The Worst Rule In Track?

[gh]

T&FN office got a release today from J.J. Johnson's flak, saying he was ready to challenge the World Record. (highly) unlikely, of course, but a PR guy has to do his job.

Someone in the office suggested a pool on how fast he (Johnson, not his flak) actually runs in Monaco and it struck me that w/ JJJ, lane draw is incredibly crucial. As I pointed out on another thread, his 19.88 world-leader back in '01 came out of lane 9. After seeing him run in inside lanes in Paris, I understand why. He's incredibly long-legged and doesn't handle curves well. Put him out in one of the long bends and he's OK.

Assuming they seed Monaco based on World Rank positions (I'm checking on that), he'll be in the second group. That means that rankers 1-4 do a random draw for the "preferred lanes" of 3-4-5-6. JJJ will be in the draw for 1-2, 7-8. Does anyone who knows sprinting think that running the 200 out of 7 or 8 remotely approaches the punishment of being in 1 or 2? Indeed, I suspect that on many tracks, being in 7 or 8 is far superior even to being in 3, given that a properly-run 200 is balls-out all the way, not sit-and-kick on the guy you are trailing. Yes, it helps to know where the competition is, but running less of a curve has to be a greater help.

I think the IAAF needs to rethink "preferred lanes" for the 200 (especially) and the 400.

[Guest]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

Machts nicht.

[Guest]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

That might be the second worst rule. The worst rule is having the 200 at all indoors. With the runners on the outside having a downhill race.

[Guest]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

yo, garry...nice bait!!!

[tandfman]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

C'mon, Louise. You've hijacked one thread and made it endless. Please leave this one alone.

[Guest]

Re: Actually;

J.J. Johnsons top end speed is as good as anyone. If he can work out the kinks in his form (wasted motion), he has the potential to run in the 19.60 range, running form lane 6 with someone like, Capel or Miller in lane 7, then who knows.

[DentyCracker]

Re: Actually;

What do you suggest Garry?
I think with the 400 it is fine. With the 200 it may be worth making it 4567 1238

[gh]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

"Angelo Taylor" wrote "machts nicht" althought that might have been a more appropriate from response from "John Akii-Bua," who after all won his Olympic medal out of lane 1 in Germany (unlike Taylor's Oz performance).

Was probably meant as a jape, but in case somebody is taking it seriously, obviously 1 result (or 2) doesn't override all the other evidence we have on the subject. And running at 47-second pace far less of a centrifugal (or is it centripetal?) force problem than does running sub-20 (or sub-45 on the flat).

[tafnut]

Re: Actually;

Isn't the real problem with lane 1 that you can't crowd the inside of the lane as well as you can in the other lanes? I know they don't measure from the line itself (1' in?), but it looks like that is a big part of the problem. I would rather be in 2 than 8.

[Guest]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

>C'mon, Louise. You've hijacked one thread and
>made it endless. Please leave this one alone.

precisely what i said to garry......and made no comment...don't start me...you should have left well enough alone....

(but why...will i get dq'ed for 2 threads???????)

[JRM]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

I agree, and have addressed this issue in my research. Strictly speaking, the outer lanes are favorable from a physical point of view: wider curve means less centrifugal forces which means more energy devoted to forward motion. Fredericks' indoor 200m WR is a clear example of that (and of the "run your own race" philosophy), as is JJJ's 19.88, MJ's 19.79s from New Orleans, and even Marion Jones' PR (I think).

I'm not sure of the rationale behind preferred lanes in the 200m. I can only assume it's a carry-over from the 100, where there is no physical preference for any lane (only psychological).

I think if we placed the fastest people in the outer lanes, we'd see faster performances on average. Unfortunately, at the same time as improving the good performances, it will degrade the worse ones by sticking athletes in lanes 1,2, or 3.

[KevinM]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

GH, wasn't Taylor in lane 1 in Sydney?

[Guest]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

yes, read his response 4-5 posts before yours

[Guest]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

I run the 200 so I must say that the pros and cons come from a mental standpoint, in terms of the outside lanes. When you have more people in front of you, you are far more aware of where you are in relation to the other runners and you are able to feed off of them and try and break the stagger while you are on the curve. When you are in lane 7 or 8, you are forced to run much more inside yourself and oftentimes you feel like you are running scared, and you don't have a "feel" of the race. I guess it would depend what type of runner you are and how much you "use" the other runners in your race. A lot also depends on the track. In Europe a lot of the tracks have wider turns, so I would take 3 over 7. At Mt. Sac for instance, I probably wouldn't.

[michael lewis]

Re: The Worst Rule In Track?

What is the "conventional wisdom" on how much faster you run in lane 5 compared to lane 1? (etc) in a 200?