4x400: time to make changes?

[Daisy]

Ms. Lewis would now appear to be charming young lady in more than one way...

“It was pretty exciting. I’m not complaining about the way we won. Relays have rules and rules are the rules. The girls ran so well, in front of a home crowd makes it so special,” Lewis said. Source

Didn't they lose by 10m? She speaks as if the English team didn't exist.

[26mi235]

Apparently there is still more to this 4x400 story but I cannot make the link work. Can anyone either get a better link or summarize the story?

I can now get the link to work. The Head Aussie guy said British runner broke the rule and his team gets the medals even if everyone knows that the Brits "won" the race and were the better team. (My interpretation)

[Quarter Horse]

While I haven't had the opportunity to officiate for an elite T&F meet, I have had the opportunity to work a number of High School and Collegiate meets. When it comes to the 4x400m relay, we always have an official working the exchange zone to explain the rules to the athletes and line them up as the runners are passing the 200m mark. Once we line them up in their positions, we tell them to hold their positions. At that point if we see any shifts or jostling to switch lanes, then we hand out disqualifications.

My question is...

Where were the officials when all of this was going on at the CW Games?

[Powell]

At the international level, I think it's perfectly natural to expect the athletes to know the rules. To me the question is whether Danvers knew in what position she needed to be standing, and if she didn't, was it through her fault.

[Daisy]

My question is...

Where were the officials when all of this was going on at the CW Games?

I read somewhere that there was some heated argument going on in the tunnel when the third leg runners came onto the track. I wonder if the official in charge was distracted by the off scene fighting rather than concentrating on the job at hand?

[26mi235]

At the international level, I think it's perfectly natural to expect the athletes to know the rules. To me the question is whether Danvers knew in what position she needed to be standing, and if she didn't, was it through her fault.

Time to change the rule that there has to be an affirmative finding that there was advantage taken by being out of place, sort of like stepping on the line in the straight (cf. Powell in the 100m).

We should never have a situation where a runner can act to help another runner get out of position. Also, who was out of position, it takes two athletes at least. Here we always penalize the earlier one taking the baton, but why does number 2 get a free pass when they were not where they belonged? If they had an incentive to be in the right place (i.e., more athletes monitoring the placement) would the frequency decline.

[Daisy]

At the international level, I think it's perfectly natural to expect the athletes to know the rules. To me the question is whether Danvers knew in what position she needed to be standing, and if she didn't, was it through her fault.

Apparently Lewis went to lane three and held that spot. Danvers probably did not know for certain and assumed that lane two was hers, espescially since the English would have been in second place at that point. To me the question is whether Lewis knew in what position she needed to be standing, and if she didn't, where was the official to correct her? (or was it gamesmanship :shock: )

[Powell]

Time to change the rule that there has to be an affirmative finding that there was advantage taken by being out of place, sort of like stepping on the line in the straight (cf. Powell in the 100m).

But there was a definite advantage. Since Danvers was standing closer to the kerb, the third-leg English runner did not have to move quite as wide to pass the baton and saved a bit of distance, while the Australians had to run a longer distance.

[Daisy]

Time to change the rule that there has to be an affirmative finding that there was advantage taken by being out of place, sort of like stepping on the line in the straight (cf. Powell in the 100m).

But there was a definite advantage. Since Danvers was standing closer to the kerb, the third-leg English runner did not have to move quite as wide to pass the baton and saved a bit of distance, while the Australians had to run a longer distance.

Powell makes a good point. Not sure how much extra distance since i don't know the standard lane width off hand.


English is Blue
Australian is Red

[26mi235]

The extra distance on the straightaway is negligable, since we have something like (100^2 + 1^1)^0.5, which is half a cm. The extra distance is a fraction of the amount running in an outside lane would amount to for the time to get the tanget to the curve. This is approximately 8 meters, or 8% of the curve. The fraction from being out a whole lane for only the very beginning; thus, it is under 0.5. 8% x 0.5 = 4%. One whole curve one lane out adds 3.25m or so. 4% of this is 13cm. Thus, the total difference is 13.5cm. However, this is the biggest possible differential. Does runner #2 actually start in Lane 3 or can they move in just so that they do not interfer with Runner#1? If they can start to move in, then we have only fraction of the 13cm difference. It was my impression that runners moved in. In this case, the A team ran no extra distance while the B team saved at most 13.5 cm.

Now, if the runners are such that Runner#1 is far enough ahead of #2 then they immediately move in and the path that Runner #1 now has to take may require moving out, which negates the disadvantage of already being out.

[lonewolf]

In my experience, 4x4 officials usually position outgoing runners as their team comes off the curve and enters the straight.. then waiting runners of trailing teams move in as their team arrives..

[El Toro]

The whiny bitches complaining about this rule were the same whiny bitches complaining about their team being pushed around under the old rule.

The orderly queue is the ultimate achievement of the human race. Those incapable of queuing properly deserve to be punished severely and should never be allowed to represent their country.

[Daisy]

The whiny bitches complaining about this rule were the same whiny bitches complaining about their team being pushed around under the old rule.

You go girl.

[El Toro]

Will do sweetheart!

[26mi235]

The whiny bitches complaining about this rule were the same whiny bitches complaining about their team being pushed around under the old rule.

The orderly queue is the ultimate achievement of the human race. Those incapable of queuing properly deserve to be punished severely and should never be allowed to represent their country.

So now we are back to saying that the reason to have the rule is so that you can obey it? A key issue on the table is the rule and this is no defense of the rule. You also do not really explain why another runner that is out of position is not a problem (#2).