Excerpt from : Mureika, J. R., Canadian Journal of Physics81 (7), 895-910 (2003)
These splits are the results of a simulation using the model presented in the journal referenced above. The simulation results are presented in the first Table, and are compared to the reported results in the second Table. The difference between the two tends to average around 0.04s, with the noted exception at 146.42m. This mismatch is most likely due to a clerical error, a methodological error, or combination of both.
At sea-level in 0-wind conditions, the time would translate to￼s (always assuming a 0.161s reaction). Had it been run in Mexico City, the model suggests a 19.172s in still wind, and 19.099s with a straight +2ms￼tail-wind. Furthermore, letting￼, at sea-level the ``straight track'' equivalent of his 10.13s split would theoretically be 9.909s, with a straight 200m clocking of 18.950s (note that the world record for a straight 200m is reported as 19.5s, wind 1.84ms￼, for American sprinter Tommie Smith in San Jose, 7 May 1966).
The second table contains the corresponding theoretical 50 and 100m interval analysis. Note the incredible split of 8.786s between 40-140m. Although such ``running-start'' performances are rarely clocked, track-lore has it that Carl Lewis marked an 8.86s leg in the 4x100m relay [ATFS 2001 Annual, Peter Matthews (ed.)]. If this simulation is accurate, this constitutes one of the fastest 100m intervals run byanyathlete in history! The corresponding simulated 150m split would be 14.592s, officially reported as 14.60s.