2023 NCAA indoors

[ATK]

I don't see Julien Alfred's 200m performance mentioned anywhere.

Alfred ran 22.26 in the 200m. That's no.2 in NCAA history and no.4 in WORLD history.

[ubiQuitous1]

45.05 WL m400 for Jacory Patterson (Florida)
Annnnnnd then 44.75 WL for Elija Godwin (Ga)

5th fastest collegian, 7th fastest performance 6th fastest performer All Time, for Godwin

[gm]

The rules say if the anchor finishes without the baton, team is DQd. If anchor crosses and is assigned finishing time, I would assume that means the team is deemed to have finished the race.

But I am respectful of your knowledge and always welcome being enlightened.

NCAA Rules, Section 8, Article 5

USATF Rule 170.16

[Steele]

She didn't drop the baton, the other runner knocked it out of her hand.

[79]

5th fastest collegian, 7th fastest performance 6th fastest performer All Time, for Godwin

Wow! More than a good win! 44"75 is a very impressive performance! 🏆

[booond]

7 U of Washington runners broke 4 minutes at BU in a very high quality mile; 34 men total under 4 minutes.

[player]

NCAA Rules, Section 8, Article 5

USATF Rule 170.16

Thank you very much for the references.

The NCAA rule that corresponds to USATF 170.16 appears to me to be NCAA Rule 7, Section 7, Article 5, which is the rule Davidokun cited in this thread for the proposition that a runner may leave the track or assigned area to retrieve a dropped baton.

The NCAA rule does not contain the language that the USATF rule does contain that contemplates retrieval of a forward-dropped baton from beyond the finish, which would necessarily involve a double crossing of the finish line.

And the USATF rule does not contain the NCAA rules' language about disqualifying an anchor for finishing the race without the baton. That language appears in NCAA Rule 7, Section 8, sub-section f, also cited by Davidokun in this thread in his follow-up post.

It strikes me that allowing multiple crossings of the finish line by the same team could be a challenge for timing technology and perhaps the NCAA has thought abut that issue. If the Duke anchor had attempted to retrieve the baton, the officials' ruling would have been instructive on the possible difference between the pertinent USATF and NCAA rules.



.

[proofs in the pudd'in]

Question about indoor tracks. From what I understand there is not one type of indoor track. With that said someone I was talking too mentioned that the turns are mostly downward - 80-90%. Is this correct, I never heard this before? This person was trying to suggest that these track are faster than outdoors because of this downward sloping help. I mentioned that the turns were most likely even in upward and downward slopes and thus balanced out. Who here is the guru of indoor track construction?

[Atticus]

I mentioned that the turns were most likely even in upward and downward slopes and thus balanced out.

Ha! Indeed - the slight exception is that one can actually start UP on the curve, so there is a net down.
The slopes make it better than flat track, but no, no indoor track is as fast as outdoors, unless it is REALLY oversized, like the UWash one, which is pretty darned close to outdoors. It also helps that there are no winds to contend with.

[NotDutra5]

She didn't drop the baton, the other runner knocked it out of her hand.

I guess we can say that but as the final leg was unfolding I was thinking to myself that the Duke anchor swung her arms wide and she better be careful because it looked like what happened could happen. The other runner knocked it from her hand but only because the Duke runner banged her hand holding the baton against the Miami runner's arm.

[gh]

for most overlooked mark of the weekend, how about the 7.07 by USC soph Samirah Moody in Seattle yesterday?

Merely equals the American-born CR.

[Steele]

I guess we can say that but as the final leg was unfolding I was thinking to myself that the Duke anchor swung her arms wide and she better be careful because it looked like what happened could happen. The other runner knocked it from her hand but only because the Duke runner banged her hand holding the baton against the Miami runner's arm.

Upon further review, the Duke runner drifted to her right down the stretch and actually took a step or two on/over the lane 2 line right at the tape, while the Miami runner stayed in lane 2. So I guess it's on the Duke runner fair and square.

[gm]

Thank you very much for the references.

The NCAA rule that corresponds to USATF 170.16 appears to me to be NCAA Rule 7, Section 7, Article 5, which is the rule Davidokun cited in this thread for the proposition that a runner may leave the track or assigned area to retrieve a dropped baton.

The NCAA rule does not contain the language that the USATF rule does contain that contemplates retrieval of a forward-dropped baton from beyond the finish, which would necessarily involve a double crossing of the finish line.

And the USATF rule does not contain the NCAA rules' language about disqualifying an anchor for finishing the race without the baton. That language appears in NCAA Rule 7, Section 8, sub-section g, also cited by Davidokun in this thread in his follow-up post.

It strikes me that allowing multiple crossings of the finish line by the same team could be a challenge for timing technology and perhaps the NCAA has thought abut that issue. If the Duke anchor had attempted to retrieve the baton, the officials' ruling would have been instructive on the possible difference between the pertinent USATF and NCAA rules.



.

There is nothing in the NCAA rules prohibiting the runner who dropped the baton from going back, picking it up and then finishing, as long as no distance advantage was gained. The Duke runner, if she had realized soon enough what happened, could have run back, picked up the baton, gone a few meters back down the track just to make sure, and then crossed the finish line with the baton. Of course, it would also require the officials paying close attention.

Also, no decent timer would have any trouble in this scenario. It's pretty evident whether or not a runner has the baton in the finish photo. You just ignore the one where she didn't.

[Awsi Dooger]

I appreciate Diggs with the 50.15. Why has that second indoor lap been so historically pathetic for American women? They flash through in 23 mid all the time then stagger and bumble around to 51 mid or higher, even when they're on the rail throughout with no excuse whatsoever.

The commentators and stadium announcers have done a terrible job in failing to spotlight and condemn the tendency. It's about time somebody actually kept going.

And too bad Adeleke won't be in European Championships. Maybe in 2 years she'll be there in Apeldoorn and even faster. That would be very interesting to see a big intimidating frame like that competing against Bol for the rail. I'm still sick of all the Europeans who defer to Bol every time.

[Revenant]

I don't see Julien Alfred's 200m performance mentioned anywhere.

Alfred ran 22.26 in the 200m. That's no.2 in NCAA history and no.4 in WORLD history.

It was obviously a great run, but the problem is Lubbock is 976m altitude, so it's hard to compare to other performances. It's the same with Hobbs & her 6.94 in New Mexico (even greater altitude at 1619m 😮 ) and Adeleke's 50.33 (also at Lubbock, 976) and Digg's 50.15 at Fayetteville (427m). Through no fault of the athletes, a lot of those runs are at a quite high altitude.

Of course, that doesn't just happen in the US, as Kambundji's 7.03 was at 669m elevation, but compare those to DAS's 7.03 in Bham (140m) or Bol/Klaver's 400s in Apeldoorn (just 16m) or Kaczmarek's 50.83 in Torun (65m).

I know the jury is out on altitude & it's exact impact, but I think it's about 3/100ths in those US 60ms & at least 1/10th in Alfred's 200m. Which are obviously still amazing times.