full speed.

But human competition in running is all about the total package from reaction time off the blocks, acceleration, average speed and stamina.
So I can't see it happening myself.

[...]

there is also a problem of getting all the runners to pass the start line at exactly the same time.