Quote:
Originally Posted by craigwd
Yes.....you have her arguing my point.
At what part in that quote do you see "aerodynamic disadvantage"?
|
So we're agreed that it's equipment now? That she did outdrive the field? If you're arguing that the equipment issue was with the runners, I can accept that. But it would have to be for all four runs, because while the last two runs were better there was still an issue there. And it appears to have been an issue for the other Canadian teams as well.
I don't see why you're so quick to dismiss aerodynamics though. It should be the first thing that comes to mind when you see poor performance at the bottom of the track, because, again, drag varies with the square of speed. Friction varies with weight, so if it's a friction issue you should see poor performance in the flatter track sections.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
So why didn't they win the olympics if they consistently win the World Cup events despite inferior equipment?
|
They did not consistently win World Cup events. They won the overall world cup standings.
In two-man, Kripps had only one gold - fewer than Friedrich (who struggled on the North American tracks) and Walther. Kripps won the overall by being more consistent, but the Germans spiked for more wins.
In four-man, no golds at all. We also placed fourth. Kripps' driving doesn't translate here, despite, if it's like the Olympics, more advantage in the starts. Lochner, who sucks in two-man, dominated this circuit. Top three sleds are German. It's a bit of a mystery to me why this does not match the two-man results better.
Humphries had the most wins on the World Cup circuit. But her three golds were still matched Schnieder, who was inconsistent. Jamanka was quite consistent, but never at the top. That fits with good driving but start disadvantage. The Olympics were a pattern break here, so perhaps her advantage was something the Germans did on the day.