Talk:Bob Beamon/Archive 1

Archive 1

Weasel Word alert!

"many track & field experts do not hold it in quite such high esteem" - while I believe this could be true, who are these "many" experts? Rocksong 07:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Modified. Fizbin 15:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Good work! Rocksong 04:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

This is bad writing. What are these many factors? Change in air resistance is fairly negligable, and while having a strong wind at his back is nice, that alone isn't enough to explain it given how much it exceeded the previous record by. Titanium Dragon 20:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

???? 'Many factors' is a term not used in the article. And the factors at play were described - not in scientific detail sure to bore the average T&F fan, but enough to get the point accoss. The fact that this jump was aided by 'many factors' (altitude - a huge and determining issue - and wind being the primary two) is not in dispute by those who know the sport.--Fizbin 00:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Both wind and altitude are extremely significant, though they may seem negligible at first glance. There are truly two things changed (one more dramatically) by these two factors. The first is speed. With less air resistance and wind aid, the initial velocity of the athlete will be increased. According to range equation (in physics), the distance of the jump varies according to the square of the initial velocity, which means that even a slight increase will amplify the distance more than one might expect. Secondly, with a much smaller effect, the gravity at a high altitude will be slightly less. According to the same range equation, the distance of the jump varies according to the inverse of the acceleration due to gravity. Thus slightly less gravity will also increase the jump more than one might initially expect. All in all, if we consider that Beamon's 8.90m jump improved over the previous record of 8.35m, which ratio-wise isn't much shorter, than we might see why these factors could have been important. Mipchunk 06:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Responding to Mipchunk's comment. Range, in this case, does not vary with the square of the velocity -- it is linear. That is because to get the "square" factor, you have to jump higher. This is not a result of Beamon's speed on take-off, but on the timing and strength of Beamon's legs. (If he were running up a ramp, the results would be different). Gravitational effects would be minimal. The trailing wind would have about as much of an effect in helping Beamon go faster on take off and have less resistance in air as the decreased air pressure. The air temperature and high humidity (thunderstorms followed shortly) would also be advantages in reducing drag.

All and all, Beamon would have shattered the WR, but he probably would not have made it to 29 feet if the conditions were more neutral. It was the perfect jump, done under ideal conditions. Beamon was having the best year of his high jumping life. He hit the board perfectly, he was going fast, and he jumped just slightly higher then usual. Everything was perfect. It is worth noting that none of the other competitors in his event bested the world record. Nor was there a record set at the US trials which was held at altitude. There was also a WR in the women's event -- by 2 1/2 inches, which was bested 2 years later. Swlenz (talk) 21:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

On re-reading the article, I'm not sure the line, "Add to that, immediately after Beamon’s jump a major rainstorm came down, making it much harder for his competitors to try and match his feat," belongs as written. The rainstorm did not contribute to his record (although the heat and humidity would help). It is truly doubtful that any competitor would have been able to mount a meaningful challenge. Swlenz (talk) 22:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that some factors really matter much more than others. I would look to other similarly high-wind, high-altitude personal bests by other long jumpers. Robert Emmiyan jumped 8.87 A (+1.9 m/s), but his next best jump was 8.61 (-0.3 m/s). Erick Walder jumped 8.74 A (+2.0 m/s), but his next best jumps were 8.58 (+1.8 m/s) and 8.53 (+0.9 m/s). Thus we might suspect that, in neutral conditions, Beamon's jump would have been around 20 cm shorter. Also, a rainstorm would be detrimental to other competitors, so it didn't help Beamon, but it certainly hurt other jumpers. Mipchunk (talk) 22:31, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I already moved the reference to the rainstorm out of the environmental factors to another place in the article. I agree from a physics stand point that the environmental conditions were worth 20 - 30 cm. I also note that both Emmiyan and Walder took far fewer jumps at altitude when compared with sea level so there is some difficulty in making a statistical comparisions (it is likely that if they had more jumps at altitude, they would go even farther, but then again, they were probably peaking to try to get a PR).

Notwithstanding, Mipchunk, your citations and your knowledge of the subject is impressive. Swlenz (talk) 23:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

A sourced statement was added today, stating that the cumulative effect of the wind and altitude was 31 cm. While I don't have scientific data to back up my statement, for those of us Americans who are metrically challenged; 31 cm is over a foot. You've got to be kidding. The source listed was a book, not an available, checkable, on line source. Does anybody have this book? Any corroborating or contradicting evidence? Trackinfo (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Lynn Davies' nationality

I edited Lynn Davies nationality from "Wales" to "Great Britain" because Wales does not send a separate team to the the Olympics. Welsh participants (including those in 1968) compete on a combined Great Britain and Northern Ireland team. Baclightning 18:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

He's African American

Hey guys: he was an African American. How on earth can that very important fact have been left out entirely???? It's not mentioned anywhere in the article. I am simply dumbfounded.

Okay, I've inserted this fact in the Intro, along with adding the article to Category:African American track and field athletes. Cgingold 07:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It is not a high priority to include somebody's ethnic background, though I won't remove it because it's not bad at all. However, look at various articles about other notable individuals, including athletes. Michael Jordan is not an "African American basketball player" nor is Mark McGwire a "Caucasian baseball player". Only when ethnic background is a crucial part of the actions that cause the individual's notability should mention of ethnicity be noted. For example, Rosa Parks is notable because of her defiance of segregation laws, which is directly linked to her status as an African American. Mipchunk 07:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)He is also going to Northrich for a race that the kids will do.

I would disagree. This fact is very important especially if you're trying to research notable people and find images and other related things about them. These things are wholly important in painting a picture of a person's roots. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.110.85 (talk) 19:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Second longest jump of all times

It says in the article that Bob Beamon's 8.90 still is the second longest jump in history. The fact is that Mike Powell beat Beamon's world record at the World Championship in Tokyo 1991 and that Carl Lewis took the silver by jumping 8.91. So what does that make Beamon's effort in a historical perspective? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.102.211.247 (talk) 22:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The Lewis jump was wind-aided (over 2 meters/sec), so ineligible for record purposes.--Fizbin (talk) 23:09, 29 November 2009 (UTC)