How about it? Instead of running in lanes all the way, we force the quarter milers to include actual race tactics like front running vs drafting, jostling for position.
They do it in the 800. They do it in the last three legs of the 4 x 400. It should work in theory.
Aside: If a 400 meters was run with a one turn stagger, would the current world leaders in the 400 still be the same?
Even better, go back to the old-tyme "pot-handle" tracks: a 220y straight with a common start; one curve; 110y homestraight.
Americans used to run this setup frequently BITD (~80-100 years ago)? Obviously it placed a huge premium on running the first furlong fast, so you could get the pole position going into the curve.
In fact this has been credited as a major factor in Americans' traditional dominance in quarter-miling: they were in the habit of blasting the first 220y, then seeing whether they could hold on. Do this often enough, and you *do* start to hold onto your speed deeper and deeper into the race.
lease wrote:
Even better, go back to the old-tyme "pot-handle" tracks: a 220y straight with a common start; one curve; 110y homestraight.
Americans used to run this setup frequently BITD (~80-100 years ago)? Obviously it placed a huge premium on running the first furlong fast, so you could get the pole position going into the curve.
In fact this has been credited as a major factor in Americans' traditional dominance in quarter-miling: they were in the habit of blasting the first 220y, then seeing whether they could hold on. Do this often enough, and you *do* start to hold onto your speed deeper and deeper into the race.
High schools ran the straight 220 and turn well into the late sixties and early seventies (even some colleges). However, most 440's were run from middle of straight with no lanes, first to the turn took control, until polyurethane tracks with all lanes marked came along. Few cinder tracks had lanes marked on the backstretch, only from the 220 and home straight. 220's used to be just a straight run.
Certainly makes it a different type of race than lanes all the way, for sure. At the speeds being run today, the early break would cause more problems than create a better race situation, in my opinion. Just look at indoor high school 300 meter races where they break after two turns. Lots of collisions.
cowboybob wrote:
Certainly makes it a different type of race than lanes all the way, for sure. At the speeds being run today, the early break would cause more problems than create a better race situation, in my opinion. Just look at indoor high school 300 meter races where they break after two turns. Lots of collisions.
Lots of collisions, huh? Hmmmmmmm ........ sounds exactly like what we need to get the American viewing public back into the sport!!
At least we'd get some crossover viewership from those drunken NASCAR fans ........
I've been hollering for years for a one-turn stagger in the 400. For sure, you'll see some FAST 200 splits as they fight that pole to go around the 2nd turn. Plus it would be a fabulous race for the fans... as opposed to the current full-race 2 turn stagger, which is just terrible for the fans.
The dullest event in track is the 400. Not because there aren't great athletes, nor because it is inherently dull, but because it is sterile - eight runners in eight staggered lanes, where there is virtually no inter-play among the athletes, where it's problematic to even ascertain the relative placement of the runners as the race unfolds. When the the final straightaway is reached we can see how the runners are situated as they fight off rigor mortis over the final 80 meters. Only a little duller is the lead off leg of the 4x4 when the lead off athletes get three turn staggers to further obfuscate the race.
The 800 - the guys are elbow to elbow and tactics and racing skills in a pack keep things lively. Steeplechase guys are hurdling and jumping water barriers without lanes. Meanwhile, the 400 comparatively is like a postal competition: no fun at all.
400 in lanes is to racing as is condom is to xxxxing: safer, but not nearly the fun.
Yes.
I have said this before.
A one turn stagger 400 would make the event much more interesting.
The indoor 400 is interesting when they fight for the pole or try to slingshot off the final turn.
A straight line 400 would be better than watching the same exact 400m runners win year after year with the 3rd-8th place finishers all battling it out.
Do you really think that a 1 turn stagger is going to effect a 1 lap race? Indoor it makes far more sense as its similar to an 800 at that point.
But the last finishers like LaShawn "drug cheat" Merritt would still end up coming off the final turn and blasting the field for gold the same way he does now, Lanes beyond 3 would be ideal as you wouldn't have to condense into lane 1 and 2 to battle for the second turn.
Merritt starting in lane 8 and running in that lane the whole way would still beat a runner like Kevin B if Kevin decide to cross inwards across two-three lanes.
zip zip zippy zipster wrote:
The dullest event in track is the 400.
That is pretty funny when you consider the distance races where most important races consist of guys trying to run as slow as possible and waiting as long as possible before kicking in a fantastically fast 25 second last 200.
I would have no objection to a one turn stagger for the 400 and I hate the 3 turn stagger for the 4x400, but please don't tell me the 400 is dull or that the 4x400 is dull. At least you don't have to wait 27 minutes before you see runners finally put it into racing mode.
I calls 'em the ways I sees 'em.
The anti-septic nature of the 400 is the antithesis of the event and the runners in the event, which is: tough as nails.
The first leg of the 4x4 is a total bore, followed by three wildly exciting legs in which the runners mix it up. That's the whole point of racing, right?
best post in the history of letsrun
lease wrote:
Even better, go back to the old-tyme "pot-handle" tracks: a 220y straight with a common start; one curve; 110y homestraight.
Americans used to run this setup frequently BITD (~80-100 years ago)? Obviously it placed a huge premium on running the first furlong fast, so you could get the pole position going into the curve.
In fact this has been credited as a major factor in Americans' traditional dominance in quarter-miling: they were in the habit of blasting the first 220y, then seeing whether they could hold on. Do this often enough, and you *do* start to hold onto your speed deeper and deeper into the race.
I agree with people that I find the 400 to be the most boring race currently. I think switching to a 1-turn stagger would make the race a lot more interesting. How quickly do you think the world record would go down if people started rabbiting the 400?
Let's do it then.
One of these days we need to have a one turn staggered 400 as an experimental event during a regular track meet. They could also have a standard 400 for the wusses.
My HS had a 220 yard straightaway, and the best is that first part of it was downhill. They weren't running the 220 that way during my time there, but an old time coach would tell stories of guys blasting some quick times on the net downhill straight 220.
They were running 220 straight as late as 1965 at Downing and Van Cortlandt stadiums in NYC on crusherd cinder. VCP did not have a lot of run out room, the finish was set 10-15 yds past the what we would now call the standard common finish. Back in the 1950's the finish end fence had a gate that the Parkies opened during the sprints. They refenced with taller chainlink and eliminated that option.
RIP: D3 All-American Frank Csorba - who ran 13:56 in March - dead
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
Running for Bowerman Track Club used to be cool now its embarrassing
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
Hats off to my dad. He just ran a 1:42 Half Marathon and turns 75 in 2 months!