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

  • tandfman
    replied
    Got it. I misunderstood what you meant.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    No, I wasn't meaning they'll change anything. I was meaning that I had planned on adding the start lists to the event threads tonite, but now I have to jump into it now because they're miles ahead of time!

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Re: Small Fields at NCAA

    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by tandfman
    [...
    Start lists are now up. They decided to run the men's DMR in two sections on a time basis, with the fastest teams in the second section.
    Can't depend on NCAA for anything these days. One normally adds "late" to any posting promises they make, so when the said "late on 3/12" I was waiting for late-late! :-)
    My guess is that they'll stick with that decision, even if there are one or two late scratches. But you're right--anything can happen. We'll know for sure tomorrow night.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235
    There is another post about the video showing that the curb, when in place, is INSIDE the line. This raises an interesting question: When the curb is in the runner "has to" maintain a 30cm distance. Without the curb, the runner has to be 20 cm out?
    Regardless of whether there is a curb or cones, or where they are placed, the runner can run as close to the inside line as he/she wants to. The 20/30cm thing has to do with track measurement and presumes that when a curb is properly placed on the line, runners will run 30cm out in order to avoid the risk of stepping on it (which can cause serious injury). When there is no curb, the presumption is that the runners will run 20cm out to avoid coming too close to the line, stepping on it, and being disqualified. Again, regardless of these presumptions, on which the principles of measuring tracks are based, runners can run as close as they want to as long as they don't step on the inside line.

    Leave a comment:


  • gh
    replied
    Re: Small Fields at NCAA

    Originally posted by tandfman
    [...
    Start lists are now up. They decided to run the men's DMR in two sections on a time basis, with the fastest teams in the second section.
    Can't depend on NCAA for anything these days. One normally adds "late" to any posting promises they make, so when the said "late on 3/12" I was waiting for late-late! :-)

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    An interesting thing occurred to me spurred by this post - essentially the line might be marker when they do NOT use either a curb or cones, and that might imply that the cones were too far out, as the rail was inside the line and possibly another 5cm inside the line:

    Historically they used the rail , see video

    of note i believe they upgraded the track surface and changed the size of a few years back since this video was taken.

    but check out this old school meyo

    old school meyo
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33Be_irrlzo

    RE: Notre Dame DMR is questionable to me 3/12/2009 10:19AM - in reply to pine needles
    Wow, and amazingly enough, the pole does not appear to even be on the inner lane line - it is INSIDE the lane line!

    Seriously, what is their problem? Are they simply inept? Do they just not know how to set up a track?


    After this posting I wrote:

    "There is another post about the video showing that the curb, when in place, is INSIDE the line. This raises an interesting question: When the curb is in the runner "has to" maintain a 30cm distance. Without the curb, the runner has to be 20 cm out? The lane line could be placed so that when the curb is not in place the lane line functions like any other non-curb arrangement with line being outside the curb by 10 cm. If this is the case, then putting the cones on the inside of the lane lines amounts to making the marking 5cm TOO FAR OUT, making the race LONG, not SHORT.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Re: Small Fields at NCAA

    Originally posted by Gleason
    Originally posted by tandfman
    18 teams have declared for this year's Men's DMR, all but three of them got their listed times this past weekend at Notre Dame. Fortunately, the DMR is the last event on the program Friday evening, so if they have to run two sections, it won't mess up anything other than dinner plans. Of course, a two-section DMR final is hardly ideal, but I think it beats putting 18 teams on the track.
    Of course 18 teams in the final isn't ideal, but it is manageable:

    1. Because team scoring is important at the NCAA & because pacing can differ widely in distances, keep all teams in one section.

    2. Change the order to 1600 - 1200 - 800 - 400. I saw this at a relay meet 40 years ago & it wasn't a problem.

    3. Split the 1600 leg into two groups -- have 12 teams start from a curved line in lane 1. Have the remaining six teams run the first two laps in lanes 4 - 6 from a curved line in lane 4. Cones can be used to manage this.
    Start lists are now up. They decided to run the men's DMR in two sections on a time basis, with the fastest teams in the second section.

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Besides the big things, I have noticed small things at ND. For instance, they have made consistent mistakes on their determination of placings in the PV (although they got the HJ correct). Not a big deal in itself, but it does indicate that little things are not being done correctly.

    Leave a comment:


  • Helen S
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235
    Originally posted by Helen S
    I never felt that there were not that many realy teams capable of running that fast. To me the issue is the measurement and subsequent cone placement of the ND indoor track. I still think there needs to be some questions asked and answers given ('splainin'). (I really like that word- and especially the double apostrophes.) (With "Apostrophe" being my favorite Zappa album also.)
    Helen, I do not think that this had any impact at all. Unless my calculations are off, the difference is only 0.40 seconds. Only one team was over 9:33.0 (9:34.00 the auto), and they were at about 9:33.2. You would certainly change the race if the ND meet were tossed, but it seems unlikely that doing so is a remedy that makes any sense and is out of proportion to the circumstances (why should the athletes be severely punished for the officials mistake. If someone running the PV makes a mistake and gives an athlete more time on a jump (say, they made a mistake and thought there were only three left when there were four left at the beginning of a height) should they be disallowed for qualification? I understand that certification of a track is a different issue but still, the number of qualifying teams is not affected in this case.
    As I said above, I am not at all concerned with the numbers of qualifiers for the NCAA. I am concerned that in something that should be so cut and dried as distance run can be questioned at a well used facility. And this seems to be something that can easily be looked into. I would love to see a statement made by someone at ND that the records for track measurement and certification are all on the up and up and conces were palced either correctly or incorrectly. I am not speculating either way on something that seems so simple to get an answer to.
    That being said, has anyone asked the question to either the NCAA or UND track personnel?

    Leave a comment:


  • Friar
    replied
    Ten teams at A&M this weekend 9:30. or better?
    In '94 only Arkansas did it with a 9:30.07CR -- 2:56.8, 45.7,1:51.3,3:56.3-- with NCAA champs at 800(Bruton 1M),400(Davis) legs, and Hood running a 3:56 anchor.

    Leave a comment:


  • 26mi235
    replied
    Originally posted by Helen S
    I never felt that there were not that many realy teams capable of running that fast. To me the issue is the measurement and subsequent cone placement of the ND indoor track. I still think there needs to be some questions asked and answers given ('splainin'). (I really like that word- and especially the double apostrophes.) (With "Apostrophe" being my favorite Zappa album also.)
    Helen, I do not think that this had any impact at all. Unless my calculations are off, the difference is only 0.40 seconds. Only one team was over 9:33.0 (9:34.00 the auto), and they were at about 9:33.2. You would certainly change the race if the ND meet were tossed, but it seems unlikely that doing so is a remedy that makes any sense and is out of proportion to the circumstances (why should the athletes be severely punished for the officials mistake. If someone running the PV makes a mistake and gives an athlete more time on a jump (say, they made a mistake and thought there were only three left when there were four left at the beginning of a height) should they be disallowed for qualification? I understand that certification of a track is a different issue but still, the number of qualifying teams is not affected in this case.

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    It will be interesting to see how they handle it, and how it works out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gleason
    replied
    Small Fields at NCAA

    Originally posted by tandfman
    18 teams have declared for this year's Men's DMR, all but three of them got their listed times this past weekend at Notre Dame. Fortunately, the DMR is the last event on the program Friday evening, so if they have to run two sections, it won't mess up anything other than dinner plans. Of course, a two-section DMR final is hardly ideal, but I think it beats putting 18 teams on the track.
    Of course 18 teams in the final isn't ideal, but it is manageable:

    1. Because team scoring is important at the NCAA & because pacing can differ widely in distances, keep all teams in one section.

    2. Change the order to 1600 - 1200 - 800 - 400. I saw this at a relay meet 40 years ago & it wasn't a problem.

    3. Split the 1600 leg into two groups -- have 12 teams start from a curved line in lane 1. Have the remaining six teams run the first two laps in lanes 4 - 6 from a curved line in lane 4. Cones can be used to manage this.

    Leave a comment:


  • bhall
    replied
    Originally posted by dj
    Originally posted by gh
    Originally posted by tandfman
    ... Of course, a two-section DMR final is hardly ideal, but I think it beats putting 18 teams on the track.
    You obviously were never a fan of the Islip Speedway's Figure 8 racing!
    Ought to run a revised devil-take-the-hindmost. Put nine teams on opposite sides of the track. Shoot the gun. Any team caught by the opposite pack gets pulled from the track.
    Would make good entertainment and encourage some interesting strategies.

    Leave a comment:


  • bhall
    replied
    It will be very interesting to see how the ND qualified teams perform this weekend. I've only done a cursory look at prior seasonal bests but I'll posit a guess that most of the ND qualified teams are 3-4+ seconds slower than their ND times.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X