Denard thinks he could beat Bolt

#76
#76
bleedingTNorange said:
Also...

So Gatlin runs a 4.4+ 40 at camp, runs a 9.79 100m at Olympics.

Bolt runs x 40, and runs 9.63 100m.

So you're saying that bolt beat gatlin by .16 seconds over 100 m, but is gonna beat him by .4-.5 seconds over 36 meters?

Also considering, gatlin had bolt beat at 40m, so it'd appear gatlin is the faster of the 2 in the first 30-40.

I don't think so, that's just common sense.
Click to expand...

You want to try to make sense of hand timed 40's across different people timing them on different surfaces? I'll go you one better; tell me how this same guy might either be downright slow for an undersized SEC caliber player OR possibly the fastest guy in the whole nation for his class depending on which source you want to use.

Damiere Byrd - Yahoo! Sports

Scout.com: Damiere Byrd Profile

In similar news you're referencing Gatlin's "pro day" workout. Great. Now take a moment to spin your way around the net and see the times he was being credited with for his workout with the Texans.

If the above doesn't make you squeamish as hell about what you can believe in these 40 times let's tip the hat again for the track guys who are REALLY getting timed.

Combine experimenting with 40-yard dash timing - CBSSports.com

Make special note of this part:

However, according to coaches and scouts who discussed this with The Sports Xchange, the FAT times are expected to be .20 to .24 seconds slower than the relative times recorded using methods the Combine has gone with since 1990, and before.

"We were told it is just an experiment and we won't be told the results," said one team official. "People are worried about the reaction players may have if the 40 times change that much."
Click to expand...
 
#77
#77
milohimself said:
I don't think it's that far fetched that the fastest couple guys in the nfl could hang with bolt in a 40yd dash on grass no blocks if he were running cold, or at least not get smoked
Click to expand...

I will grant that if you take the fastest human ever and throw him cold into a race with different conditions than anything he's ever run before -- no blocks, grass, shorter distance -- that it might take him a few iterations to adjust. But it's blind hubris to imagine that any American football player would beat him at any significant distance once you gave him a reasonable chance to figure it out.
 
#78
#78
bleedingTNorange said:
The RT is subtracted from the 4.1 time already, so why are you subtracting it twice?.
Click to expand...

Where? I see Bolt's RT subtracted and the yard/meter conversion calculation.* That's swell and all but then you try to make a football time comparison. I thought I explained it the first time but that 4.1 time attributed to Bolt does not include the time where the clock isn't running for somebody running a "football 40". A football player is literally already running before the timing starts and the RT of the person doing the timing would have to be subtracted from a raw time/distance value like the 4.1 given by your post.

*I'll happily recant all this if I simply missed it but I don't see anything about making the necessary conversion of allowing for the timer's reaction that is intrinsic to how they time football players.
 
#79
#79
Bolt is a freak of nature. He's much taller than the average sprinter while at the same time can turnover his gate at a similar if not more rapid pace than other world-class sprinters.

He's both powerful, judging from the way he comes out of the blocks, and is without a doubt extremely strong considering how he is constantly accelerating throughout his races and reaches speeds that makes the other sprinters look like they are jogging in his wake.

I am guessing that Denard could prolly take Lebron in 1v1 to 11 and take Verlander deep in one AB as well.
 
#80
#80
There's nothing more fantastical than the 40 times of American football players. It's like Santa Claus is timing these guys.
 
Last edited:
#82
#82
hndog609 said:
Where? I see Bolt's RT subtracted and the yard/meter conversion calculation.* That's swell and all but then you try to make a football time comparison. I thought I explained it the first time but that 4.1 time attributed to Bolt does not include the time where the clock isn't running for somebody running a "football 40". A football player is literally already running before the timing starts and the RT of the person doing the timing would have to be subtracted from a raw time/distance value like the 4.1 given by your post.

*I'll happily recant all this if I simply missed it but I don't see anything about making the necessary conversion of allowing for the timer's reaction that is intrinsic to how they time football players.
Click to expand...

Agree to disagree, there's only one way to know and I wish he and CJ would run it.

I just dont see how any rational person can say this...Gatlin who runs at best a 4.3 40 when subtracting everything you're talking about, was neck and neck or ahead of bolt at the 40 yard mark of their gold medal run. Their reaction times were almost exact, so that's not why he was faster than bolt, he simply ran the first 40 yard the same or a smidge faster than Bolt. So if Gatlin runs at worst, the SAME 40 yard as Bolt, and Gatlin runs at best a 4.3 football 40....then how the heck can anyone say bolt would run a 3.9-4.0!!? That just doesn't make sense, gatlin is as fast is 40 yards as bolt, gatlin runs at best a 4.3....the two together just don't make sense. Bolt isn't going to magically knock .3-.4 seconds off his 40 time just for the heck of it.

I'm just using the common sense theory, if Gatlin 40yd=Bolt 40yd then it makes no sense that bolt on a football field runs .3-.4 seconds faster than what Gatlin runs, that's a HUGE difference in that short of a distance.
 
Last edited:
#83
#83
bleedingTNorange said:
Agree to disagree, there's only one way to know and I wish he and CJ would run it.

I just dont see how any rational person can say this...Gatlin who runs at best a 4.3 40 when subtracting everything you're talking about, was neck and neck or ahead of bolt at the 40 yard mark of their gold medal run. Their reaction times were almost exact, so that's not why he was faster than bolt, he simply ran the first 40 yard the same or a smidge faster than Bolt. So if Gatlin runs at worst, the SAME 40 yard as Bolt, and Gatlin runs at best a 4.3 football 40....then how the heck can anyone say bolt would run a 3.9-4.0!!? That just doesn't make sense, gatlin is as fast is 40 yards as bolt, gatlin runs at best a 4.3....the two together just don't make sense. Bolt isn't going to magically knock .3-.4 seconds off his 40 time just for the heck of it.

I'm just using the common sense theory, if Gatlin 40yd=Bolt 40yd then it makes no sense that bolt on a football field runs .3-.4 seconds faster than what Gatlin runs, that's a HUGE difference in that short of a distance.
Click to expand...

Thanks for at least keeping the conversation rational, some people get bent out of shape with this stuff.

Now please go back and take a good look at my post #76. There's some pretty interesting stuff there that needs to be considered in this whole football players/40yd thing.

2nd, why so hung up on this one race of Bolt's as a means of comparison? Do you REALLY think if we lined up CJ (even back in the day) for 10 40's he be going low 4.2's every time? Hell, Bolt recently lost the 100m and 200m to Blake and had lost to Gay back in '10. So Gatlin has a great start in London and Bolt didn't in this particular race. And? How about when we gets Bolt's best?

Let's clear something up for people that have the wrong perceptions about Bolt not being able to punch it right from the start. When he ran his 9.58 guess who had the lead at 20m? Yep, Bolt. (.02 up on Powell) By 40m he was .06 up on the next fastest (Gay) and .08 up by 60m. Obviously it just kept getting worse from there.

And since we've got that 60m benchmark we can actually compare apples to apples. Bolt's 60m split for that 9.58 was 6.31. Care to guess what the current WR for the 60 is? 6.39. So this guy that's supposed to be all about the 2nd half of a race passes 60m .08 faster than the WR at that distance. I haven't seen the splits yet for the Olympic race so Gatlin may have improved his time (he really did have a good early race) but his fastest official 60m to date is a 6.45.

Draw your own conclusions from the above but please note none of it is my "opinion". It's all a matter of record.

Oh, and Denard also ran track at Michigan. Pretty good too as his 60m at the time was the best on the squad. Still, that 6.81 is positively hysterical compared even to Gatlin, much less Bolt.
 
#84
#84
Vercingetorix said:
Little brother has been bending big brother over for almost half a decade now. You ought to be getting used to the taste of the dirt by now.
Click to expand...

Oh trust me, it hasn't been good. But I think we'll be okay going forward.

Although, I have great respect for both Mark D'Antonio and Tom Izzo. Two fine coaches.
 
#86
#86
zjcvols said:
I see the little brother anger coming out.
Click to expand...

What do I have to be angry about. Read all of my posts in the thread, Im pretty complimentary towards 'laces. He's a pretty good dude.

Other than that, tell me about the last 4 years without making an excuse. Little brother has been beating some A$$$$ GO GREEN
 
#87
#87
GatorBill said:
What do I have to be angry about. Read all of my posts in the thread, Im pretty complimentary towards 'laces. He's a pretty good dude.

Other than that, tell me about the last 4 years without making an excuse. Little brother has been beating some A$$$$ GO GREEN
Click to expand...

GO WHITE!!

F Michigan.
 
#89
#89
I think there are plenty of guys in the world that could beat Bolt at a shorter distance. Also, the combine numbers can be off and recorded differently ie opinion.

Take for instance the official time for Trindon Holliday was 4.34s, yet others recorded him as low as 4.21/2s. And are you telling me Patrick Peterson is faster than Holliday because he ran a 4.31s. I think not.
Trindon Holliday Runs a 4.21 sec. 40 Yard Dash at the NFL Combine - YouTube


I would place my money with either Johnson or Holliday, anything longer than a 40 and it's all Bolt. Basically Holliday was/is maxed out due to him being smaller, good for 40-60 y/m, not so good for 100m. Johnson has world class speed, probably would be in the running in the 40 with anyone.
 
Last edited:
#90
#90
GatorBill said:
What do I have to be angry about. Read all of my posts in the thread, Im pretty complimentary towards 'laces. He's a pretty good dude.

Other than that, tell me about the last 4 years without making an excuse. Little brother has been beating some A$$$$ GO GREEN
Click to expand...

Obvious joke was obvious.

Rich Rodriguez isn't in Ann Arbor anymore.
 
#91
#91
LSU-SIU said:
I think there are plenty of guys in the world that could beat Bolt at a shorter distance. Also, the combine numbers can be off and recorded differently ie opinion.

Take for instance the official time for Trindon Holliday was 4.34s, yet others recorded him as low as 4.21/2s. And are you telling me Patrick Peterson is faster than Holliday because he ran a 4.31s. I think not.
Trindon Holliday Runs a 4.21 sec. 40 Yard Dash at the NFL Combine - YouTube


I would place my money with either Johnson or Holliday, anything longer than a 40 and it's all Bolt. Basically Holliday was/is maxed out due to him being smaller, good for 40-60 y/m, not so good for 100m. Johnson has world class speed, probably would be in the running in the 40 with anyone.
Click to expand...

If Bolt trained for the 40, he would smoke any human alive.

How is this even debatable? He's the fastest man ever!

The man half-asses world records.
 
#92
#92
GahLee said:
If Bolt trained for the 40, he would smoke any human alive.

How is this even debatable? He's the fastest man ever!

The man half-asses world records.
Click to expand...

He's the fastest man in 100m and 200m, that doesn't mean he is the faster person in everything, really not that hard of a concept. If that was the case he'd run the 400, 800 etc etc. there's absolutely no question he is the fastest in the 100 and 200, however assuming he's the fastest in 40 yards, on grass, without blocks, just isn't smart, its a completely different atmosphere. Sure he could be, but he also may not be.

Your shorter guys are your quickest usually in the 40, I don't recall many 6'6" guys running sub 4.2 40's, do you? Heck in just a quick research, nobody over 6'2" has ever run under a 4.3 actually. So like I said, Bolts perfect for the 100m and 200m, but to assume he would dominate the 40 isn't educated. My money would be on a much smaller, quicker guy who accelerates much faster, like a Chris Johnson. Add in the fact that Bolt wouldn't have blocks to push off of which is a huge advantage and I'd put money on there being atleast 5 NFL guys who could beat Bolt in a 40, I think he'd be 4.3+ closer to a 4.4 guy.
 
Last edited:
#93
#93
GahLee said:
If Bolt trained for the 40, he would smoke any human alive.

How is this even debatable? He's the fastest man ever!

The man half-asses world records.
Click to expand...

He is the fastest at the 100m, that is like saying if the fastest man in the 400m trains hard he will beat anyone at the 100m.

Like bleedingTNorange said, smaller guys have advantage at the shorter distances. If you see Bolt he takes off after about 30-40m. I would say there is probably 4-10 guys in the NFL that could run neck to neck with him up to a 40m.

I would say there is 3 guys in the NFL right now that could probably beat him in a 40: Johnson, Demps and Holliday and probably another 5-7 that could run with him. I don't think there is a guy in the NFL that could run with him over a 100m, closes is probably Holliday or Demps and he would smoke them.
 
#95
#95
zjcvols said:
Obvious joke was obvious.

Rich Rodriguez isn't in Ann Arbor anymore.
Click to expand...

Obvious domination is obvious. He wasnt there last year either.

And until you get to the "cupboards were bare" bull, check in on the recruiting rankings for the last decade.


No idea what will happen Oct 20th, but things have changed, and they will never go back to the way they were.
 
#96
#96
bleedingTNorange said:
Plain and simple, anyone who thinks Bolt could/would run a sub 4 forty, is delusional.
Click to expand...

Timed on a track in the same manner as a football player would? Not remotely delusional, and I'm making that statement predicated on the raw time/distance figure that you posted. If want to argue that's a bit apples and oranges (turf vs track/starting blocks) I have no problem with that but it's something that can't be dismissed either.

I really thought I'd covered this adequately in posts 76 & 83 so let's try a different approach. Anybody speculating about what Bolt can't do needs to demonstrate why. The "not fast at shorter distances" thing has been totally debunked. Like anyone else not every race is your best race but it's absolutely, positively proven Bolt can burn right out of the blocks. So where's the real, demonstrable arguments about what he couldn't do (beat CJ for instance) over 40 yards? I'm fully aware of the caveats of blocks, surface, etc when trying to compare track to turf (see post #36) but every valid attempt to show what Bolt's 40 yard times translate to (including the one you cite) are stupid fast, are they not?

People are dying for a real apples to apples and since we've got nothing to work with putting Bolt on turf our apples-apples has to happen on a track. I've already cited that we have Bolt clearing 60m in 6.31 and D Robinson's best at that distance is 6.81. I don't think you and many others have actually noodled out the implications of that comparison. Let's say Denard, who is universally acknowledged as damn fast for a football player, was running even with Bolt at 40 yards. With 40 yards being a bit over 36m that would mean Bolt would have to surge ahead by .5 seconds in 24m. You've said you're trying to take a "common sense" approach to this. Good, read that last sentence again and crank up that common sense.

A .5 second difference is a Death Star vs Alderaan beatdown even at 100m. At 40 yards a .5 difference is what separates an elite burner WR and a D lineman. We're talking a .5 difference over 26 yards. I know and you know that idea is an absurdity. The explanation is, likewise, just as obvious to both of us. Bolt would have to be way, WAY out in front of Robinson at 36m (40y) to be .5 ahead at 60m.

I know some people are much happier speculating but the above is apples to apples. Yeah, Bolt's THAT fast even over shorter distances. (at least when he has a good start)
 
#97
#97
hndog609 said:
Timed on a track in the same manner as a football player would? Not remotely delusional, and I'm making that statement predicated on the raw time/distance figure that you posted. If want to argue that's a bit apples and oranges (turf vs track/starting blocks) I have no problem with that but it's something that can't be dismissed either.

I really thought I'd covered this adequately in posts 76 & 83 so let's try a different approach. Anybody speculating about what Bolt can't do needs to demonstrate why. The "not fast at shorter distances" thing has been totally debunked. Like anyone else not every race is your best race but it's absolutely, positively proven Bolt can burn right out of the blocks. So where's the real, demonstrable arguments about what he couldn't do (beat CJ for instance) over 40 yards? I'm fully aware of the caveats of blocks, surface, etc when trying to compare track to turf (see post #36) but every valid attempt to show what Bolt's 40 yard times translate to (including the one you cite) are stupid fast, are they not?

People are dying for a real apples to apples and since we've got nothing to work with putting Bolt on turf our apples-apples has to happen on a track. I've already cited that we have Bolt clearing 60m in 6.31 and D Robinson's best at that distance is 6.81. I don't think you and many others have actually noodled out the implications of that comparison. Let's say Denard, who is universally acknowledged as damn fast for a football player, was running even with Bolt at 40 yards. With 40 yards being a bit over 36m that would mean Bolt would have to surge ahead by .5 seconds in 24m. You've said you're trying to take a "common sense" approach to this. Good, read that last sentence again and crank up that common sense.

A .5 second difference is a Death Star vs Alderaan beatdown even at 100m. At 40 yards a .5 difference is what separates an elite burner WR and a D lineman. We're talking a .5 difference over 26 yards. I know and you know that idea is an absurdity. The explanation is, likewise, just as obvious to both of us. Bolt would have to be way, WAY out in front of Robinson at 36m (40y) to be .5 ahead at 60m.

I know some people are much happier speculating but the above is apples to apples. Yeah, Bolt's THAT fast even over shorter distances. (at least when he has a good start)
Click to expand...

Great work.
 
#98
#98
It may have been mentioned, but Justin Gatlin raced a few of our football players when he was here and a few of them beat him at 40. 100m and they were toast
 
#99
#99
What you are calling "proven" to me looks like speculation at best. 40 times at a combine are not an indication of track times out of the block. If so, Patrick Peterson would be the NCAA champ and not Holliday, Peterson wouldn't even be able to make the LSU track team.

Peterson has super speed, Holliday has world class speed, there is a difference yet at the combine Peterson's official times were better.

No way Bolt beats Holliday by .3-4 in the 40 when his 100m time is about .4 difference and Bolt runs a super human last 60.
 
#100
#100
These guys train to run the 40, give Bolt time to train like they have and I would bet the house that he smokes any NFL player, college player, horse, car, you name it.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top