eagle9903 {l Wrote}:DuxEagle26 {l Wrote}:11.43 is not fast. Wouldn't even get him to states in MA.
Lie. http://massachusettsstatechampionships.runnerspace.com/eprofile.php?event_id=462&do=news&news_id=265971DuxEagle26 {l Wrote}:Your telling me that a kid who couldn't run fast enough to even attend states in MA (a generally slow state) is fast enough to run a 4.39 40?
No, I'm calling you a liar.DuxEagle26 {l Wrote}:Jet smith was probably about a 4.39 and the kid ran a 10.2 100m. You people are ridiculous
Lie. http://www.bceagles.com/sports/m-track/spec-rel/041308aaa.html (thank you to whomever already called this lying liar out for this lie, while I was doing work).
DuxEagle26 is a liar.
The irony is that Smith was actually much more impressive in the 200 than the 100. Once he got up to speed, he could flipping fly. Which is why he was not a good football player but was a decent returner. He had track speed but no football quickness. First 40 wasn't his best 40.
If this wasn't so stupid, I'd note that the start of every race contains the first 40, but not every 40 in a race contains the start. Explosive athletes start very well, but don't necessarily finish the 100 well. For example, who would have the best time at 40m in this race: