Crown Nation Forum
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In | Register

Presenting the times on stance vs overall
Labi1995
#1 Posted : Tuesday, May 14, 2019 8:27:04 PM(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/29/2019(UTC)
Posts: 90
Location: LONDON

Thanks: 0 times
Was thanked: 0 time(s) in 0 post(s)
In other words, she is not doing anything exceptionally fast or slow compared to the other top women. Given that her stride rate here is lower than that of Davila and Adidas Superstar Uomo Goucher, she must have a longer stride length than the others in order to compensate (this assumes Nike M2k Tekno Heren that these data are representative of the entire race, which they may not be). Despite being a heel striker, Davila has the shortest stance time and the highest cadence. Goucher has a relatively long stance time, a shorter swing time, and has by far the shortest aerial time of any of these women at this point in the race.Among the men, Geoffrey Mutai has a faster swing time than the others, and less aerial time (both feet off the ground). He also has the shortest step time, and therefore the highest cadence of any of the men. Mosop, a true forefoot striker, has the shortest stance time and the longest aerial time – he is the only runner here who Nike Air Max 90 Mujer spends more time in the air than on the ground. Ryan Hall has the longest stance time and Nike Air Max 270 Mujer a relatively long step time. His cadence is the lowest of any of the runners examined here.
As an easier way to compare these runners, below is a scatterplot showing each runner plotted according to their values for swing time and stance time.Mosop and Goucher come out at opposite extremes in this plot. Mosop has a long swing phase, short stance phase, whereas Goucher has a long stance, short swing. Interestingly, the male and female winners Kilel and Mutai come out very close to one another in this plot, suggesting that they share some similarity in their gait parameters.I’m not sure what, if anything, all of this means, but it’s certainly interesting to put some numbers on the gaits of these elite marathoners. I need to digest this a bit Nike Air Max 97 Femme before I can really say anything else, but I wanted to post it and see if anyone had any Nike Roshe Run Mens thoughts. If nothing else, it provides more evidence that even elites can vary considerably in their form – one need look no further than Mosop and Mutai. Both came in under world record time (though not record eligible), and they did so using quite different gaits, at least in terms of swing/stance/aerial timing. What’s strange is that if you look at the video of the two of them, their strides look almost to mirror one another. I initially didn’t believe the numbers I had recorded, but I went back and analyzed the video again and came up with the same results. When talking about differences in the hundredths of a second, it’s difficult to notice differences from stride to stride with the naked eye, but I suppose things can add up over the www.philshotton.co.uk course of a 26.2 mile race….interesting stuff for sureIt might be useful to list the heights Nike Blazer Womens of each of the runners and also use this to compute the angle on stance to provide a form of normalized view of the stance. Cadence and runner height would also be something interesting to correlate. Presenting the times on stance vs overall stride time as a percentage would also be interesting. Estimated speed of each of the runners at the time of the video would also be a useful factor to list.All of these suggestions revolve around trying to normalize the stats so that it’s we can better compare running gaits. For instance the tall runners will need a lower cadence than a short runner for the same running gait, that is, if one assumes the angles of the various body parts through the cycle being similar being a marker of similar running Nike Air Max 270 Femme Noir gait.The best way to derive this from the footage is to use the time in the air and the a www.jamlikhalsavast.se mathematical model of parabolic flight under gravity. I’ve done some quick maths, assuming that the toe off height and landing height are the same, the equation would be g * T * T / 8.Admitedly not a perfect model given toe off and landing are likely to be a little different height, but it should be good enough to understand the basic relationsip – double the time in the air and you quadruple the height, this make sense as you have to launch twice as fast vertically, and it takes twice as long to reach the peak, multiple the two together and you get four times the height.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

FlatEarth Theme by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by YAF 1.9.4 | YAF © 2003-2010, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.074 seconds.