Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the adidas 400H [split]

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • Smoke
    replied
    From the track, I am appalled that this hapened but I have to tell you I was standing at hurdle 8 and did not register the short distance until after the race. Which for me is odd since I am intimately familiar with the race. In hindsight it should have clicked, ESPECIALLY since they held up the race because one hurdle was missing from the misplaced flight. How is that for irony? No one still noticed.
    Marlow is correct, if you are the starter or official a cursory look around the track would have resulted in noticing the misplacement. I have been at a meet where the entire crowd noticed a hurdle flight in the short hurdles was misplaced, I am amazed this was not noticed.

    I can guarantee you the markings on the track go both ways for all races and the dumb thing is the markings are all the same colors, at least for the short hurdle races they are. I know this because the women's race was set up wrong during their warm up and I helped resolve the issue. The only difference in the markings is one way has THICKER lines than the other. It is highly confusing for me as a hurdle man, I can only imagine a ragtag hurdle crew coming to this track for the first time. There was mass confusion in trying to get it all sorted, but we did.

    An unfortunate set of circumstances for sure

    Leave a comment:


  • Halfmiler2
    replied
    There is a precedent for this. I believe it was at the 1983 TAC/USA Nationals which I think was the first major meet on the IUPUI track, the markings on the track for a row of the women's 100 hurdles was off (by a meter?) and one competitor crashed and was hurt in the first round before the problem was corrrected. I can't recall if the times from the first round were accepted for statistical purposes, although I'd guess in most cases, the times in the finals were quicker.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Not to KC
    So you're not speaking in general terms here.
    Both, actually. Can you contradict my statement that the times most definitely would have been different if the hurdles had been in the right place? If not, then you admit the times we have are bogus.
    I never tried to contradict that chance, I referred to 26mi235's statistical point (see above). There is a greater chance that KC was hurt too, or at least not hurt, rather than being helped. As to the technicians of the event I am sure they were hurt not helped. So I agree when you say:
    I submit this would have been devastating to Moses. And apparently Taylor too.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Not to KC
    So you're not speaking in general terms here.
    Both, actually. Can you contradict my statement that the times most definitely would have been different if the hurdles had been in the right place? If not, then you admit the times we have are bogus.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Not to KC
    So you're not speaking in general terms here but have KC in mind?

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Not the most representative data pool.
    But in this case relevant.
    Not to KC, who is the one least affected (as humorously pointed out above). The others would have (ostensibly) had to pay more for the error. KC relies on his speed and strength more than his hurdling skills or stride pattern. I submit this would have been devastating to Moses. And apparently Taylor too.

    Leave a comment:


  • bhall
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by bhall
    a. I've been around the 2 guys who won 3 of the last 4 OG in the event and their coaches and I don't believe that.
    b. Remove the marks from the lists if/when the data shows the situation aided athletes.
    a. Not the most representative data pool.
    b. You'd never know. No one can ever know what the marks would have been if the hurdles been in the right place. The one thing we do know is that the times would NOT have been the same, and that's precisely why they can't be valid marks.
    At least 37.5% (off the top of my head) of the field had an OG Silver or better. So my experience doesn't count?

    These guys are going to race a decent number of times this season. So... let's look at these marks in the full context of the season.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Not the most representative data pool.
    But in this case relevant.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by bhall
    a. I've been around the 2 guys who won 3 of the last 4 OG in the event and their coaches and I don't believe that.
    b. Remove the marks from the lists if/when the data shows the situation aided athletes.
    a. Not the most representative data pool.
    b. You'd never know. No one can ever know what the marks would have been if the hurdles been in the right place. The one thing we do know is that the times would NOT have been the same, and that's precisely why they can't be valid marks.

    Leave a comment:


  • bhall
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    Originally posted by bhall
    Why not leave the marks on the lists and remove the competition from ranking consideration
    Seems like the logical way to go. Sounds like that is what they are doing.
    It is. My point is to those saying this situation improved some people's times. I've been around the 2 guys who won 3 of the last 4 OG in the event and their coaches and I don't believe that. But if it did why do the marks need to be removed NOW? Remove the marks from the lists if/when the data shows the situation aided athletes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by Marlow
    That is a grossly misleading statement. They all have PLANS for a certain stride pattern, but VERY often they find themselves having to alter that plan mid-race
    Of course, that is part of the event but that does not mean they are all suddenly stutter stepping. A good 400m hurdler sees the hurdles from a long way out and adjusts accordingly. So where is the hypothetical gain coming from? The assumption is that they would not have hit the hurdle correctly in the right location. But how often do we see that?

    Leave a comment:


  • tandfman
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    By the way, what was Clement's time?
    There's a link to the results of the adidas meet in the Results box on the right-hand column of the front page.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marlow
    replied
    Originally posted by Daisy
    [At the elite level when, in theory, the athletes have specific stride patterns, how could this help them?
    That is a grossly misleading statement. They all have PLANS for a certain stride pattern, but VERY often they find themselves having to alter that plan mid-race, due to a wide variety of conditions, including, most importantly, the time they're en-route to. A 48.0 won't have the same pattern as a 49.0 for the same athlete, in many cases.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daisy
    replied
    Originally posted by bhall
    Why not leave the marks on the lists and remove the competition from ranking consideration
    Seems like the logical way to go. Sounds like that is what they are doing.

    Leave a comment:


  • bhall
    replied
    Why not leave the marks on the lists and remove the competition from ranking consideration at this point in the season. Hindsight is likely going to be a much better judge come October than most/any of us. If they look anomalous at the end of the season (to the good) they could be pulled then.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X