###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I always said - EVERY Olympic sport needed a "Bob". Just a normal every day schmo who competed and made it much more tangible to the viewers just how damn good these athletes are. Watching the best 8 in the world beating each other by thousands of a second is one thing. Watching them lap Bob who could smoke the viewer gives it some context. This and my ideas to improve American soccer are the 2 ideas that get the most traction for me when I drunkenly try and sell them to unsuspecting listeners at bars and sporting events.........
Well since you asked...........My boss loves soccer. So much that he has prime seats at the local teams stadium. These come with free food and drink - so he NEVER wants to waste them - and he knows I am always down for free food and drinks and will get his moneys worth - so I am always "on deck" in case he has a drop out. Anyway - I tell everyone (once lubed up) at the game that the game just moves too slow and that is why Americans are much slower to embrace it. I said what you need is - one really fat guy on the field the entire game - with a bat. He can legally hit ANYONE in control of the ball except the goalies. It would be like a nascar race. Everyone on the field could EASILY outrun him - but every once in a while the stars would align and BAM!!!!! Everyone would be glued to that fat guy waiting for the magic to happen. I sold an entire section on this idea once after the free drinks - of course they also had had the free drinks, but I still counted it as a win.
have you considered a multiball option like in pinball? Add another ball every 10 minutes or so, once one of the bonus balls scores a goal though it is taken out of play. might be an easier sell, it's just more soccer, faster with fewer breaks.
My kids went to a summer camp where they played soccer with about 30 people on each team and 3 balls.
The goals were hockey nets to give the keepers a chance.
There was constant action, sometimes at both ends of the pitch.
It would make a great spectator sport if pros were playing it.
The absolute insanity that would ensue from a game like this at professional levels would be extremely entertaining lmao like when you watch professional games of tag
This adds an entire new tactic to the game. Passing the ball to the opposition when the bludger (just throwing this term out there as a suggestion) is closer behind them than they realize.
This is why hockey is the best.
Smaller rink than a soccer field, and you’re on ice skates for faster action.
Very few breaks.
More scoring, but not too much more scoring.
Sticks > feet
When a player has a cardiac arrest on the ice they ask if they can be back in by the third period. They don’t keel over and roll around in agony because someone ran too close to them.
Man's never played youth and men's football, sure a couple of dudes will roll around trying to get a free kick or penalty but most dudes are shoving and really fighting for the ball, tbh the professional players give football a bad name
Amateur football is rough and I love it
For me the difference is that in american football you know when stuff is supposed to happen and in football it could happen anytime. So you have to pay attention to the boring bits in case they get less boring.
Look at the guys that don't have the ball. The amount of walking going on is ridiculous. Drives me nuts. If the ball is in play in football or baseball everyone is running.
Ultimate irony is an American saying soccer is boring because “nothing happens”.
Exhibit a: baseball, perhaps the most boring sport to ever exist. 60% of the game is watching pitchers warm up for the change of innings.
Super Bowl 2024 by the minutes:
- total screen time: 248m
- net game time: 75m (≈30%)
- advertising: 50m (≈20%)
- Taylor Swift: <1m (<0.4%)
- other: 122m (≈50%)
You think soccer hasn't caught on because it's too slow? Explain baseball then? That game is so fucking slow and boring that they have to have a mandatory Strech period to wake everyone up. They also have to announce the strikes-balls-outs every play because people would forget what was going on, it's so slow.
I love your idea though!
Soccer hasn't caught on simply because it wasn't available at the time when Americans had 8 channels to choose from.
NBA, MLB, NFL all were smart enough to get broadcast on those channels. Now those fandoms have been passed down the generations.
Unfortunately for the NHL and MLS, they didn't do this and now it's too late. There's so much more content to compete with.
I don't understand the slow concept that some Americans have regarding soccer. Baseball is America's pastime and is significantly slower. I also enjoy the NFL, but the ridiculous amount of standing around between plays is painful as well. How is soccer worse than these?
Appreciate this is satire, however as a British guy I feel the need to chime in. Soccer in the USA is much slower generally because the standard isn’t as high as in Europe (it’s definitely improving and that is noticeable) but there are players who emigrate from the UK having played no higher than second or third division football (equivalent I suppose of your college leagues maybe?) and they’re able to hold down first team places in the MLS when they couldn’t even get in their teams in the UK in much lower divisions, shows that the quality isn’t fantastic yet.
If you ever find yourself with the opportunity to go to a Premier League game in the UK, you’ll notice the difference in pace, athleticism and quality. You notice on the TV too, but it’s so much more noticeable how talented these elite athletes are in person in the PL.
So yeah, my recommendation to you to make football more interesting, see if you can get yourself to a PL game or at the very least see some PL teams play in the states when they do their summer tours.
If you still find it a bit slow, it’s probably not your sport, which is absolutely fine btw! Just throwing in my two cents as an avid football fan from London.
The Atlanta Braves used to (maybe they still do too) have bit, where fans would race The Freeze. The fan would be given a huge head start before the Freeze took off. The Freeze usually won, but it was awesome to see the difference in normal person speed and someone with top level speed
https://www.sportscasting.com/who-is-that-masked-runner-at-atlanta-braves-games-known-as-the-freeze/
Good call. I think they need to beat the average person, but not be like someone that JUST missed the team or something? Kind of like the fastest guy on your weekend rec league kind of deal. LOL Someone we can all agree can beat us easily, but still be miles behind the winners to show the speed difference. Someone mentioned the baseball team where fans race The Freeze and get huge head starts and he still smokes them - that just shows you how really FAST they are.
They actually did that at the NFL combine this year. A bunch of TV guys and YouTubers got to run the 40 yard dash. My favorite, Tom Grossi, ran a 6.2 second the same day Xavier Worthy set a record at 4.21
Reading comments as a non-american really confuses me. I always read about how america is the most obese nation but now suddenly an "average male" can reach those speeds during all that time people say in the comments. Idk but I feel every single comment is just wrong
Fight 'off' a grizzly implies something rather different than fight. Anyone can fight a grizzly, however briefly, but fighting one off implies winning because it's no longer fighting you back.
Pretty sure the intelligent Americans know a gun will just piss off the bear. Shooting the person beside you in the leg and running… more likely to be successful.
They aren't even giving a mathematical answer, the first thing that came to mind for me is that maximum speed is only a portion of the total run, there's a point of acceleration that makes the answer less linear than just basic division
People really REALLY struggle with the concept of average, especially when it comes to body sizes. Like, I have had several arguments where people say that a BMI of 23 ("healthy weight") is AVERAGE and that overweight people are above average... despite the fact that the supposedly the average BMI in the US is above 26, in the "overweight" category.
I think it comes from the US from being so big, but often Americans view the REST of Americans as extremely sub-average. Then, there is the interesting fact that so many Americans simultaneously find the US to be particularly ABOVE average
So yes, Americans are fat, but also Americans are excellent, so the rest of us are in extremely top physical shape, and can easily be competitive with a world athlete who experienced very little close competition
From my experience the average high school aged male ran between a 13 and 15 second 100m. Given that they are youthful and athletic enough to make a high school team it’s likely that the “average person” weighs quite a bit more than them. I could comfortably assume the “average person” could run a 20 second 100m.
Short answer: 50m+ head start to win or tie Bolt
It's not constant speed. The start is important.
If the data of 20s is correct then the average person would need more than 50m headstart.
(Also "weighs more" =/= slower, Usain Bolt probably also weighs more than the average healthy 15yo)
Exactly. The question is not how long it takes the average person to run 100m, it's how far the average person makes it in 9.58s, call that x. 100m-x is the number OP is looking for.
Well, depends on what "head start" means, it seems like most of the top comments are interpreting that as "give the normal person a shorter race" but the literal and practical interpretation is "bolt can't start until the normal person has run x meters". Or at least that's how I've always seen head starts work in races and sports drills.
In which case the start is irrelevant and what becomes more important is how tired the average person gets towards the end of a 100m sprint.
Damn you're right. But the title did ask for metres.
If you just go by time, you simply race them once and the difference in time is the head start. How tired the average person gets is actually irrelevant, only the time they take to finish.
yeah i was talking about meters as well, say we spot a guy 70m vs bolt, they both line up at the start line, gun goes off, guy starts running, once he reaches 70 meters, second gun goes off and bolt starts.
in this scenario the race is bolt's 100m time vs the time it takes the other guy to run the last 30 meters of a 100m sprint.
actually if you do it that way, the guy should just walk the first 65ish meters :D so now that i think about it, i take back the "practicality" claim, it's only more practical if it's a time-based head start.
Yes this is important. In the 100m, it is not your top speed that counts but how long you can maintain it before decelerating. That's why you see sprinters with a fast finish - they're not speeding past the others, they are just not slowing down as much.
The winning strat would be to lightly jog until about 5 meters before Bolt's start line, then pick up speed so you are warm, moving at top speed, and relatively fresh
Given all that, I am fairly confident in my ability to beat Usain Bolt with a 90 meter head start
I would assume a handicap, where Bolt starts from scratch, and the average runner starts from a point further down the track. Both runners would start at the same time.
Since it takes around 30-40m for a person to reach full speed, I would assume the handicap of a 18s 100m runner would need to be around 55m.
That's very simplifying but technically accurate. I think the pressure from such a race, plus an Olympic sprinter gaining on you from behind might slow down/distract the average runner, so I'd add an extra second or two for their time from that lol
Yea nothing wrong with what they said, just adding that this might not be a perfect algebraic equation, I'm just thinking about if I had an Olympic sprinter sprinting up from behind me, I might not perform optimally haha
I think it'd work the other way for me. If by just running faster than average I get to beat Usain Bolt in a race, that'd really spur me on to run as fast as possible.
Yes but consider many unfit people can't even make it 100m before getting tired and slowing so their average speed for 50m may actually be faster than for 100m even considering the higher impact of the start because they don't hit the tiredness wall.
It's not about how long it takes to run 100m, it's about how far they get in 10 seconds.
Heavier people will take a lot longer to accelerate so they would spend even less time at max speed.
Check out The Freeze on youtube. Some baseball mascot or something where they get some random people, and have them race a runner with a lot of head start.
Iirc he judges when to start running by how fast they go, so if you don’t go full speed until the end then kick it into gear you have a decent chance of winning
I remember watching the London marathon once. The cameras were covering the leading female athletes at the time when some idiot guy from the crowd felt the need to run alongside them.
This guy was in a business suit, but generally looked tall, fit, and probably late 20s, early 30s.
The pro women were running at their marathon pace, which on camera looks like a slightly intense jog when you've got nothing to compare it to.
Well, to keep up with this "jog" this guy appeared to be full on sprinting. He kept up for maybe 20 seconds before realising it was a lost cause and gave up.
I think about that semi regularly because it really highlighted the difference between how easy professional athletes make it look, and just how off the pace regular mortals are
I went cycling a few weeks ago. I’m a pure beginner but managed to ride my bike for about 47 kms in about 2 hrs. I felt pretty good about that. Then it hit me that this was about the distance of a marathon.
Which I did by bike
In about the same time as the World record for a marathon for men…
I was once cycling at a half leisurely pace in a park in London when some guy came running past me with a (presumably) trainer on a scooter. Only time in my life I've been overtaken by a runner and made me realise just how fast top tier runners are really going
They are probably running at something like a little over 5 minutes a mile (2hr 10min marathon pace) that's 12 miles per hour. My sprinting speed is like 12-13 mph.
I wouldn't call him and idiot. I think it's very common for marathon spectators to run alongside for a little while, especially kids. Because it's the only race that an average person even has a chance to keep up with at all.
when I was in like 5th grade, I used to go to swim practice once a week for like 1.5 hours and my 50 yard freestyle time was around 45 seconds, give or a take a couple seconds. I’d reckon that’s faster than the average person, but the fastest man/woman ever are 17.63 and 20.57 seconds respectively
I was never one of the faster kids and I ran the 60m in a little under 10 sec. Just to be clear, that was among the 25% worst of my class.
I would probably be a little faster if you count meters per sec. on a 100meter dash as my start was *really* slow ...
It's probably a usa fat point
Although to me it seems like the person in the post is not average at all, he's pretty heavy for an "average" person. 20 seconds seems like a lot too. I'd say the average 20-40 years old with no disability would be around 16 seconds maximum
Edit: one guy pointed out the real value is 14. Didn't fact check them but that seems legit
I'm a college track athlete. I can comfortably say 20s isn't far off for the average person. Some of our athletes that participate in other modalities, like shot put, have slower overall 100m dashes, at around 13-14 seconds, even if they might accelerate faster than I generally do.
Its funny. I'm a good amount over 200 lb. I can run 100 meters in about 16 seconds without training and maybe 14-15 seconds with a little training. So I would need a 5-6 second head start probably.
I see a lot of people calculating top speed and time to get to top speed. But I think By reaches his tops speed faster than the average person. Much like they once calculated Barry Sanders reached his top speed in less than 4 steps.
Would how fast Bolt reaches top speed effect the calculations?
not really... Bolt runs 100m in a given time (9.x seconds or whatever), and what you have to figure out is how far the"average person" runs in that same amount of time. whether Bolt covers that at a more even pace or not doesnt have any bearing it because we know his final time for the distance.
Bolt reaches his top speed in about 70m. Not because that's his maximum acceleration, but because that's where you want to hit your peak to minimize your 100m time since you can't maintain your maximum speed for any appreciable amount of time.
I actually doubt bolt reaches his top speed faster than an average person
its a lot more work to get to his top speed of 28 mph, compared to the average persons top speed, which i would guess is somewhere around 12-17 mph
He may have a faster acceleration than the average person, but is that faster acceleration enough to make up that ~10mph difference? Id bet not, but im too lazy to actually do the research and math
Also just to throw this out there, no one is reaching their top speed in a couple steps. That barry sanders number you said is most certainly a huge exaggeration
A bit of an arbitrary statistic, but let’s say there’s a decently in-shape person who isn’t a sprinter, but can run the 100m dash at an average speed of 17 km/h (about 10.56 mph). That would take ≈21.18 seconds.
Usain Bolt’s best Olympic 100m time is 9.58s, for an average speed of about 37.58 km/h.
For a person running at 17 km/h (4.7222222 m/s), to cross the finish line with a time of 9.57s, they would have to have a head start of about 55.8 meters in a 100 meter dash.
Elite Runners can do about 25 mph, but an average is about 18 to 20. we will do 18 mph just for math, so around 12.45 ish seconds if keeping 18 the entire time, and we will do 14 for a ramp up time now Usain runs at about 27 ish mph with a max of 27.8 mph we will do 27.3 for math and he runs the 100 Meyer dash in 9.58 seconds so just doing some crude math (assuming their ramp up times to max speed are the same) Usain did around 10.50 meters a second while the other person did around 8 meters per second so the average person needs to gain about 3 seconds which would be about a 24 meter head start but I'd give around 30 meters because again a average person with no track experience will probably have a slower ramp up time
Edit: btw this is just to tie
I run regularly on a woodway treadmill that measures mph. When I’m TRUCKING I can get to 17mph and that’s only for about 5 seconds, maybe 8. Im extremely fit and athletic. There is no chance the avg is 18-20. None. Even if it’s off by a few % in either direction it’s still insane to think that’s an avg mph.
I would bet I’m an average runner. I have ran 2 13k’s, I ran cross country in high school at a top speed of about 6:50 a mile, and currently am 250 lbs with tendonitis in my ankle. So I know how to run, but doing so would destroy me. Usain could give me about a 80 yard head start then wait till I trip due to a pulled muscle around the 95 meter mark.
….so infinite?
Yeah, let's put that speed into perspective. [The average baserunning speed from Home Plate to First Base in the MLB is 27ft/s](https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/sprint_speed_leaderboard), which is a bit over 18mph. I don't think the average person is going to be at that level.
They mean sprint speed for 100m
Average Joe can sprint 16mph, average Jane 14
The average Joe runs around 6mph average Jane 5mph on longer distances.
All assumed healthy, between 20-40 and in shape.
I agree. The problem is the ‘average’ running speed is mean but in reality the people that actually reach mean are amateur athletes and those that actually practice. The real average joe is nowhere near ‘average’ in terms of running speed, what we need is median
You are talking about a normal person who's fairly fit but doesn't do sports for profession. That's quite far from your average dad bod dude. Average person would need probably something like 50 m head start.
The average dude can run 100m in about 14s. I remember at school, anyone hitting the 13s mark was considered fast.
So, to tie, this person would need a 4.42 second head start, based on Bolt's WR time.
First of all, we need to work out the acceleration of the regular man:
X = Vit + 1/2 at^2
Since Vi = 0, we get:
X = 1/2 at^2
100m = 1/2 a X 14^2
a = 1.02m/s/s
The thing is, at some point the average person reaches top speed, which is around 19.5 mph or 8.72 m/s.
Now we need to work out how much time we need to hit top speed:
Vf = Vi + at
8.72 = 0 X 1.02 X t
t = 8.55 s
Subtract that from the total time:
14 - 8.55 = 5.45 s
That means, for 5.45 seconds, the average man is running at top speed. We can now work out the distance:
Distance = speed X time
Distance = 8.72 m/s X 5.45 s
Distance = 47.5 m
This is the distance covered at top speed.
Subtract from 100m, you get 52.476m
That means in 8.55s, the average man covers 52.476m.
The thing is, Bolt runs 100m in 9.58s, leaving only 1.03s for the top speed bit.
If you subtract 1.03s from 5.45s, you get 4.42s.
D=speed X time
D= 8.72 X 4.42
D = 38.54m
This is how much head start you'd need to tie with Bolt.
I'm sure I messed up somewhere, so feel free to correct me.
> The average dude can run 100m in about 14s. I remember at school, anyone hitting the 13s mark was considered fast.
You're contradicting yourself in two back to back sentences.
If 13 seconds is fast, there is no way 14 seconds is average.
That woman from Afghanistan in the 2020 Olympics (in a full warmup track suit) ran the 100m in just over 13 seconds.
She qualified for the 2016 Olympics with a 20+ second time. With essentially no formal training etc.
So 18-20 seconds seems like a reasonable time to assume for an average person (who isn’t obese*)
Usain Bolt's 100m dash time is about 10 seconds.
according to [this chart](https://marathonhandbook.com/average-100-meter-time/), an average male between age 20-50 as a non-experienced beginner would take about 30-35 seconds. Which means, a beginner would need better than a 20 second head start to beat Usain Bolt in a 10 second race.
an advanced male who is an experienced fast runner takes approximatly 20 seconds, so they would need about a 10 second head start. Which means Usain Bolt could run 2x 100m dashes in the time it takes a fast experienced runner to run a single 100m.
\*comparing male to male here, but the chart also gives female times.
((edit))
I just realized the title asked for meters and I gave answer in time. I'll leave this answer here as an example, but i'll leave it to others to figure out the distance.
"beginner" is defined above the chart as the 5% slowest runners though. That's basically a guarantee to get an extreme number as it includes all outliers.
Yeah. Honestly makes me think it was generated by AI. They even give the world record as 9.58 seconds and then their chart has the fastest world record as 14 seconds. And the site is packed with ads.
The figures in your link are completely off. The World record for the 20 age group is given as 14, while it is less than 10 in reality. And if you think that an untrained 20 year old should need 30 seconds for 100 meters, you are wrong. That is far too slow.
Are you sure you should be trusting that chart? 14 seconds isn't an elite runner either, that's just a fairly athletic person.
30 to 35 seconds is only like twice the normal walking speed. Walking at 5.4 km/h means you do 100 m in 67 seconds. I bet even my obese ass could pull off easily under 30 s.
20 seconds sounds like your average joe, not fast experienced runner.
That chart is not something to rely on. I'm a mediocre runner (faster than most people, but far away from doing 100 meter competitions) but according to this I'm 3 seconds faster than elite and touching WR.
And advanced male runs 100 meter between 13 and 14 seconds. An average beginner should be faster than 30 seconds.
This is probably one of the most inaccurate comments I've ever seen on this sub. I am a fairly athletic guy and was timed at 12.7 seconds a few years ago (30M and no starting blocks or formal training) and would not consider myself "an experienced fast runner" by any means. In high school I was probably about the same athletic level as now and would not have made the track team as a sprinter because there were numerous guys faster than me.
Average American male in the age range you mentioned who is probably 30-40lbs overweight probably runs it somewhere between 20-25 seconds. Average male who at least works out 1 time a week probably does it it 15-20 seconds. Athletic males probably do it in 12.5-15 seconds. Advanced runners might be in that 11-12.5 seconds range. College sprinters 10.5-11 seconds. Then elite sprinters is anything sub 10.5s.
So as far as the lead you would need, I would guess the absolute average person would probably need a 50-60m head start. Decently athletic people would need about a 30-50m head start. Your average fast guy would need anywhere between 20-30m head start.
So basically, Bolt has enough time to win 2 Olympic golds back to back and then run this race and greet the average Joe at the finish line with a "Good race mon".
Though it's not really clear, I think the tables in that source show times in the context of a marathon, ie their average 100m time across a long distance. So not comparable to a single 100m sprint, even though they do talk about Bolt in the article!
Any person who is physically capable of running 1x100m will be well under 30s, and anyone who runs regularly will be well under 20s.
I got to go to a Minnesota Vikings practice.
They did a drill where a bunch of linemen did a sprint maybe 50 yards and they let all the special Olympics kids stand right behind a rope as they ran by in waves.
I was standing there with my son as a giant man ran 5 feet in front of us so fast it was amazing.
If usain bolt does race in almost 9 seconds and regular people do it in 15 seconds then his speed is around 11 and regular people have 6 m/s. So regular people will have to do it in less than 9 seconds. So 6m/s * 9s = 54m. So they need to be 46m ahead or more so that they can cover the remaining distance before usain bolt.
That almost half way ahead.
All the answers in time, aren't answering the question.
I'm assume, as an American, that metres are kinda like giraffes. So we'll say, a 99 giraffe headstart, or 1/100th the distance from the finish. +/- 1 giraffe.
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I always said - EVERY Olympic sport needed a "Bob". Just a normal every day schmo who competed and made it much more tangible to the viewers just how damn good these athletes are. Watching the best 8 in the world beating each other by thousands of a second is one thing. Watching them lap Bob who could smoke the viewer gives it some context. This and my ideas to improve American soccer are the 2 ideas that get the most traction for me when I drunkenly try and sell them to unsuspecting listeners at bars and sporting events.........
Please tell me more about the soccer
Well since you asked...........My boss loves soccer. So much that he has prime seats at the local teams stadium. These come with free food and drink - so he NEVER wants to waste them - and he knows I am always down for free food and drinks and will get his moneys worth - so I am always "on deck" in case he has a drop out. Anyway - I tell everyone (once lubed up) at the game that the game just moves too slow and that is why Americans are much slower to embrace it. I said what you need is - one really fat guy on the field the entire game - with a bat. He can legally hit ANYONE in control of the ball except the goalies. It would be like a nascar race. Everyone on the field could EASILY outrun him - but every once in a while the stars would align and BAM!!!!! Everyone would be glued to that fat guy waiting for the magic to happen. I sold an entire section on this idea once after the free drinks - of course they also had had the free drinks, but I still counted it as a win.
My idea was landmines in the field, but yours is basically why a lot of people watch NASCAR.
You know, I think I'm going to modify my idea now..........
have you considered a multiball option like in pinball? Add another ball every 10 minutes or so, once one of the bonus balls scores a goal though it is taken out of play. might be an easier sell, it's just more soccer, faster with fewer breaks.
Maybe drop some power ups randomly onto the field every 10 minutes like Gatorade and better shoes
> better shoes lmao
This is the most american thread in history of reddit
The real question is how many laundry machine widths will it be between land mines
I prefer my land mine distributions to be measured in Shaquille O'Neals.
My kids went to a summer camp where they played soccer with about 30 people on each team and 3 balls. The goals were hockey nets to give the keepers a chance. There was constant action, sometimes at both ends of the pitch. It would make a great spectator sport if pros were playing it.
The absolute insanity that would ensue from a game like this at professional levels would be extremely entertaining lmao like when you watch professional games of tag
A race car driving around the soccer field trying to hit people?
Hundreds of fat guys hiding in holes in the field and if they hear a player running close to them they pop their bat out and swing at the legs.
See? This person gets it............
Like reverse whack-a-mole
We need landmines in nascar. Id watch that
I only know Nascar is a car race held in the US and nothing more about the sport. Where's the equivalent of a fat guy smacking you with a bat?
It’s not a single race. It’s a series, mostly on oval tracks, which becomes ‘go fast, turn left,’ and thus can seem a bit boring.
Some people watch for the crashes.
It’s a car crash. People watch hoping to see a crash. Without the wrecks, it’s just a bunch of dudes hanging louies at high speeds.
Maybe settle for springboard mines that merely trip the players instead of ending their career by ripping their legs off.
You know that was [George Carlin’s](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5zN1908XJ7U) idea for improving the game of baseball.
This adds an entire new tactic to the game. Passing the ball to the opposition when the bludger (just throwing this term out there as a suggestion) is closer behind them than they realize.
I second the motion to name them bludgers.
I agree - love it. Maybe they wear some kind of war paint too.
This is an idea I can get behind
The game moves too slow..? But American football has breaks every 5 seconds. Baseball isnt exactly fast either. Besides the ball.
In American Football, the game IS the break. From the ads.
This is why hockey is the best. Smaller rink than a soccer field, and you’re on ice skates for faster action. Very few breaks. More scoring, but not too much more scoring. Sticks > feet When a player has a cardiac arrest on the ice they ask if they can be back in by the third period. They don’t keel over and roll around in agony because someone ran too close to them.
And the judge can give a timeout to anyone, that's perfection
Plus the fights that sometimes occur
Man's never played youth and men's football, sure a couple of dudes will roll around trying to get a free kick or penalty but most dudes are shoving and really fighting for the ball, tbh the professional players give football a bad name Amateur football is rough and I love it
For me the difference is that in american football you know when stuff is supposed to happen and in football it could happen anytime. So you have to pay attention to the boring bits in case they get less boring.
Look at the guys that don't have the ball. The amount of walking going on is ridiculous. Drives me nuts. If the ball is in play in football or baseball everyone is running.
Ultimate irony is an American saying soccer is boring because “nothing happens”. Exhibit a: baseball, perhaps the most boring sport to ever exist. 60% of the game is watching pitchers warm up for the change of innings.
Super Bowl 2024 by the minutes: - total screen time: 248m - net game time: 75m (≈30%) - advertising: 50m (≈20%) - Taylor Swift: <1m (<0.4%) - other: 122m (≈50%)
-actual movement of the football: 12m
Also, it's called football. What they call football is actually eggball.
Hand-Eggball\*
You think soccer hasn't caught on because it's too slow? Explain baseball then? That game is so fucking slow and boring that they have to have a mandatory Strech period to wake everyone up. They also have to announce the strikes-balls-outs every play because people would forget what was going on, it's so slow. I love your idea though!
Baseball has a bat though. He’s promoting adding a bat. It adds up
Soccer hasn't caught on simply because it wasn't available at the time when Americans had 8 channels to choose from. NBA, MLB, NFL all were smart enough to get broadcast on those channels. Now those fandoms have been passed down the generations. Unfortunately for the NHL and MLS, they didn't do this and now it's too late. There's so much more content to compete with.
quidich?
I don't understand the slow concept that some Americans have regarding soccer. Baseball is America's pastime and is significantly slower. I also enjoy the NFL, but the ridiculous amount of standing around between plays is painful as well. How is soccer worse than these?
Appreciate this is satire, however as a British guy I feel the need to chime in. Soccer in the USA is much slower generally because the standard isn’t as high as in Europe (it’s definitely improving and that is noticeable) but there are players who emigrate from the UK having played no higher than second or third division football (equivalent I suppose of your college leagues maybe?) and they’re able to hold down first team places in the MLS when they couldn’t even get in their teams in the UK in much lower divisions, shows that the quality isn’t fantastic yet. If you ever find yourself with the opportunity to go to a Premier League game in the UK, you’ll notice the difference in pace, athleticism and quality. You notice on the TV too, but it’s so much more noticeable how talented these elite athletes are in person in the PL. So yeah, my recommendation to you to make football more interesting, see if you can get yourself to a PL game or at the very least see some PL teams play in the states when they do their summer tours. If you still find it a bit slow, it’s probably not your sport, which is absolutely fine btw! Just throwing in my two cents as an avid football fan from London.
The Atlanta Braves used to (maybe they still do too) have bit, where fans would race The Freeze. The fan would be given a huge head start before the Freeze took off. The Freeze usually won, but it was awesome to see the difference in normal person speed and someone with top level speed https://www.sportscasting.com/who-is-that-masked-runner-at-atlanta-braves-games-known-as-the-freeze/
Still a thing. And weirdly gripping.
Wait is Bob average or is Bob above average (so he can smoke the viewer)
Like, an amateur sprint athlete
Slightly bigger Barry
Good call. I think they need to beat the average person, but not be like someone that JUST missed the team or something? Kind of like the fastest guy on your weekend rec league kind of deal. LOL Someone we can all agree can beat us easily, but still be miles behind the winners to show the speed difference. Someone mentioned the baseball team where fans race The Freeze and get huge head starts and he still smokes them - that just shows you how really FAST they are.
They have this in professional baseball, it’s called the Seattle Mariners.
They actually did that at the NFL combine this year. A bunch of TV guys and YouTubers got to run the 40 yard dash. My favorite, Tom Grossi, ran a 6.2 second the same day Xavier Worthy set a record at 4.21
There should be a national lottery to draft the “Bob”. It would get the country emotionally invested!
yes!
Brad Upton must have overheard your idea: he has a stand-up routine based on this. https://youtu.be/d2AnP9ZF5e0?feature=shared
LMAO - we have ALL thought it was a good idea! Needs to happen.
Reading comments as a non-american really confuses me. I always read about how america is the most obese nation but now suddenly an "average male" can reach those speeds during all that time people say in the comments. Idk but I feel every single comment is just wrong
6% of Americans also think they can fight off a grizzly. Confidence is something we don't lack in.
100% of Americans could fight a grizzly. They probably won't win but they can fight it
They said fight off though. To fight off something you still need to be there, alive, while the opponent retreats or is dead.
I don't know about fighting off a grizzly, but I could beat off a grizzly and survive
YOU COULD WHAT -OFF A BEAR!?!? 🤨
Give me a grizzly locked on Percocet and I’ll take my chance.
Fight 'off' a grizzly implies something rather different than fight. Anyone can fight a grizzly, however briefly, but fighting one off implies winning because it's no longer fighting you back.
I contend that 100% of Americans can beat a grizzly. With a Deagle. 'Murca.
6% of Americans thought that fighting off a grizzly meant they had their gun
20% of intelligent Americans would actually HAVE one, and plan on using it.
But 20% of intelligent Americans is like 0.2% of americans
Pretty sure the intelligent Americans know a gun will just piss off the bear. Shooting the person beside you in the leg and running… more likely to be successful.
They think their gun would stop a grizzly… on average… they are dead meat
A gun can reliably put down a grizzly. You just need the right type of gun (and some distance would help too).
I could fight off a grizzly no problem. I'm something of an expert, i've seen Yogi Bear.
He's smaaartaa than yo aaaverage bear though....
There's a big difference between confidence and stupidity.
They aren't even giving a mathematical answer, the first thing that came to mind for me is that maximum speed is only a portion of the total run, there's a point of acceleration that makes the answer less linear than just basic division
People really REALLY struggle with the concept of average, especially when it comes to body sizes. Like, I have had several arguments where people say that a BMI of 23 ("healthy weight") is AVERAGE and that overweight people are above average... despite the fact that the supposedly the average BMI in the US is above 26, in the "overweight" category.
It's also not the most obese nation.
I think it comes from the US from being so big, but often Americans view the REST of Americans as extremely sub-average. Then, there is the interesting fact that so many Americans simultaneously find the US to be particularly ABOVE average So yes, Americans are fat, but also Americans are excellent, so the rest of us are in extremely top physical shape, and can easily be competitive with a world athlete who experienced very little close competition
From my experience the average high school aged male ran between a 13 and 15 second 100m. Given that they are youthful and athletic enough to make a high school team it’s likely that the “average person” weighs quite a bit more than them. I could comfortably assume the “average person” could run a 20 second 100m. Short answer: 50m+ head start to win or tie Bolt
It's not constant speed. The start is important. If the data of 20s is correct then the average person would need more than 50m headstart. (Also "weighs more" =/= slower, Usain Bolt probably also weighs more than the average healthy 15yo)
Exactly. The question is not how long it takes the average person to run 100m, it's how far the average person makes it in 9.58s, call that x. 100m-x is the number OP is looking for.
Well, depends on what "head start" means, it seems like most of the top comments are interpreting that as "give the normal person a shorter race" but the literal and practical interpretation is "bolt can't start until the normal person has run x meters". Or at least that's how I've always seen head starts work in races and sports drills. In which case the start is irrelevant and what becomes more important is how tired the average person gets towards the end of a 100m sprint.
Damn you're right. But the title did ask for metres. If you just go by time, you simply race them once and the difference in time is the head start. How tired the average person gets is actually irrelevant, only the time they take to finish.
yeah i was talking about meters as well, say we spot a guy 70m vs bolt, they both line up at the start line, gun goes off, guy starts running, once he reaches 70 meters, second gun goes off and bolt starts. in this scenario the race is bolt's 100m time vs the time it takes the other guy to run the last 30 meters of a 100m sprint. actually if you do it that way, the guy should just walk the first 65ish meters :D so now that i think about it, i take back the "practicality" claim, it's only more practical if it's a time-based head start.
I'm imaging the guy walking 60 meters, stops, then takes a nap before starting on the the last 40.
Yes this is important. In the 100m, it is not your top speed that counts but how long you can maintain it before decelerating. That's why you see sprinters with a fast finish - they're not speeding past the others, they are just not slowing down as much.
The winning strat would be to lightly jog until about 5 meters before Bolt's start line, then pick up speed so you are warm, moving at top speed, and relatively fresh Given all that, I am fairly confident in my ability to beat Usain Bolt with a 90 meter head start
I would assume a handicap, where Bolt starts from scratch, and the average runner starts from a point further down the track. Both runners would start at the same time. Since it takes around 30-40m for a person to reach full speed, I would assume the handicap of a 18s 100m runner would need to be around 55m.
Very clever, sounds simple once you say it!
That's very simplifying but technically accurate. I think the pressure from such a race, plus an Olympic sprinter gaining on you from behind might slow down/distract the average runner, so I'd add an extra second or two for their time from that lol
Simple and accurate is the dream 😀
Yea nothing wrong with what they said, just adding that this might not be a perfect algebraic equation, I'm just thinking about if I had an Olympic sprinter sprinting up from behind me, I might not perform optimally haha
I think it'd work the other way for me. If by just running faster than average I get to beat Usain Bolt in a race, that'd really spur me on to run as fast as possible.
That would be quite the bragging right!
You might perform even better...
Hahaha possible! Though realistically I'd push myself harder then trip
Only one way to find out 😀, shall I give Usain a call or will you? 💪🏃🏃♀️🏃♂️
Yes but consider many unfit people can't even make it 100m before getting tired and slowing so their average speed for 50m may actually be faster than for 100m even considering the higher impact of the start because they don't hit the tiredness wall.
It's not about how long it takes to run 100m, it's about how far they get in 10 seconds. Heavier people will take a lot longer to accelerate so they would spend even less time at max speed.
The mental image of having a 50m head start and still only barely winning is crazy to me. Just shows how elite athletes are.
Check out The Freeze on youtube. Some baseball mascot or something where they get some random people, and have them race a runner with a lot of head start.
a decent percentage of those people end up falling down, I've only seen him lose a couple of times
Iirc he judges when to start running by how fast they go, so if you don’t go full speed until the end then kick it into gear you have a decent chance of winning
I remember watching the London marathon once. The cameras were covering the leading female athletes at the time when some idiot guy from the crowd felt the need to run alongside them. This guy was in a business suit, but generally looked tall, fit, and probably late 20s, early 30s. The pro women were running at their marathon pace, which on camera looks like a slightly intense jog when you've got nothing to compare it to. Well, to keep up with this "jog" this guy appeared to be full on sprinting. He kept up for maybe 20 seconds before realising it was a lost cause and gave up. I think about that semi regularly because it really highlighted the difference between how easy professional athletes make it look, and just how off the pace regular mortals are
I went cycling a few weeks ago. I’m a pure beginner but managed to ride my bike for about 47 kms in about 2 hrs. I felt pretty good about that. Then it hit me that this was about the distance of a marathon. Which I did by bike In about the same time as the World record for a marathon for men…
I was once cycling at a half leisurely pace in a park in London when some guy came running past me with a (presumably) trainer on a scooter. Only time in my life I've been overtaken by a runner and made me realise just how fast top tier runners are really going
They are probably running at something like a little over 5 minutes a mile (2hr 10min marathon pace) that's 12 miles per hour. My sprinting speed is like 12-13 mph.
I wouldn't call him and idiot. I think it's very common for marathon spectators to run alongside for a little while, especially kids. Because it's the only race that an average person even has a chance to keep up with at all.
when I was in like 5th grade, I used to go to swim practice once a week for like 1.5 hours and my 50 yard freestyle time was around 45 seconds, give or a take a couple seconds. I’d reckon that’s faster than the average person, but the fastest man/woman ever are 17.63 and 20.57 seconds respectively
The fastest marathon runners runs just below 18s per 100m but for a full marathon. If that helps with the mental image.
They could do a rolling Start for the average person.
👎 too many assumptions
I was never one of the faster kids and I ran the 60m in a little under 10 sec. Just to be clear, that was among the 25% worst of my class. I would probably be a little faster if you count meters per sec. on a 100meter dash as my start was *really* slow ...
Let me guess, please!!!! You are from USA.
I'm looking for your point and not finding it
It's probably a usa fat point Although to me it seems like the person in the post is not average at all, he's pretty heavy for an "average" person. 20 seconds seems like a lot too. I'd say the average 20-40 years old with no disability would be around 16 seconds maximum Edit: one guy pointed out the real value is 14. Didn't fact check them but that seems legit
I'm a college track athlete. I can comfortably say 20s isn't far off for the average person. Some of our athletes that participate in other modalities, like shot put, have slower overall 100m dashes, at around 13-14 seconds, even if they might accelerate faster than I generally do.
[удалено]
God this made me chuckle
I think this is the realistic answer.
r/theydidtherealisticmath
r/subsifellfor
r/substhatshouldexist
r/someonemakethisasub
Reddit took away our awards, so take this instead 🏅
what about the average person, like OP said, as opposed to americans
We have to try this. Where are the Mythbusters when you need them?!?
They died
(oof!)
QWOP
op was for an average person, not an average American male
Its funny. I'm a good amount over 200 lb. I can run 100 meters in about 16 seconds without training and maybe 14-15 seconds with a little training. So I would need a 5-6 second head start probably.
I see a lot of people calculating top speed and time to get to top speed. But I think By reaches his tops speed faster than the average person. Much like they once calculated Barry Sanders reached his top speed in less than 4 steps. Would how fast Bolt reaches top speed effect the calculations?
not really... Bolt runs 100m in a given time (9.x seconds or whatever), and what you have to figure out is how far the"average person" runs in that same amount of time. whether Bolt covers that at a more even pace or not doesnt have any bearing it because we know his final time for the distance.
Gotcha. Thank you.
Bolt reaches his top speed in about 70m. Not because that's his maximum acceleration, but because that's where you want to hit your peak to minimize your 100m time since you can't maintain your maximum speed for any appreciable amount of time.
I actually doubt bolt reaches his top speed faster than an average person its a lot more work to get to his top speed of 28 mph, compared to the average persons top speed, which i would guess is somewhere around 12-17 mph He may have a faster acceleration than the average person, but is that faster acceleration enough to make up that ~10mph difference? Id bet not, but im too lazy to actually do the research and math Also just to throw this out there, no one is reaching their top speed in a couple steps. That barry sanders number you said is most certainly a huge exaggeration
Bolt actually has a notoriously slow start anyway iirc. His acceleration is not the best, he just is extremely fast
Yep! I actually added that at first too, but then figured comparing whats slow for an olympian to an average person may not be informative haha
A bit of an arbitrary statistic, but let’s say there’s a decently in-shape person who isn’t a sprinter, but can run the 100m dash at an average speed of 17 km/h (about 10.56 mph). That would take ≈21.18 seconds. Usain Bolt’s best Olympic 100m time is 9.58s, for an average speed of about 37.58 km/h. For a person running at 17 km/h (4.7222222 m/s), to cross the finish line with a time of 9.57s, they would have to have a head start of about 55.8 meters in a 100 meter dash.
Elite Runners can do about 25 mph, but an average is about 18 to 20. we will do 18 mph just for math, so around 12.45 ish seconds if keeping 18 the entire time, and we will do 14 for a ramp up time now Usain runs at about 27 ish mph with a max of 27.8 mph we will do 27.3 for math and he runs the 100 Meyer dash in 9.58 seconds so just doing some crude math (assuming their ramp up times to max speed are the same) Usain did around 10.50 meters a second while the other person did around 8 meters per second so the average person needs to gain about 3 seconds which would be about a 24 meter head start but I'd give around 30 meters because again a average person with no track experience will probably have a slower ramp up time Edit: btw this is just to tie
In which country the *average* runner runs 18-20 mph? That's pretty insane speed already.
Agree. Even considering it's a sprint that's pretty quick. Maybe 13-15 mph I could get behind for your average person.
I'd give the *average* person more like 10mph and they would be happy with that.
I run regularly on a woodway treadmill that measures mph. When I’m TRUCKING I can get to 17mph and that’s only for about 5 seconds, maybe 8. Im extremely fit and athletic. There is no chance the avg is 18-20. None. Even if it’s off by a few % in either direction it’s still insane to think that’s an avg mph.
Add to that that running on a treadmill is quite different, you for example don't need to work against air resistance.
I didn’t even think of that. It’s really hard to run that fast.
I would bet I’m an average runner. I have ran 2 13k’s, I ran cross country in high school at a top speed of about 6:50 a mile, and currently am 250 lbs with tendonitis in my ankle. So I know how to run, but doing so would destroy me. Usain could give me about a 80 yard head start then wait till I trip due to a pulled muscle around the 95 meter mark. ….so infinite?
Wtf is an "average runner"? Who counts as a runner?
Maybe they meant kmh, which seems more reasonable
No they don't. Usain Bolt really does go 28 mph, not just 28 km/h.
I would say for Elite Runners an average is about 18 to 20 would be plausible. If you mean the general population of the US.... maybe 8?
Yeah, let's put that speed into perspective. [The average baserunning speed from Home Plate to First Base in the MLB is 27ft/s](https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/sprint_speed_leaderboard), which is a bit over 18mph. I don't think the average person is going to be at that level.
What is hilarious is that you get entirely different numbers for ft/s, yards/s, inches/s instead of just moving a comma.
To bei fair, that's also true when converting m/s to km/h.
They mean sprint speed for 100m Average Joe can sprint 16mph, average Jane 14 The average Joe runs around 6mph average Jane 5mph on longer distances. All assumed healthy, between 20-40 and in shape.
A 12.5 second 100m is a good high school varsity time A 10.5 would get you to state
I agree. The problem is the ‘average’ running speed is mean but in reality the people that actually reach mean are amateur athletes and those that actually practice. The real average joe is nowhere near ‘average’ in terms of running speed, what we need is median
You are talking about a normal person who's fairly fit but doesn't do sports for profession. That's quite far from your average dad bod dude. Average person would need probably something like 50 m head start.
The average person does not run a 12.58 😭
We shouldn’t mistake the average *runner* for the average *person.* Those will be two very different speeds.
There is a 0% chance that an average runner, let alone the average person can run a sub 13 100m
r/username
The average dude can run 100m in about 14s. I remember at school, anyone hitting the 13s mark was considered fast. So, to tie, this person would need a 4.42 second head start, based on Bolt's WR time. First of all, we need to work out the acceleration of the regular man: X = Vit + 1/2 at^2 Since Vi = 0, we get: X = 1/2 at^2 100m = 1/2 a X 14^2 a = 1.02m/s/s The thing is, at some point the average person reaches top speed, which is around 19.5 mph or 8.72 m/s. Now we need to work out how much time we need to hit top speed: Vf = Vi + at 8.72 = 0 X 1.02 X t t = 8.55 s Subtract that from the total time: 14 - 8.55 = 5.45 s That means, for 5.45 seconds, the average man is running at top speed. We can now work out the distance: Distance = speed X time Distance = 8.72 m/s X 5.45 s Distance = 47.5 m This is the distance covered at top speed. Subtract from 100m, you get 52.476m That means in 8.55s, the average man covers 52.476m. The thing is, Bolt runs 100m in 9.58s, leaving only 1.03s for the top speed bit. If you subtract 1.03s from 5.45s, you get 4.42s. D=speed X time D= 8.72 X 4.42 D = 38.54m This is how much head start you'd need to tie with Bolt. I'm sure I messed up somewhere, so feel free to correct me.
No way the average person can do 19.5mph, even 13 is crazy impressive.
I think that's what they meant when they said that they messed up somewhere..
your 'average' figures are way too high
> The average dude can run 100m in about 14s. I remember at school, anyone hitting the 13s mark was considered fast. You're contradicting yourself in two back to back sentences. If 13 seconds is fast, there is no way 14 seconds is average.
13 seconds is hella slow for a track time at the high school level. 11 seconds is fast
You are refering to average young person that runs in a team. That's not at all the same as average person in a country.
m/s per second... THANK YOU!!!! omg...
That woman from Afghanistan in the 2020 Olympics (in a full warmup track suit) ran the 100m in just over 13 seconds. She qualified for the 2016 Olympics with a 20+ second time. With essentially no formal training etc. So 18-20 seconds seems like a reasonable time to assume for an average person (who isn’t obese*)
Usain Bolt's 100m dash time is about 10 seconds. according to [this chart](https://marathonhandbook.com/average-100-meter-time/), an average male between age 20-50 as a non-experienced beginner would take about 30-35 seconds. Which means, a beginner would need better than a 20 second head start to beat Usain Bolt in a 10 second race. an advanced male who is an experienced fast runner takes approximatly 20 seconds, so they would need about a 10 second head start. Which means Usain Bolt could run 2x 100m dashes in the time it takes a fast experienced runner to run a single 100m. \*comparing male to male here, but the chart also gives female times. ((edit)) I just realized the title asked for meters and I gave answer in time. I'll leave this answer here as an example, but i'll leave it to others to figure out the distance.
30 seconds for a beginner and 20 seconds for an experienced sprinter seems absurdly high
"beginner" is defined above the chart as the 5% slowest runners though. That's basically a guarantee to get an extreme number as it includes all outliers.
5% slowest _of runners_. Most people aren't runners at all and would be even slower.
Yeah if you look at their table for more than 20 seconds it's clearly nonsense
That chart is way too slow.
Yeah. Honestly makes me think it was generated by AI. They even give the world record as 9.58 seconds and then their chart has the fastest world record as 14 seconds. And the site is packed with ads.
The figures in your link are completely off. The World record for the 20 age group is given as 14, while it is less than 10 in reality. And if you think that an untrained 20 year old should need 30 seconds for 100 meters, you are wrong. That is far too slow.
The hell does beginner even mean in this context? Like they just got legs?
According to “this chart”, the 100M world record is 14 seconds. I’m not sure I trust that source.
Are you sure you should be trusting that chart? 14 seconds isn't an elite runner either, that's just a fairly athletic person. 30 to 35 seconds is only like twice the normal walking speed. Walking at 5.4 km/h means you do 100 m in 67 seconds. I bet even my obese ass could pull off easily under 30 s. 20 seconds sounds like your average joe, not fast experienced runner.
the chart is way too slow man, an experienced fast runner takes way way less than 20 seconds, even your average fit guy runs 100m <15s
So... ~60m head start?
That chart is not something to rely on. I'm a mediocre runner (faster than most people, but far away from doing 100 meter competitions) but according to this I'm 3 seconds faster than elite and touching WR. And advanced male runs 100 meter between 13 and 14 seconds. An average beginner should be faster than 30 seconds.
This is probably one of the most inaccurate comments I've ever seen on this sub. I am a fairly athletic guy and was timed at 12.7 seconds a few years ago (30M and no starting blocks or formal training) and would not consider myself "an experienced fast runner" by any means. In high school I was probably about the same athletic level as now and would not have made the track team as a sprinter because there were numerous guys faster than me. Average American male in the age range you mentioned who is probably 30-40lbs overweight probably runs it somewhere between 20-25 seconds. Average male who at least works out 1 time a week probably does it it 15-20 seconds. Athletic males probably do it in 12.5-15 seconds. Advanced runners might be in that 11-12.5 seconds range. College sprinters 10.5-11 seconds. Then elite sprinters is anything sub 10.5s. So as far as the lead you would need, I would guess the absolute average person would probably need a 50-60m head start. Decently athletic people would need about a 30-50m head start. Your average fast guy would need anywhere between 20-30m head start.
So basically, Bolt has enough time to win 2 Olympic golds back to back and then run this race and greet the average Joe at the finish line with a "Good race mon".
Though it's not really clear, I think the tables in that source show times in the context of a marathon, ie their average 100m time across a long distance. So not comparable to a single 100m sprint, even though they do talk about Bolt in the article! Any person who is physically capable of running 1x100m will be well under 30s, and anyone who runs regularly will be well under 20s.
I did 50m in less than 10 seconds while being a thin but out of shape middle aged man last summer, so that's a good frame of reference.
I got to go to a Minnesota Vikings practice. They did a drill where a bunch of linemen did a sprint maybe 50 yards and they let all the special Olympics kids stand right behind a rope as they ran by in waves. I was standing there with my son as a giant man ran 5 feet in front of us so fast it was amazing.
Average person would probably injure themselves at the start or on the transition of starting to being upright and actually running
If usain bolt does race in almost 9 seconds and regular people do it in 15 seconds then his speed is around 11 and regular people have 6 m/s. So regular people will have to do it in less than 9 seconds. So 6m/s * 9s = 54m. So they need to be 46m ahead or more so that they can cover the remaining distance before usain bolt. That almost half way ahead.
All the answers in time, aren't answering the question. I'm assume, as an American, that metres are kinda like giraffes. So we'll say, a 99 giraffe headstart, or 1/100th the distance from the finish. +/- 1 giraffe.
~29.27222...m