Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Get Ready for Small Individual Fields at NCAA Indoor Meet

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • polevaultpower
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235
    Other than the comment about having a curb in 2008 in one video we do not know if the track was measured from the inside line under the assumption of no curb (30cm) or a curb (20cm also with restricting curbs outside the edge. I saw a comment somewhere that FloTrack were there, so maybe there is video.
    You're right, none of us KNOW for sure.

    Has anyone heard of a major program installing an indoor track, having it measured for no curb, then adding a curb in the future and NOT remeasuring it?

    I think it is highly likely that the track was measured for a curb. Under any other set of rules, I don't think you can just remove the curb and add cones, even if they do come up to the line.

    This seems like a glaring inconsistency in the NCAA rulebook, that indoor tracks that are measured for curbs are even allowed to be used without a curb.

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Other than the comment about having a curb in 2008 in one video we do not know if the track was measured from the inside line under the assumption of no curb (30cm) or a curb (20cm also with restricting curbs outside the edge. I saw a comment somewhere that FloTrack were there, so maybe there is video.

    Note also that the person the does not know how to apply the placing rules correctly is at it again in the men's PV (3/4 decided because the person given third had one more clearance with same misses.

    Looking at the video the inside lane looks like it could be the same width of other lanes so it could be legit.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by dj
    The NCAA rule regarding curbing and track measurement which pertain to indoor events is Rule 10.2.3, which includes the following language:

    "Where the inside edge of the track is bordered by a white line, it shall be marked additionally with cones. The cones shall be at least 15cm high. Cones shall be placed on the track so that the outward face of the cone coincides with the edge of the white line closest to the track when the track is surveyed based on the existence of a curb. Otherwise, cones shall be placed on the infield adjacent to the line."

    So, if the ND track was measured 20cm from the line, the cones were properly placed. If the track was measured 30cm from the line, as if there were a curb, the cones were improperly placed.

    Qualifying for the outdoor championships must be on a curbed track. There is no such requirement indoors.
    That's very interesting. There's no such differentiation under IAAF or USATF rules. If there's no curb, you place the cones so the outward face of the cone coincides with the edge of the white line closes to the track AND you measure 20cm, from the line, not 30cm, as you would if there were a curb.

    Should there be separate records and statistics for tracks without curbs measured under NCAA rules? They're effectively running different distances.

    Leave a comment:


  • polevaultpower
    replied
    Originally posted by KevinM
    Originally posted by polevaultpower
    So I don't get it... they set the track up wrong, an insane number of teams qualified, and now athletes in every single other event will not get to go to Nationals because of it?
    You'd have to first be able to prove that the faster times are only attributed to the track setup for your statement to hold water.
    It doesn't matter. I think it is highly likely that a rule (an important rule!) was broken.

    Obviously there were great fields assembled for this race and it was going to be fast no matter what. But a few seconds make all of the difference in the world in this instance.

    I think that every coach with an athlete in positions 15-18 on the performance lists in every event should be protesting this.

    It's possible that Notre Dame was breaking this rule all year. I don't care. DQ all the running marks from all their meets if you have to. The rules need to be followed.

    Leave a comment:


  • KevinM
    replied
    Originally posted by polevaultpower
    So I don't get it... they set the track up wrong, an insane number of teams qualified, and now athletes in every single other event will not get to go to Nationals because of it?
    You'd have to first be able to prove that the faster times are only attributed to the track setup for your statement to hold water.

    Leave a comment:


  • polevaultpower
    replied
    Here is a random video from 2008 at Notre Dame: http://www.flotrack.org/videos/track_ra ... 0-w-400-h4

    There was a curb then. Have they remeasured and remarked their track since then?

    Leave a comment:


  • KevinM
    replied
    Re: Small Individual Fields

    Originally posted by Gleason
    Originally posted by Bruce Kritzler
    No limit on number of athletes from one school in one event. Remember Stanford going 1,2,3 in 10k a few years ago. Think Arizona women may have went 1,2,3 in hj also?
    Thanks for the response. I should have added that I was referring to INDOORS. World Indoor has a limit of two per nation probably because of indoor crowding, so that is the reason for my question.
    Field sizes are naturally limited by the qualifying standards and selection procedure, so more athletes from one school qualifying in a given event simply means less athletes from other schools qualifying, keeping the fields managed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gleason
    replied
    Small Individual Fields

    Originally posted by Bruce Kritzler
    No limit on number of athletes from one school in one event. Remember Stanford going 1,2,3 in 10k a few years ago. Think Arizona women may have went 1,2,3 in hj also?
    Thanks for the response. I should have added that I was referring to INDOORS. World Indoor has a limit of two per nation probably because of indoor crowding, so that is the reason for my question.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bruce Kritzler
    replied
    No limit on number of athletes from one school in one event. Remember Stanford going 1,2,3 in 10k a few years ago. Think Arizona women may have went 1,2,3 in hj also?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gleason
    replied
    Small Individual Fields

    Originally posted by Bruce Kritzler
    The total field size for ncaa men's indoor is 284. The minimum field size for individual events is 14, and for relays, 10. The 18 dmr's currently qualified would contribute 72 athletes. Add 10 4x4's contributing 40. Figure one guy per relay team is already an individual qualifier. That leaves only 200 spots for individual events, when there are supposed to be 210 (15 events x 14 entrants).
    The cones have replaced curbs for about 10 yrs., so don't think that is the reason for all the qualifiers.
    I assume that teams with auto qualifiers aren't required to enter because only eight teams score points. eg. Oregon may enter Rupp in 5000 & 3000, Wheating in 800 & Centrowitz in Mile -- not in DMR which is right after 5000 on friday.

    Forty years ago Kansas had to have special permission to enter three shot putters (they swept). Oregon could have three individuals in some distances. Is this allowed or are schools limited to two entrants/event?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bruce Kritzler
    replied
    The total field size for ncaa men's indoor is 284. The minimum field size for individual events is 14, and for relays, 10. The 18 dmr's currently qualified would contribute 72 athletes. Add 10 4x4's contributing 40. Figure one guy per relay team is already an individual qualifier. That leaves only 200 spots for individual events, when there are supposed to be 210 (15 events x 14 entrants).
    The cones have replaced curbs for about 10 yrs., so don't think that is the reason for all the qualifiers.

    Leave a comment:


  • dj
    replied
    The NCAA rule regarding curbing and track measurement which pertain to indoor events is Rule 10.2.3, which includes the following language:

    "Where the inside edge of the track is bordered by a white line, it shall be marked additionally with cones. The cones shall be at least 15cm high. Cones shall be placed on the track so that the outward face of the cone coincides with the edge of the white line closest to the track when the track is surveyed based on the existence of a curb. Otherwise, cones shall be placed on the infield adjacent to the line."

    So, if the ND track was measured 20cm from the line, the cones were properly placed. If the track was measured 30cm from the line, as if there were a curb, the cones were improperly placed.

    Qualifying for the outdoor championships must be on a curbed track. There is no such requirement indoors.

    Leave a comment:


  • polevaultpower
    replied
    So I don't get it... they set the track up wrong, an insane number of teams qualified, and now athletes in every single other event will not get to go to Nationals because of it?

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by ed gee
    Perhaps having the cones positioned inside the line and allowing the runners to run a shorter path contributed to the fast times. Certainly if there had been a rail on the track, the runners would have found it difficult to be so close to the line.

    What are the rules re cone placement on tracks w/o rails?
    The cones are supposed to be placed so that they cover the inside lane line. Placing them on the infield inside the line definitely shortens the race distance. I believe the difference is about a foot per lap.

    Leave a comment:


  • ed gee
    replied
    Not sure of the specifics, but am open to second opinions.
    I agree with you on the rails vs cones.

    http://www.flotrack.org/videos/coverage ... 735/159278

    http://www.flotrack.org/videos/coverage ... 735/159284

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X