Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WA certified tracks around the world

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • gh
    replied
    Arkansas's indoor track just got certified.... story on home page

    Leave a comment:


  • ATK
    replied
    Interesting note on Gately Track in Chicago, they hosted their first indoor meet this weekend The Morolake Akinosun Elite Invitational.

    Leave a comment:


  • andyjgt
    replied
    Originally posted by gm View Post
    Is there any requirement for a facility to be Class 1 or 2 in order for marks made there to count as world records or for Oly/WC qualifying?
    The Ukrainian federation are only counting marks made at certified facilities and they have asked Tilastopaja and I believe WA to do the same (though they include class 3). Viktoriya Tkachuk ran 54.59 for 400h in Kyiv on 9 August but the stadium was not certified so it didn't count. (She'd still be 3rd on the world lists, behind compatriot Ryzhykova as well as Bol.) She doesn't count it as her PB either on her instagram page.

    Leave a comment:


  • El Toro
    replied
    Originally posted by Alan Sigmon View Post

    "2.3.1 LONG JUMP FACILITY (See 2.1.1.2)

    2.3.1.1 Layout (Figures 2.3.1.1a and b)

    The Long Jump facility includes a runway, a take-off board and a landing area. Usually, it is placed outside the track along one of the straights with two adjacent runways with the landing areas offset at each end as shown in Figure 2.5a, thus allowing competition in either direction by two groups of athletes simultaneously. This is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II.

    Now, to me, it's clear that the final sentence negates the "usually" of the previous sentence making all elements of that sentence mandatory for Class 1 and II arenas."


    ------

    It seems to me that there is some ambiguity in the phrase "This is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II." In particular, exactly what is the antecedent of the word "This"? Does this refer to "outside the track" or does it refer to "two adjacent runways .... allowing competition ... by two groups of athletes simultaneously." The positioning of the word "usually" at the beginning of the sentence suggests that it modifies the word "placed," suggesting that the location is not mandatory.
    Obviously, I don't agree with your interpretation but I think we can all agree that whatever, IAAF/WA intended to say, they shouldn't have used those woeful sentences to try and say it! There should be no argument about a simple policy requirement.

    Here's two rewrites with the opposite meanings:

    1. The Long Jump facility includes a runway, a take-off board and a landing area. The layout shown in Figure 2.5 a is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II. Alternative layouts are allowed for other Construction Categories.

    OR, the opposite meaning

    2. The Long Jump facility includes a runway, a take-off board and a landing area. A layout which allows two groups of athletes to compete on parallel runways simultaneously within the arena is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II. The layout shown in Figure 2.5a is strongly preferred but not mandatory for any construction category.

    Leave a comment:


  • lonewolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Alan Sigmon View Post
    ------

    It seems to me that there is some ambiguity in the phrase "This is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II." In particular, exactly what is the antecedent of the word "This"? Does this refer to "outside the track" or does it refer to "two adjacent runways .... allowing competition ... by two groups of athletes simultaneously." The positioning of the word "usually" at the beginning of the sentence suggests that it modifies the word "placed," suggesting that the location is not mandatory.
    I favor this interpretation.

    Leave a comment:


  • PearlDaddy
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy View Post
    Portland had an Indoor WC a few years back, but on a temp track (presumably certified) that ended up somewhere I don't recall.

    The University of Iowa bought it. Since then, they have hosted a lot more indoor meets than they had on their old surface.

    Leave a comment:


  • lonewolf
    replied
    In my long experience, there are far more LJ/TJ facilities inside than outside the track. What I hate is when they are behind the stands or in the end zone or somewhere out of sight.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    And thank goodness...

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    important bottom line: no matter how the rule is meant to be read, Eugene's WC will go off with the interior runways

    Leave a comment:


  • J Rorick
    replied
    Yes, it could be interpreted that "allowing competition in either direction by two groups of athletes simultaneously" is what is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II. Angels on the head of a pin.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alan Sigmon
    replied


    "2.3.1 LONG JUMP FACILITY (See 2.1.1.2)

    2.3.1.1 Layout (Figures 2.3.1.1a and b)

    The Long Jump facility includes a runway, a take-off board and a landing area. Usually, it is placed outside the track along one of the straights with two adjacent runways with the landing areas offset at each end as shown in Figure 2.5a, thus allowing competition in either direction by two groups of athletes simultaneously. This is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II.

    Now, to me, it's clear that the final sentence negates the "usually" of the previous sentence making all elements of that sentence mandatory for Class 1 and II arenas."


    ------

    It seems to me that there is some ambiguity in the phrase "This is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II." In particular, exactly what is the antecedent of the word "This"? Does this refer to "outside the track" or does it refer to "two adjacent runways .... allowing competition ... by two groups of athletes simultaneously." The positioning of the word "usually" at the beginning of the sentence suggests that it modifies the word "placed," suggesting that the location is not mandatory.

    Leave a comment:


  • ATK
    replied
    Originally posted by lonewolf View Post
    The horizontal jumps are inside the track at Univ of Arkansas.
    And at Ichan Stadium, yet both certified. (I'm sure others on the certified list have the jumps inside as well)

    Leave a comment:


  • El Toro
    replied
    Originally posted by Trickstat View Post

    I wonder if the person/people who check tracks in India for the home federation also does it for WA, so you get a 2 for 1 deal?
    I don't know specifically about India but WA makes provision to accept suitable member certifications. From the Certification System Procedures (March 2020)

    2.1.6 Some World Athletics Member Federations have already put technical certification procedures in place that regulate and certify facilities in their own countries. Where these procedures are considered adequate, World Athletics may recognise certificates issued by these Member Federations as adequate for issue of certificates, but World Athletics reserves the right to re-evaluate such facilities.

    Leave a comment:


  • El Toro
    replied
    Originally posted by dj View Post
    According to El Toro's responses, the new Hayward Field set-up is not compliant as either a Class 1 or 2 facility, as the jump runways are inside the track.

    What is the chronology of awarding of the bid to Eugene and the adoption of these requirements for Class 1 and 2 facilities?
    OK. I thought I'd go back and check to make sure I was right, given the propensity for WA to produce confusing documentation and occasionally have multiple versions of documents available through search engines.

    I note that multiple different documents are referenced in relation to arena requirements. I started to write a post with the full chain of references yesterday but it was so long I though nobody would read it, so I deleted it. Pretty stupid of me now that I think about it!

    However, if we look just at the most detailed document, the World Athletics Track and Field Facilities Manual 2019 (1 November), we find the reason why they want the horizontal jumps outside:

    Chapter 2 - Competition Arena

    2.3 Facilities for Jumping Events

    The Jumping Events are Long Jump, Triple Jump, High Jump and Pole Vault.
    The facilities required for these are described in Section 2.1.1.2. Further details are given in Sections 2.3.1 to 2.3.4. These facilities preferably should not be on the infield because of the potential safety and event scheduling problems.
    Sensible thinking, but "preferably should not be on the infield" does not make it compulsory to have them outside.

    Let's move on to a more explicit statement:

    2.3.1 LONG JUMP FACILITY (See 2.1.1.2)

    2.3.1.1 Layout (Figures 2.3.1.1a and b)

    The Long Jump facility includes a runway, a take-off board and a landing area. Usually, it is placed outside the track along one of the straights with two adjacent runways with the landing areas offset at each end as shown in Figure 2.5a, thus allowing competition in either direction by two groups of athletes simultaneously. This is mandatory for Construction Categories I and II.
    Now, to me, it's clear that the final sentence negates the "usually" of the previous sentence making all elements of that sentence mandatory for Class 1 and II arenas.

    Figure 2.5a, as referenced, is a diagram of the WA "Standard Arena" layout with outside bi-directionl, parallel, offset runways.


    One other thing to throw in relating to all throws being inside the arena that will affect tracks with artificial football fields inside:

    The highest Construction Category possible for an arena that does not have all the requisite throwing facilities on the main arena is Construction Category III, if complying throwing facilities are provided within the same sports complex.



    Leave a comment:


  • Conor Dary
    replied
    Originally posted by bad hammy View Post
    That's a scheduling issue more than a safety issue. Not sure exactly what they're planning at Hayward but they have a huge hammer/discus-ready facility just a few yards south of the stadium proper. I'm assuming for big meet that the javelin and discus will be inside, hammer outside - depends on how they feel about hammer-holes in the infield.


    I suspect the hammer days inside are over...



    Leave a comment:

Working...
X