Tweet
On the lastest false start thread, DTG says, "I maintain, I still want to see the FASTEST RUNNER win the race, not the one that has the fastest reaction time to the gun start."
With current technology we clearly have the ability to measure "true" performance in many events and not reaction time. We know from the start/finish data exactly who covers the sprint race fastest from the moment he/she leaves the blocks to the moment of crossing the finish. Many times this result does not reflect the physical order of finish because a slower runner might be a quicker reactor. Should the runner who actually covers the distance in the fastest elapsed time be the winner instead of the first place finisher?
Likewise, in the horizontal jumps it is possible with current technology to measure the "true" length of the jump from take off to landing, regardless of foot placement on the board. Probably, on a "true" performance basis, Carl L. should have been credited with a 30 foot jump that night in Indiana years ago. Throws might be similarly measured from the place where the implement leaves the thrower's hand.
Moreover, it seems to me that with enough video/computer tracking it ought to be possible to follow each individual runner's progress through, say, an 800 meter race and find each runner's time at the point where he/she actually has covered 800 meters. Obviously a person forced by the pack to run a considerable distance in lane 2 or 3, or who has to change lanes several times, covers the 800 meters at some point before the finish line and might even have run the distance faster than the person who crosses the finish line first.
Of course, all these things are a track nut's nightmare, none of us are crazy for change. But are they the future of the sport or not? And are they any nuttier than starting block pressure pads and the like?
With current technology we clearly have the ability to measure "true" performance in many events and not reaction time. We know from the start/finish data exactly who covers the sprint race fastest from the moment he/she leaves the blocks to the moment of crossing the finish. Many times this result does not reflect the physical order of finish because a slower runner might be a quicker reactor. Should the runner who actually covers the distance in the fastest elapsed time be the winner instead of the first place finisher?
Likewise, in the horizontal jumps it is possible with current technology to measure the "true" length of the jump from take off to landing, regardless of foot placement on the board. Probably, on a "true" performance basis, Carl L. should have been credited with a 30 foot jump that night in Indiana years ago. Throws might be similarly measured from the place where the implement leaves the thrower's hand.
Moreover, it seems to me that with enough video/computer tracking it ought to be possible to follow each individual runner's progress through, say, an 800 meter race and find each runner's time at the point where he/she actually has covered 800 meters. Obviously a person forced by the pack to run a considerable distance in lane 2 or 3, or who has to change lanes several times, covers the 800 meters at some point before the finish line and might even have run the distance faster than the person who crosses the finish line first.
Of course, all these things are a track nut's nightmare, none of us are crazy for change. But are they the future of the sport or not? And are they any nuttier than starting block pressure pads and the like?
Comment