A look at the decathlon

[DecFan]

Sigh. It seems most decathlon threads morph into advice about how to change an already great event.

A year ago we had a rather lengthy discussion about staggering the start of the 1500. That's the one innovation I would favor. The tables must remain non-linear - as another poster stated, it would be ridiculous to award the same increase in point value for moving from 3:30 to 3:25 as moving from 5:15 to 5:10. But I proposed a method for staggering the start in that thread, and showed that in all the WC's and OG's since 1984, under this proposal, the finish order on the track would have been identical to the finish order of the decathlon, even with the non-linear scoring tables.

The major concern brought up was the possible advantage given to the decathlete who is behind by a few points in being able to draft off of his opponent. He does have some advantage under the scenario compared to the present procedure.

I'd like to see some experimentation with this innovation. But - hey! - this is already the best event in track and field!

[lonewolf]

I agree with bam on handicapping the start of the 1500 by point standing. I have worked modern pentathlon and it does make an interesting conclusion. First guy across the line wins.

[bambam1729]

I've said this before on here and it usually gets panned. I've been saying this since the early 1980s when Bob Sparks laughed at me about it.

Assuming we keep the 1500 last, the best way to make the decathlon finish interesting is to change to a linear table in the 1500 and start the runners as a time-trial in order of their placements, going off at intervals based on their time behind the leader. This is how the running goes off in the 5th event of the modern pentathlon, and in cross-country skiing pursuit races.

This way, the finish in the 1500 is the finish in the decathlon - exactly, and it adds some drama for the fans and for television.

[nbonaddio]

The decathlon is fine just as it is. Opening with 1500 would severely impact the following four events on first day.
Changing 1500 to 800 would simply award another event to the 400 winner.
Sometimes the 1500 is plodding when the leader after nine has the event wrapped up but it can be exciting when a competitor who still has a shot is going for time and the leader has to stay close.
Leave it alone..

Well, if that's the case, why not change the 400 to an 800? I think the general argument most are making is that speed is the integral component of many of the events, so why not take on relatively speed-based event and add some endurance to it?

400m -> 800m
110h -> 400mh

Take your pick.

[lonewolf]

The decathlon is fine just as it is. Opening with 1500 would severely impact the following four events on first day.
Changing 1500 to 800 would simply award another event to the 400 winner.
Sometimes the 1500 is plodding when the leader after nine has the event wrapped up but it can be exciting when a competitor who still has a shot is going for time and the leader has to stay close.
Leave it alone..

[deca-pat]

does anybody think that running the 800 instead of the 1500 would be more exciting, especially in close deca's? I personally have seen wayyy more exciting indoor 1000's in heptathlons than 1500's!

[Dave]

Then, what would you think of changing the 1500 and making it first?

Well, if we are still looking at any semblance of entertainment value, we're going to see four events on that day that are well below the capabilities of the participants. Blech.

Human physiology pretty much dictates the order of events....they are ordered as they are for maximum value across all ten events. We know that lactic acid affects the neuromuscular system to the point where coordination breaks down. Put guys in a 1500 first and they are crap in everything that follows. This is why the 400 is last on the first day and the 1500 is last of all.

Look, I am not here to tell you that the 1500 in a deca is a pretty sight. In fact, it's one of the most pathetic things you'll ever see at the world class level. That's not the point, though. The point of the 1500 is that it is a crucible of endurance that one must pay a price for in order to be crowned master of the event, and the price is higher for those who are not well adapted to it. When you put it in context, it's easier to appreciate (but nevertheless, ugly.) :wink:

Good point and that probably addresses the idea of changing out the 1500 for the 3000st.

[DecFan]

Thanks again, nmzoo. You've stimulated our discussion with facts, and not just opinions. May your tribe increase!

[nmzoo]

Some answers - This was limited to deca's from 2000 and later. Didn't look at Jenner or others earlier. As I noted though, the top three situation held for other "major decathlons" also but their results were not included in the breakdown. The data didn't show that they had to be leading after 3 events, just in the top 3

As far as the 100m is concerned - Sebrele won twice and placed 3 times and never finished higher than 10th in the 100m. The actual 100m placings of the medalists were as follows:

2000 Oly - 2-14-1
2001 WC - 2-1-3
2003 WC - 3-19-2
2004 Oly - 11-1-2
2005 WC - 1-11-10
2007WC - 15-2-4
2008 Oly - 1-5-8
2009 WC - 1-20-13 (Suarez was 13 after 3 events).

Actually the majority of medalists fared better (more pts) in the 400m than they did the 100m, although it was usually quits close..

One correction - Dvorak jumped 8.07m in the LJ in 2001 WC, not 8.27m (what's 8" amoung friends!). Still worth 1079 pts.

One last item - Adding the SC would probably drastically change the outcome of most decathlons, it would probably also drastically reduce the pool of decathletes.

[Alexm]

Changing the 1500m to the steeplechase will make no difference, it'll just mean we see 20 big men suffer for twice the distance, with a few falls and DNF's. And a good run in the 1500m can mean a different result - see how Schrader overtook Hardee in Gotzis with a great 1500 while the American suffered, see how many times Pogorelov has dropped right out of contention after the 1500...it does happen.

The training & athleticism needed for the 110H, LJ, HJ, PV and a sprint means we'll still see speed based guys.

What is probably needed is a review of the points scoring, not a change in events. The mens 1500 and women's 800 scoring makes it very difficult to make a big difference.

[LopenUupunut]

It was already noted in the initial post that the events most correlating with final results are the almost purely speed-based 100m and LJ. Of course speed helps a lot in other events but as even gh admitted there's a definite speed bias. Therefore, a new 1st day (no changes to 2nd day are required) with stronger endurance and throwing elements would make the decathlon more balanced (though I have no illusions about anybody following this suggestion):

Day 1: 200m - Shot Put - High Jump - Javelin - 800m

[mike renfro]

To Garry's suggestion of modifying the deca events, that's why dog invented the double decathlon. All the jumps and throws, steeple, 400H and to finish, tada, 10K. Sounds like fun :shock:

[polevaultpower]

I've thought it would be nice to put the more technical events on day 1 instead of day two when fatigued.

Kind of like:
Day one: HH, DT, PV, JT, 400
Day two: 100, LJ, SP, HJ, 1500

I'd still leave the 1500 for the very end. :P

That's what the women decathletes do now (except for the hurdles and 100 are in the same order as the men).

I've thought it would be nice to put the more technical events on day 1 instead of day two when fatigued.

Kind of like:
Day one: HH, DT, PV, JT, 400
Day two: 100, LJ, SP, HJ, 1500

I'd still leave the 1500 for the very end. :P

[Spickard]

Then, what would you think of changing the 1500 and making it first?

Well, if we are still looking at any semblance of entertainment value, we're going to see four events on that day that are well below the capabilities of the participants. Blech.

Human physiology pretty much dictates the order of events....they are ordered as they are for maximum value across all ten events. We know that lactic acid affects the neuromuscular system to the point where coordination breaks down. Put guys in a 1500 first and they are crap in everything that follows. This is why the 400 is last on the first day and the 1500 is last of all.

Look, I am not here to tell you that the 1500 in a deca is a pretty sight. In fact, it's one of the most pathetic things you'll ever see at the world class level. That's not the point, though. The point of the 1500 is that it is a crucible of endurance that one must pay a price for in order to be crowned master of the event, and the price is higher for those who are not well adapted to it. When you put it in context, it's easier to appreciate (but nevertheless, ugly.) :wink: