Notre Dame DMR is questionable to me

haha, YO wrote:

What they should do is have different qualifying times for oversized tracks. A team running 9:30 on a track like Washington or ND is completely different than a team running a 9:30 on a flat 200m track.

That's because no one runs 9:30 on a flat 200m track.

X Runner wrote:

Someone would have to be very bitter and crochety to file a protest that would disqualify 15 teams.

I could care less who runs the DMR at NCAAs. But I do care how many pole vaulters step onto the field. Every single coach with an athlete ranked 15-18 in every single event is going to care. It doesn't just affect the DMR.

polevaultpower wrote:

I could care less who runs the DMR at NCAAs.

You could? Well, at least you care some, then. Thanks!

every coach across the country that has provo qualifiers should care about this. it seems to be a rules violation. there are going to be 20 or so athletes in this meet than normal. that is more than 1 less athlete in every meet.

So they should DQ teams because there was a rail last year and now there wasnt? Yeah good idea shit head.

Maybe teams shouldn't be disqualified, but, IF there is a measurement infraction there should be some action taken for the well being of the sport. What's next, hurdles that are a little low or small fouls in the long jump are winked at? Accuracy is a part of fairness. I sincerely doubt that anyone did anything wrong deliberately, but, nevertheless, let's at least get the track set up legally, that is, according to the rules of measurement.

If the railing was supposed to be there and wasn't, I think that would serve about a 2 second advantage over 4000 meters, not 5 seconds. (10 centimeter advantage on all curves would yield 12 meters or so over a dmr).

Too much flare wrote:

So they should DQ teams because there was a rail last year and now there wasnt? Yeah good idea shit head.

Because it makes a big difference in how the track is measured. If a track has a curve, they measure from further away from the curb than they do if it's just a line. I think 30cm/20cm. So it's a bigger track! Which is OK if there is a curb because people don't run as close to it.

But if you take that curb away, people are running closer to it. Apparently according to the NCAA rules, if you remove the curb, you can put cones ON the line and it's ok? USATF and the IAAF don't even allow this as far as I know. If you take the curb off of a curb measured track I don't think that it's legal for their purposes.

But Notre Dame didn't even have the cones on the line, they were outside of it. So if it was measured as a curbed track, that's a pretty big difference there.

I think the NCAA rules should be changed to be consistent with USATF and IAAF. If a track is laid out as a curbed track, it needs to be run with that curb, period.

For those who want the math, an indoor track with a maximum recommended curve radius of 21 meters (I don’t know the measurements of the ND track) would be reduced to a radius 20.9m when accounting for the absence of the curb (i.e., the 10cm difference that is being discussed). The total length of the curved part of the track (both ends) is equal to pi times the diameter (or pi times twice the radius). So the total length of the curved part of the track goes from 3.14x2x21=131.88 meters with the curb (as in previous years) to 3.14x2x20.9=131.25m when not curbed (as in 2009). This is a difference of 0.63m per lap (which is about 8.6m over the length of the DMR). Now, if the ND track was originally designed and certified for a curb, but the curb was not used, this would require that the outward face of the cones coincide with the edge of the white line closest to the track (i.e., away from the infield). Even then, the track has a smaller radius by 10cm (or 0.63m per lap). In other words, if the track had been certified without a curb, the white line would have to be 10cm out from where the curb normally goes to be certified for the same length (320m). This is because lane one is measured 20cm out from the line when there is no curb. Putting the cones on the inside edge of the line (another 5cm) is not only the incorrect placement when a curb is temporarily removed, but actually has the effect of permitting another 5cm of encroachment on the inside edge. A 15cm reduction in the radius is almost a meter per lap (0.94), or about 13m for the DMR. A miler running at 4:06 pace is going to take about 2 seconds to cover this distance. (Actually, it looked like the cones were even inside the line, and not even touching it – now we’re talking 2.5 seconds? 3 seconds?) No matter who ran on the line or who didn’t, who ran on the outside of lane one for most of the race, or whatever, that happens in every race. The dynamics of those two DMR heats were no different than any other. But a smaller track is a smaller track, no matter what, and the whole pack winds up running a shorter race, on average. That’s why the regulations are precise – because it matters.

You don’t even need to do the math. It makes no sense that 15 teams in 2 separate heats auto-qualified in the DMR. When has this ever happened before? Certainly never at this facility. It can’t be explained by a fast heat, a good day for a few teams, or anything else other than a change in the length of the race. And that is exactly what happened. The track was changed. The effect was across the board. Every team in both heats qualified in some fashion, even the crappy ones.

The bottom line is that the ND track either was certified with curb or it was not. If it was, then there is no question that the cones were in the wrong place and the track ran shorter than in previous years. If the track was certified without a curb, and it was “corrected” this year, then ND ought to be equally embarrassed for running it long for all those years. If you look at the past 3 years, in the longer runs (mile, 3000, 5000, 4x400, and DMR), there were 16 autos and 24 provisionals (16/24) in 2009, 0/17 in 2008, and 4/29 in 2007. And even though there were 3 autos and 15 provisonals in the DMR in 2007, the average time for the autos and provs was a full 7 seconds slower in 2007 than in 2009. It was also a full 7 seconds slower in 2008. If the curb was pulled in 2009 and the markings were changed accordingly and recertified, which I doubt, then there is no problem – every 2009 auto-qualification is valid, and good luck to the DMR 15 teams in Texas.

ND needs to provide the track certification for public scrutiny ASAP, before the field is selected for the championships. If there was a violation, then every coned race on that track should be thrown out. If there was not a violation this year, then they owe some apologies to the athletes that competed there all those years and missed auto-qualifying by tenths or hundredths of a second.

I think if having a rail was so important they would put a rail on each lane for the 200m. They are actually allowed to step on the line as long as they do not do it in three consectutive strides.

This rail talk seems petty. And any rule that eliminates provisional quaifiers from one event to allow extra auto qualifiers in another event seems crazy.

X Runner wrote:

I think if having a rail was so important they would put a rail on each lane for the 200m. They are actually allowed to step on the line as long as they do not do it in three consectutive strides.

This rail talk seems petty. And any rule that eliminates provisional quaifiers from one event to allow extra auto qualifiers in another event seems crazy.

Good thinking but that's not a good example. In USATF & IAAF one step one the line is a DQ. NCAA changed to two steps since referees often chose not to act on reports of one step violations. The change was to bring the rules into accordance with practice. (Note: In HS it's three steps, but that rulebook is on it's own planet.)

X Runner wrote:

They are actually allowed to step on the line as long as they do not do it in three consectutive strides.

That hasn't been the rule for a while. Think Gwen Torrence and Maria Mutola in 1995.

Pure conjecture, and libel... you have no source for your ten centimeters nor error for this measurement, and then converted to time, which is a completely different set of units again with out a percent error nor a f(x) of approximation .... so go back to being a completely off the wall asshole somewhere else, might I suggest the opinion section of the New York Times?

You're the ahole. The curb was taken out for a reason. ND accomplished exactly what they intended, and screwed a hole bunch of legit qualifiers.

I might say anybody who was there knows that there wasn't anything fishy about it at all. Although I was thoroughly amazed and was unable to get in myself I am still fully believing that the times are legit. Anybody who thinks otherwise is pessimistic and can't just be happy that we have so many amazing teams this year.

Yes, it's unheard of. But then again, don't "unheard of" things happen now and again? That's the beauty of life, sometimes there can be pleasant surprises that keep people on their toes and surprised.

I think just pointing this out shows some ass hole trying to get it changed cuz his team had provisional in something and now can't go. Pity, shoulda just got the auto.

This is easily the most ridiculous post ever on letsrun.

Simply absurd.

Marks are thrown out all the time. Whether it be a low long jump/triple jump pit, no rail, counter-balance hurdle weights off, etc.

If the event was contested with an illegal, unfair advantage...those marks are going to be negated.

The OP is obviously a troll and for most of you it seems to have worked haha. In short tracks are measured from those white lines painted on them, and officials are there to make sure you dont step on those lines. Rail, cones, electric fencing (dog collars on runners? meh.), etc... is not going to change the fact that its the white (or w/e color lets say black cause im for equality) lines painted on the track that correspond to the distance of the track (316? for ND im not sure dont quote me) and not a railing or whatever. Seeing as how no one got DQed for infringing on the line the race is a legit 4k whether you want it to be or not. Just because the rail may (and i stress the word MAY) have been closer to that line than the cones does not mean that runners are going to run any closer to the white line because they should already be running as close to it as possible (thats the whole goal of a lane.)

P.S. OP if you are not a troll then im sorry that your team ran 9:34.XX but theres always next year mate you dont have to scheme your way, undeserved into nationals. Better luck next year.

Back to my question about the size of the track:

320m (1/5 of 1600m) or

352 yards (1/5 of a mile)

Any one know? I thought it was in yards many years ago when I ran the 4 X 880y relay in college. I may just be mis-remembering.

The lack of basic understanding of science, logic and probability by the people on this board amaze me. A few things to keep in mind:

1. If a track is measured as if it has a curb and they don't use the curb, athletes running around that track can not be considered to have run the full distance, period.

2. Runners like to think of the "possibility" of every team running a fantastic time based on fitness, but what's the "probability" of that happening? Virtually zero.

3. If all those bogus DMR times allow teams to get into the NCAA meet with auto times, that prevents athletes in other events from going to the meet because the total number of athletes allowed in the meet is capped.

We're definitely distance biased on this board, but that doesn't make it okay to bump athletes from other events who should be in the meet but might not because ND didn't properly conduct their meet.