Crooked Judges at IAAF

[jahcs]

*Opens mouth and attempts to insert foot (due to my lack of knowledge with the incident and rules)


Tantrums like the one described reflect badly on athletes, the sport, and the nations involved. A certain amount of joy/anguish will always be a part of sporting events but extreme displays (jumping into the steeplechase pit) are inapropriate.

I have enjoyed drag racing (at the RACETRACK ONLY!) for several years and false starts (or red lighting) is measured by timing beams placed at the starting line. Two beams are used, spaced slightly apart. The first beam is to ensure the vehicle is "staged" up to the line and the second for "at the line." If the vehicle leaves the second beam even .001 second early that run is disqualified. I guess I just dont see the logic in checking the amount of force placed on the blocks behind the competitor when crossing the starting line seems more important to me.

[Life]

Wow interesting topic to read. Many good points were made. Including the one about the staging for drag racing. Perhaps this would be the better way to go for track as well. But it would only work for races like the 100 meters as any other race that requires running a corner would make this approach rather difficult ie (200 and 400 meters etc)

I've run many many races in my youth and in that time the rules were two false starts per person. However in all that time it was clear undeniably clear that once in the set position no movement at all is allowed or it is a false start. So despite what Mr Drummon maintains (ie that he did not move) the pressure pads indicate clearly that he did. No matter what way he looks at it it was and is a false start. Clearly nothing else is needed to be said about this. I'm not certain but I can imagine that Jon Drummon has probably competed in more races than I ever did and more than likely has dealt with this amount of stress many many times previously. In all those previous situations he had to follow the rules as they were then. (ie in the set position no movement what so ever is permitted).

His body had to be ready for the race as was his mind. However he was clearly not mature enough to handle this situation after it unfolded. I hope he has time to reconsider this event.

On another note if I were a person considering individuals to sponsor my product or market it. I might consider twice Jon Drummond after that silly display. Fortunately for him I'm not in that position.


Life

[dudearonymus_32]

Wow even more replies on just how wrong I was :D. Like I said earlier you all make better points than me. and after reading all the replies I agree with most of the posts. Being very ignorant on the topic of T&F I hadn't known of the rule changes. I especially like Life's post saying how he wouldn't want Jon's face on his cereal box.

[Vandiablo]

Life wrote:

once in the set position no movement at all is allowed or it is a false start.

Thanks for clearing up the rule. Now I have to go back and re-read all that I wrote ... naw, it'll take too long.

I'll consider your moniker as an endorsement and maybe buy some Life next time I'm at the grocery store.

-V

[Baylan]

Hello, just a little factoid from my experience.

I remember the days when all runners got a warning, and yes I know it took forever. But maybe they should just admit that short-sprint races are a little different-- let them run. If the first place finisher had a false-start, do the race over. Otherwise, (s)he's the winner. If only the 2nd place person did, re-run the race for 2nd and 3rd, but 1st place has already been decided. I can't believe that 100m is too hard to repeat after say 5 minutes.

You have quite obviously never run track. I might suggest that one day sometime soon, you head down to the local high schools track. Time yourself running one 100m race, and then 5 minutes later time yourself running another 100m race. I think you'll probably end up finding a difference in the times of upwards of a second (if you train). In the extremely high end of the sport, for example the olympics a one second delay is 10% more time. That is like running a 4:40 mile instead of a 4 minute mile.

A typical track practice (from my last year, as a freshman doing T+F) can consist of several things: a ladder (100m, 200m, 300m, 400m, then go back down. Or you can do it the other way), repeats (5x300, 8x200, 10x100), or other such excercises. Athletes fight injuries (I myself fought shin splints, which are *extremely* painful) in practice in order to be ready for the race day. We train for hours for our 10, or 25, or 60 seconds of fame on the track, and then you ask us to rerun the entire race because someone ahead of us false-started? I'm sorry, but even at a distance of 100m you WILL see dramatic differences in times from one to the next with 5 minutes rest.

Anyway, rant off, and isn't it about time you started sticking that foot in your mouth? ;)
Just kidding of course, but I thought I'd put my little bit of input in the discussion.

Baylan

[Vandiablo]

I can't believe that 100m is too hard to repeat after say 5 minutes.

Hard to believe nobody jumped (heh, pun intended) on this sooner. When I wrote it, I thought, somebody's gonna refute that one!

You have quite obviously never run track.

I did! I did! Many years ago. Four long years! I'd run until I couldn't breathe (not long, about 400m), somehow go the rest of the way (~600m total) and then I would be done until the next year. (xlation: yer right.)

I might suggest that one day sometime soon, you head down to the local high schools track. Time yourself running one 100m race, and then 5 minutes later time yourself running another 100m race. I think you'll probably end up finding a difference in the times of upwards of a second (if you train).

Well, seeing how I never run anymore, I imagine my times would be pretty similar for a short course.

In the extremely high end of the sport, for example the olympics a one second delay is 10% more time. That is like running a 4:40 mile instead of a 4 minute mile.

Now see, in high school I focused more on mathematics than on anything else*, including track. My guess would have been that an increase of 10% on 4 minutes would be 4:24. Just my guess tho, I don't know all this track stuff. :P

I'm sorry, but even at a distance of 100m you WILL see dramatic differences in times from one to the next with 5 minutes rest.

No need to be sorry about it. ;)

I know in world championships there's a lot of interest in beating records, but my idea was based on competing against the other athletes, not the clock. If they all ran the first race, they'd still be competing against each other on the 2nd time, and all be at the same disadvantage. You could even allow those who didn't false-start the first race to keep their original time, which BTW would be very fair, much more fair than stopping everyone because some slob three lanes over jumped the gun.

What this loses, of course, is the photo finish, and the ability to see during your run how fast your competitors are going. So it'll never happen anyway. Moot moot moot.

isn't it about time you started sticking that foot in your mouth?

oh, I just leave it in there**, it saves time.

Thanks for the input.

-V


*I focused on math more than anything else except: looking at female classmates, dreaming about female classmates, obsessing about how it was going with those who allowed me to date them, and playing Dungeons and Dragons, of course. BTW, being a ref for D&D (now called: "AD&D ver. 3.97368382108") is an excellent way to learn about probability.

**BTW fungus thrives in moist areas with little airflow, and most anti-fungals don't taste very good. Desenex has the most flavor, but it's a bitter flavor and greasy to boot, while Clotrimazole has a taste similar to Elmer's Glue that won't interfere as much for tasting other things. I recommend: Desenex mixed with Tabasco, Clotrimazole mixed with curry, Tinactin with garlic sauce (knowing the local Chinese restaurant proprietor helps), and Lamisil (sp?) with red wine vinegar.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I know in world championships there's a lot of interest in beating records, but my idea was based on competing against the other athletes, not the clock.

Yes, but at a major event, the sprints are run in heats. The usual way to qualify for the next level is to either come in first to n-th (n varies with the event and meet) in the qualifying heat or to have a good time (sort of a wild card slot or slots). So, someone who has to restart a few times has a disadvantage against someone who gets to run in a "clean" race. Coaches have even been known to use this as a tactic to knock down some of the competition.

Personally, I like the idea of *no* false starts. The race is run out, the false starters disqualified, and the places for everyone else stand. Yeah, it is a little tough on the people who make a mistake, but at least everyone else is not being punished for the mistake of one and it completely eliminates the weasel tactics. Of course, that doesn't get rid of the rabbits in the long events, but that's another story.

and Lamisil (sp?) with red wine vinegar

Hmm, add a dash of cayenne pepper and it should be about right. Thanks, that'll help the next time I pull a hoof in mouth.

--Pete

[Baylan]

*waves at Van*

*smack forehead at bad math* And I'm supposed to be a good math student! The post was written at 1 am, I should have put in a disclaimer stating that I couldn't be held responsible for any incoherentness or bad math ;).

Other than that, there isn't much I can in reply to about your post. Pete brought up some good points that I didn't think about, so I should direct you to his reply!

Baylan

Edit: Incoherent - Proofread THEN post, proofread THEN post, proofread THEN post, NOT post then proofread!

[Occhidiangela]

the most enviromentally irresponsible (per-capita) nation

Since Kyoto is based on pseudo science, or at best junk science, even though there is some science involved, what kind of nonsense is that statistic?

Try living in a Third World country, or even southern ITaly, or try the environmentlaly irresponsible neighbor just south of me in Mexico.

Using a lot of energy does not equal environmental irresponsibility, (who brought you unleaded gas and the catalytic converter?) and insofar as per capita, may I refer you to Russia?

While I agree that too small of a core population seeks to use energy wisely and not wastefully, your framing a comment in "per capita environmental irresponsibility" tells a lot more about you than it does about your target.

Or do you have elaborate metrics that back up your position, based on data and not anecdote?

Addendum: By 2012, China, India and perhaps Indonesia, will all have outpaced the United States in CO2 and other greenhouse emissions. They are already seven to 10 times greater polluters on a per-dollar-of-GDP-produced basis. By then, they'll just be bigger polluters, period.

If you want environmental irresponsibility, I'd consider looking in another direction, such as in Somalia, where a few decades of piss poor agrarian policy reduced the amount of arable land, increased waste/desert land, and made Somalia considerably environmentally unsta.

Consider the 1991 deliberate release of barrels and barrels of oil into the Persian Gulf by Saddam Hussein. Consider the deliberate firing of the Kuwaiti oil fields. Environmentally irresponsible, and with 22 million, Iraq's per capita is pretty high on that score.

That said, I reclarify, I am not impressed with the size of the core population in the US whose energy consciousness equals or exceeds my own. The blackout was as much a product of undisciplined demand as shaky infrastructure.