CR4 Olympic Coverage: A Message for Usain Bolt, the Fastest Man on Earth

Such arrogance, "most track events are exceptionally boring. Steeplechase? Women's 5000m? Blech!" your opinion, not mine or, that of a many others. You never know if and when a break will come. The long jump, on the other hand, is a quick flash with a long wait till the next to see if a white or red flag will be held up, that is boring.

I suspect anything is interesting if you've actually competed in the sport yourself.

I used to do a bit of long distance running (poorly) and find watching such events fascinating, whereas swimming leaves me cold. Although I must admit swimming looks great on TV, dull in real life, but great on TV.

But, to show my age, I intensely dislike the "showboating". To me it cheapens the achievement.

In Australia at least, it was normal for a winning sports-person to modestly admit that "Yes, I have performed well today and I'm pleased that the training has paid off. But I'd especially to thank my coach, fellow team mates, the competitors who's great efforts pushed me further, Bob who prepared the track, Betty who runs junior league etc etc".

I shows a lot more class than " Me! Me! aren't I the greatest thing, Show me the money...".

I have to agree with you 1000% about "showboating". That has been the single most annoying aspect of any sports event, whether it be boxing, football, basketball or track. To me it almost nulifies the positive aspect of the win. I suspect it is an inferiority complex. A bit more modesty would go a long way. GA btw.

I can remember reading that the fastest man on earth is the one who becomes first in the 200m event because if you divide the time taken for 200m by 2,it will be less than the time taken to run 100m. I don't have figures to confirm. If someone has,please publish those figures for the last couple of Olympics.European championship etc.

pnaban,

I've taken the three fastest times ever for both events, and they do not support your assertion. I've also only included men's results, only to simplify this answer. Women's results conform similarly.

200m records

1. Usain Bolt (JAM), 2009. 19.19 seconds with -.3 m/s head wind

2. Yohan Blake (JAM), 2011. 19.26 seconds with +.7 m/s tail wind

3. Michael Johnson (USA), 1996. 19.32 seconds with +.4 tail wind

100m records

1. Usain Bolt (JAM), 2009. 9.58 seconds with +.9 m/s tail wind

2. Tyson Gay (USA), 2009. 9.69 seconds with +2.0 m/s tail wind

3. Asafa Powell (JAM), 2008. 9.72 seconds with +.2 m/s tail wind

Usain Bolt set both records at the 2009 championships in Berlin, including one in a head wind!

Thanks.Can you give results of Olympics(not records) of 2012,2008,2004,2000,1996 etc?.

100m

1988 - Seoul GOLD Carl Lewis, USA 9.92
1992 - Barcelona GOLD Linford Christie, GBR 9.96
1996 - Atlanta GOLD Donovan Bailey, CAN 9.84
2000 - Sydney GOLD Maurice Greene, USA 9.87
2004 - Athens GOLD Justin Gatlin, USA 9.85
2008 - Beijing GOLD Usain Bolt, JAM 9.69

2012 - London GOLD Usain Bolt, JAM 9.63

200m

1988 - Seoul GOLD Joe DeLoach, USA 19.75
1992 - Barcelona GOLD Michael Marsh, USA 20.01
1996 - Atlanta GOLD Michael Johnson, USA 19.32
2000 - Sydney GOLD Kostas Kederis, GRE 20.09
2004 - Athens GOLD Shawn Crawford, USA 19.79
2008 - Beijing GOLD Usain Bolt, JAM 19.30

2012 - London Results pending

Thanks. I find 200m winner faster in a)1988 by 0.04sec,b)1996 by 0.18sec and c)2008 by 0.04secs

Interesting, this begs the question: is there a distance in between at which the athletes could achieve a higher average speed?

The optimum distance should then be the distance over which the definitive sprint races take place.

I wonder whether the officials record time taken for every 5 or 10m as well as speed every 5 or 10m so that we can draw a graph of time and speed of athletes Vs time to analyse in which lap the fastest time as well as at which point highest speed were achieved. From the graph we will know whether in the first 100m or in the second 100m the fastest time was achieved compared to 100m sprint. The same analysis could be done for all events even long jump & high jump.

Item 1- 100m faster by 0.01sec,Item-2 200m faster by 0.06sec

Item 3-200m faster by 0.06sec

I have to disagree with this, Usain Bolt is not the fastest man on earth.

I am faster than Usain Bolt at least twice a day, so are most other people, with a bike, a car, on a train.

Yes, im being picky, he is the fastest at running the 100m, and does it in style, but not the fastest man on earth.

I find this blog interesting! Not boring in the least!!!!!

If Carl Lewis could run the sprints as well as do the long jump, then Bolt probably could do the same (with a lot of coaching mind you).

Okay, not to blow my own horn here, but back in my high school days long long ago I too was a sprinter, and pretty damn good at it mind ya. I gave up a promising football career (kickoff and punt returns + Slot Back) after my Junior year because I was better at track, not wanting to get seriously injured. You wouldn't know it today looking at me because I've put on the pounds since then and now smoke like a factory chimney, but I was a 5-time NYS Section 2 champion, mainly indoor track. Not bad for a kid that weighed 135# soaking wet and only stood 5'-7" tall....my main strength was my explosive start out of the blocks as I could beat almost anyone of of them. This was back in the day when we ran in yards, not meters. Many of my old high school track records are still standing some 36 years later! Some of my records: 5.4 sec in the 50 yd dash Indoors; 6.35 sec in the 60 yd dash Indoors; 9.62 sec. in the 100 yd dash Outdoors (finishing 3rd at the state meet, electronically timed); and 21.6 sec in the 220 yd dash Outdoors. We also had the fastest 440-yd and 880-yd relay team in New York State during my Senior year in HS....I was the anchor leg and my kid brother (a Junior) was the 2nd leg. We finished 4th at the state meet due to a flubbed baton handoff...I'm not naming names though!

Interesting. We are from different countries and times but we are both PEs, I think we both got a substantial part of our educations in the school of hard knocks, and now...we were both sprinters. I was the greyhound back in those days so I didn't have the best start, and although I was moving faster than the two in front, I always came in third in the hundred and the two twenty. They put me in the district sports four forty and I won, then on to the London schools. This was an eye opener, I had a normal shirt, football/soccer shorts and tennis shoes and there were kids walking around wearing Thames Valley Harriers track suits and proper spikes; and then I drew the outside lane for only my second quarter mile race. Depressing. This was a rough old cinder track and my mates said I was doing well when I hit a soft patch and almost went down but I did go off the track. I have no complaint, the facilities were not good because this was in 1951 and we were still recovering from WW2. I was just sixteen and finished school that term.

I don't see how swimming can be called more exicting...
Now maybe if they added underwater hurdles that they had to swim under?

The IOC reduced the number of cycling events that an individual can enter (trying to limit British domination and open it up a bit), yet we still get the boring procession of guys reeling in strings of swimming golds for essentially the same thing... now that's boring.

The womens boxing was great... so fast, and such a great smile from the little UK gold medalist, good on her. She persevered in her chosen sport despite great antipahty, down right hostility and the usual turgid support from the governing bodies.
The womens football too! Blimey a few years back they couldn't head a ball convincingly... now I'd rather watch them than the over paid over hyped men.
Some world class goals, brilliant! The USA Canda match was great (only slighty marred by a dodgy penalty decision which came following a free kick given because one of the Americans hounded the ref... tut tut...)
I have even offered to give Hope Solo some special Cat goalkeeping coaching prrrrr prrrr. (Is she related to the man from UNCLE ? )
Del

How do they judge the best nation,is it by counting the total number of medals won or the number of gold medals won?. I suggest to give 3 points to each gold medal,2 points to each silver medal and 1 point to each bronze medal and summarise the total points won by each nation.

In the USA, judging what is exciting and what is monotonous is dependent on NBC. NBC pretends that all of the contests that draw the most viewer interest take place in prime time, something of a self-fulfilling prophesy. I too thought the women's football was great, but I have seen the Americans score the same goals, give the same interviews so many times that I throw things at the screen.

The English part of me was surprised and delighted in the medals won by GB although, mysteriously, I was only able to see a few of these contests. On a per capita basis, they cleaned up though.

IMO, NBC just dropped the ball on the coverage of the games....both big and small.

What was really lacking was the grand tour of the host city. In years past, whatever TV network (in the US) was broadcasting the games they would have mini-tours of the city. Not this time, and I consider that a large fail. London, and the immediate countryside has so much to show and be proud of! Why on earth wasn't any of this shared with the rest of the world? NBC screwed up royally regarding this lack of coverage! I'll admit I have only been to London twice in my lifetime (and rather rushed tours at that), and I would have liked to have seen on TV stuff I didn't get a chance to see either of those times....

NBC also didn't televise a lot of the lesser known (or less popular)/watched sports like archery and competitive shooting, etc etc. The Prime Time coverage (8 PM-midnight ET) was replayed in the wee hours. FAIL! They should have covered the other less popular venues then, but instead rehashed the whole bloody soup mix! WHY???????

With apologies to our British cousins, but I found the Opening and Closing Ceremonies rather odd, weird, off-beat, and boring! Emphasis on BORING! Last night I changed the channel midway through the Closing Ceremonies. I couldn't stomach it any more! Newspaper clad cars, trucks, and people? Come on now, this was downright freaky. I don't care if those newspapers were about great English Literature authors of the past. Like, who gives a rats ass and why does it pertain to sports at all? It doesn't! Too wacko left-hand artistic? You bet! Whoever orchestrated this monstrosity was out for "shock factor" more than anything else. I can just imagine what the rest of the world now thinks of Great Britain......"are they really that freakish?". And the shots of the Royal Family's reaction to it all was precious. I think Prince Harry was thinking along the same lines I was, literally!!!!! Embarrassing for the UK is my first train of thought.....

The only thing I found interesting was Sir Winston Churchill popping out of the roof of Big Ben! Now that was cool!

Also, Tom Brokaw's 1-hour piece of what the Brits went through during the Battle of Britain and the Blitz, and the war in general, was done very good and relevant, but shouldn't it have been played around the beginning of the games rather then near the end of the games? NBC dropped the ball there too! All-in-all, I'll give NBC a B+ on that piece.

Sorry, that's my view on the subject. I know I'll catch hell from a lot of people (especially you Brits), but hey I expect it! IT WASN'T MY CUP OF TEA MATE!!!!!

NBC has been crucified for their subpar coverage of the Olympics. Most of it has been justified, I'd agree. Between spoiling their own upcoming events, tape delaying almost everything--after showing the same coverage earlier, and then cutting out the closing ceremony (also tape delayed!) so they could show "Animal Practice," NBC could have done better.

But Olympic coverage is a logistics nightmare when London is 6 hours ahead, and events I really wanted to watch (men's basketball, women's beach volleyball) I made sure to watch live.

When the Summer Olympics go to Brazil in 2016, the tape delay won't be required so it should be better overall. Until then, we have to live with Sochi in 2014, 8hrs ahead of EST!

I don't want to defend either ceremony other than to say they both started weakly and built to a climax, which is surely the better way to do it than the other way round.
Personally I think the ceremonies are a bit of a waste of money, and become a exercise in who can spend the most.
I think, overall we did a 'good' games, but would have been quite happy with low key ceremonies.
I'm not sure you can offer a wholly valid criticism if you didn't see them through to the end?
Del

Del, I agree with you wholeheartedly that you Brits did a fantastic job with planning and execution of the actual games. They were superb!

BTW, I did watch the entire Opening Ceremony. Yes, I didn't view the entire Closing Ceremonies, though I did see NBC's highlights of them this morning.

They could have spent the money better elsewhere in the games instead of this lavishness. They should really eliminate this sort of stuff from the games from now on. Like, who can afford it anymore? In the end, the taxpayers get handed the bill regardless if an Olympic Game breaks even or not.

And what's with that damn twisted red tower anyhow? What a monster of cash wastefulness! To me it looks like a failed roller coaster ride from hell! OMG, to me it's a Structural Engineer's worse nightmare realized!!! Whoever engineered it is brillant I might add! I know I know, some UK Billionaire steel magnate sprang for it.....his name somehow escapes me at this moment. All I have read about it on this side of the Pond is that there's a lot of controversy in the UK over it. In the end, for all the money spent on the Closing Ceremonies they should have instead handed a pint of Britters to everyone in the stadium. MASS CONSUMPTION! :-) For all I know, NBC didn't even breathe a word about it! Art or engineering masterpiece? What is it? LOL

Is it worth spending so many millions in opening and closing ceremonies which are routine events?. Instead if that money is spent on providing drinking water to some communities starved of water by nature or by their government it will be a worthy deed..