¶mDiscus: Gerd Kanter (Estonia) 68.94 (226-2)

[Powell]

And Kolnootchenko remains the Japanese all-comers record holder 8)

[gh]

Alekna was out of synch all night. Looked like he was very unfamiliar with that plate thing in his hand.

[Randy Treadway]

Nobody else will exceed Alekna's first throw. You heard it here first.

Did I say that? That couldn't have been me, it must have been an imposter. 8) Or an eclipse of the moon or something.

[Jaack]

Did anyone else notice a potential "official error" when they marked Hartning's 3rd round throw?

I watched on BBC and they had a computerised graphic up, which made it easier to notice visually. Anyhow, Harting threw for the third time it landed and the official ran over and pointed at its landing position, the measuring stick was then placed accordingly- I said to myself "That's not where it landed", it was slightly further"- I was thinking that the official had pointed out a previous dint and I was all set to look through the official results to find a mark of the same distance as as soon as the mark was shown. Low and behold, it was given to be the same distance as Harting's OWN 2nd round throw. I am pretty positive, that the dint from his second round throw was actually marked twice, and his third round throw was just that little bit better.

Now I could be wrong, but I really don't think so. If I'm not, it shows Hartings incredible accuracy to throw in an around the same "Dint"/spot on the field twice in a row. It also shows how probable human error is, when events come down to cm's and an official doesn't mark from the exact spot- well- how many titles have been lost by incorrect measuring- I wonder!?

[Randy Treadway]

Just looking at television, and being a former long-time field events official, I've seen quite a few in this meet that I didn't think were marked as accurately as they could or should have been, but then having been an official myself, I usually toss it off as 'they're trying as hard as they can, and am I really SURE I could have done better myself if I'd been down there on the field in that incredible heat and humidity without benefit of video replay?"

That said, I'm amazed that IAAF hasn't funded technical development more than they have, to come up with some kind of tracking device that can track an implement in the air and detect the instant of a major change in direction (contact with the ground being the assumed "cause" of the change in direction), and instantly triangulate the distance from the circle or runway (javelin).
They've got the computerized triangulation down, but it still relies on humans to mark the contact point. Seems like the rest of it should be "doable" given a grant to some university research department.
I thought Ralph Lindemann was having the folks at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs develop stuff like this. I know they were working on some foot-fault detection apparatus a few years ago using some kind of wired mesh material- never heard what became of that either...
Instead, we see the little radio-controlled robot cars taking the implement back to the throwing area. Cute (typically Japanese) and perhaps a logistics and safety aid, but it does nothing to improve officiating accuracy.

By the way, it is common for athletes, especially at elite level, to continually return to the same landing zone out in the sector. I've even seen a hammer thrower land the ball in the exact same "hole in the grass" he'd made in an earlier round. The odds seem incredibly low, but it happens more often than you'd think.

[Jaack]

I usually toss it off as 'they're trying as hard as they can, and am I really SURE I could have done better myself if I'd been down there on the field in that incredible heat and humidity without benefit of video replay?"

Absolutely, I wasn't bashing the officials- Like I pointed out, human error is just that, in our nature. But I am *kind of* (:P ) bashing the fact that humans are still used to measure- when surely some alien, and/or robotic lifeform could be on poiint all of the time

[Jaack]

That said, I'm amazed that IAAF hasn't funded technical development more than they have, to come up with some kind of tracking device that can track an implement in the air and detect the instant of a major change in direction (contact with the ground being the assumed "cause" of the change in direction), and instantly triangulate the distance from the circle or runway (javelin).
They've got the computerized triangulation down, but it still relies on humans to mark the contact point. Seems like the rest of it should be "doable" given a grant to some university research department.
I thought Ralph Lindemann was having the folks at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs develop stuff like this. I know they were working on some foot-fault detection apparatus a few years ago using some kind of wired mesh material- never heard what became of that either...
Instead, we see the little radio-controlled robot cars taking the implement back to the throwing area. Cute (typically Japanese) and perhaps a logistics and safety aid, but it does nothing to improve officiating accuracy.

By the way, it is common for athletes, especially at elite level, to continually return to the same landing zone out in the sector. I've even seen a hammer thrower land the ball in the exact same "hole in the grass" he'd made in an earlier round. The odds seem incredibly low, but it happens more often than you'd think.

Thanks so much for that post, some really cool stuff in there- particularly interested in the last paragraph. Takes some accuracy!

[Per Andersen]

So it took a calf injury to finally get the better of Alekna. Injured for a week. Who knew?
Cost me 16 points. He will be back though. What a Champion!