Submitted by The_Critical_Cynic t3_yfezcn in todayilearned
IIRC that was because a reaction time quicker than 0.1 seconds isn't humanly possible according to world track and field officials, so Allen must have cheated.
However... (also IIRC) that 0.1 seconds standard isn't actually based on science - it's literally just a number some bureaucrat from the World Athletic Championships decided upon because it sounded good.
It sounds like an appeals process needs to be implemented, and the standards assessed accordingly.
And it cannot be appealed soon enough.
Agreed.
Considering drag racers often have reaction times down into the .05 second range and below, I'd say the number is arbitrary AF.
I think it’s slightly different in the sense that drag racers can estimate the start of the race as its constant. But for track and field the official firing the starter pistol is never constant and therefore can’t be predicted
It’s also a matter of sound, which radiates outward from its source at variable speed depending on different factors. This seems like something that can’t be reliably measured to that degree of precision. Feels like the kind of problem engineers and bureaucrats invent to justify their jobs.
Is it standardized where the official with the starter pistol stands?
There is a theory I like but wouldn’t call reliably proven that says humans and animals often subconsciously taken in information and even subconsciously analyze it to come to conclusions they aren’t can’t explain the reasoning for. In context this is more about short term things, not abstract ideas. It is relevant in that if the theory is true it would mean some of the runners could be taking in information like the official holding the starting pistol a certain way and even the movement of their finger and be reacting to that making it seem like their reaction to the shot is very short. Though some put forward this theory could even include information you couldn’t even learn to look for, like a tiny reflection a hundred feet away that shows the ref (behind the runner) flexing their finger to pull the trigger.
I like the theory but it is probably BS.
It's BS because each lane has its own speaker. So there's no time difference in hearing the signal.
The reaction time is also now at the point where distance from the starter's pistol^1 is becoming a factor
^1 technically from the collapsing waveform of the sound envelope. A starter's pistol 'Bang' does not radiate from the gun evenly in a circle, rather in a 3D teardrop shape
Depending upon the angle the starter fires it, it is not impossible that the moving sound wave could hit the eardrum of the second closest runner before the closest
Eighth lane is still screwed though
At championship levels there are speakers behind each set of blocks and the signal is electronic.
TIL
Thank you
IIRC they randomize the signals at the start of the drag races and no one actually knows when exactly it will flash from yellow to green.
Edit. Wrong. No ones knows the flash to triple amber but the move from that to green is .4
Edit 2. Just to be clear. Im saying I in fact did not recall correctly
It’s always a set time between amber and green, 0.4s for pros. That’s how perfect reaction times are possible - they know when green is coming.
TIL... Depending on the type of racing, all three amber lights will flash simultaneously, followed four-tenths of a second later by the green light (a Pro Tree), or the three bulbs will flash consecutively five-tenths of a second apart, followed five-tenths later by the green light (a Sportsman, or full, Tree)
Still though. Thats incredibly fast. Also I saw the op article originally posted and there is a lot to it. Light travels faster than sound. The brains processing time. The speed of electricity to activate muscles. Some people can truly process faster and some top tier athletes actually have to train themselves to wait the full .1 which is ridiculous.
In F1 the red lights go out randomly though.
Yeah the yellow countdown makes it out a lot easier to anticipate.
The whole idea seems like circular garbage.
>We all need to start at the same time, so lend her a noise or a light to signal the start.
>Well now we need to react to the start, which means everyone will have a slightly different delay.
>You've got to anticipate the start, so you can start as close to the start as possible.
>Well someone starting exactly at the start could be a sign of cheating, so the real start has to be 0.1s after the start.
And really, how would you even cheat that??? You get a notification 3/10 of a second before and then perfectly react 3/10 of a second later to be exact with the start?
The whole thing is stupid. You have to anticipate, and you have to risk disqualifying yourself for an early start, and 0.099s after the start is still AFTER the start.
> However... (also IIRC) that 0.1 seconds standard isn't actually based on science - it's literally just a number some bureaucrat from the World Athletic Championships decided upon because it sounded good.
There are a bunch of tests on the limits of human reaction times (mostly how fast you can push a button after a screen flashes). Human limit is around .2 seconds. Human perception is around 0.1 but it take a bit of time for humans to do anything with that.
So .1 seconds is a good point to chose since it gives you enough of a margin of error not to be an issue but not so massive that athletes can rely on anticipating the gun.
This is the same standard for speed climbing.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments