What is a good 100 meters time?

What a good 100 meters

  • 7-9 seconds

    Votes: 5 12.8%
  • 9-10 seconds

    Votes: 5 12.8%
  • 10-12 seconds

    Votes: 18 46.2%
  • 12-14 seconds

    Votes: 8 20.5%
  • 14-16 seconds

    Votes: 1 2.6%
  • 16 and up, I can't run

    Votes: 2 5.1%

  • Total voters
    39
Well I personally ran my 100 meter in 4.59 seconds in 10th grade.
 
8f3d910a7d0231c90c319ef96e53ebb6.png


n= 5n-7

N=3

You didn't answer the question. Instead you hotlinked from wikimedia.

:)
 
I like this '10 seconds is a good time' stuff. Some guys who end up in the Olympics can't run that fast.

Anything between 11 and 12 seconds is probably in the top couple of percent. I'd class that as good.

I've not been timed over 100m since I was 12 with 12.3s, there were 2 guys in my year who ran 11.7s. That's out of about 150 of us.
 
To compete at a high level in high school track here in Wisconsin, you'd have to run somewhere in the low 11s. The fastest kids in the state ran in the high 10s. That being said, you could probably run 12-12.5 and the track coach still might run you, you just wouldn't place very much. IIRC, I ran somewhere around 13, good thing I wasn't a 100 runner (400 was my event).
 
Apparently in my country the running marks are fascist. You got to be low 10 for an A.
 
Well I'm the only black person who can't. Damn racial stereotypes. I get . .. .. .. . for that every single day.

You haven't had practice fleeing the police? You sure you're black?
 
That makes no sense. I think you meant n=5i-7, which would then give us -2+3+8=9th grade.

Wouldn't it be 5*3-7=8? Isn't the i=1 only there to tell you where to start your series? I'm not sure of this but I think that's how it goes.
 
Wouldn't it be 5*3-7=8? Isn't the i=1 only there to tell you where to start your series? I'm not sure of this but I think that's how it goes.

That big E sign (sigma) is used to denote a summation. So you add all 3 numbers, which comes out to be 5*6 - 3*7 = 9.
 
I don't think you "have" to add up all of them, maybe. That's not how I learned it but. Yeah, I was going for 8.

Well, this is math, not literature. Symbols map injectively towards definitions. What the text meant holds supreme. What was meant by the author when he/she had written the text is secondary, or worse, irrelevant.

Edit: bleh, spell-check erroneously changed 'injectively' to 'invectively'.
 
Back
Top Bottom