Should records at BUs track not count?

Yes! Or UW. Or the Armory. Or in Germany. I think indoor tracks can just be fast. That's part of the sport. We don't run on cinders anymore.

if so then marathon times at berlin and valencia don't count... it is what it is

Dude 8 guys from the same school all just broke 4 with 5 of them running 3:53 or faster not on BU track. I think you are asking the wrong question. There is one common factor to all of this. Should times run in super shoes not count?

An American 18 year old ran 3:55 in the 60s, I’d sure hope we’re running faster, especially these kids with extra eligibility who are 23-24 on UW’s team

Americans complained for years that we weren’t competitive on the world stage, now we have young guys running fast times like the Africans do and people here just try and make excuses as to why they’ve gotten so good

Should 1500 records run in Monaco not count? Should marathon records run in Berlin not count?

Everyone knows there's fast tracks and courses in the world. And its not like they're inaccessible to any top elite who wants to use them. Jakob could turn up to any 5k he likes at BU if he wants to go for a WR

you're assuming more bounce is better

in fact, it is not

consider how much faster you can run on a concrete surface vs. a series of trampolines

instead of casting doubt on times run at the BU track, we ought to be studying it's properties; it clearly is well suited for high performance running

I don't know how most on here even watch the sport..how can folks even follow it if they credit all improved running to shoes and track

Everyone has the right to race at the track. As a BTC fan it’s bs that they are not out there racing! could there be a slight placebo effect with the track where there is a little more confidence? For example a 54 yr/old put on super shoes and goes from 8:10 min mile to 7:59 mile and says “Wow, these shoes are great”.

There’s a nice analysis of the BU track by Geoffrey Burns. You can Google it. LetsRun won’t let me post a link.

The BU track is 20 years old. In its early years it was one of only a handful of banked indoor tracks so it naturally attracted the best runners. BU hosts 5-6 very large meets every season that any good runner can enter, producing many opportunities for fast times. Over time BU’s reputation as a fast track has grown from the fast times run there, attracting even more fast runners. Simply put, fast times are run there because the fastest runners choose to run there, and have many opportunities to do so. Send large numbers of those same runners to another high-quality, banked indoor track 5-6 times a year and you’d likely see similar results.

Until they definitively find something about the track that is illegal then no they shouldn't.

This makes absolutely no sense. It would make more sense if you said “Until they definitively find something about the track that is illegal then yes they should.”

By your logic, once something about the track is found to be illegal, then times should count.

You do acknowledge that people run faster at BU than they do elsewhere?

It's a fact.

Calm down lol. I meant all times should count until they definitively prove something is illegal with the track. However I would be extremely surprised if that would be the case. World class athletics tracks are not just laid down haphazardly without all sorts of stringent testing and ticking of boxes first to make sure they are within the boundaries of what is legal and what's not.

I am curious. What are these "stringent testing and ticking of boxes first to make sure they are within the boundaries of what is legal and what's not."? In post #14 I quoted the Technical Rules on indoor track surfaces. They are very loose and open to a lot of creative interpretation. For example:

Does this imply sprung sections are OK, so long as they are not "special"?

"As far as technically possible' is very vague. It is almost as if they are saying if you can come up with some sort of excuse you don't need to have uniform resilience. Also, there are no limits on the amount of resilience. It would be simplest to state that the resilience cannot be greater than that found on an outdoor track but that would eliminate any form of suspended or banked track as joist spacing will obviously affect resilience. Perhaps the rules could state the resilience cannot be more than 10% greater than an outdoor track?

How is it checked? Are there force - deflection measurements taken or is it just a marshal walking around and going by feel? Again, very vague.

If you know of other rules and tests besides those published by WA I would really like to see them, because the current rules seem to rely on good will and that the designers of indoor tracks will just design them to be functional rather than fast. As was shown with the shoes if someone does decide to exploit the vagueness of the rules they can cause a major shift and leave the authorities rushing to play catch up.

Regarding the BU track. Did they design it to be fast or did they happen upon a combination of grades / thicknesses of plywood and joist spacing that made the track more resilient, I don't know?

BU track has asymmetric banks - just as important than the bounce according to the designers

This article talks about the ‘96 track in Atlanta and gives a quantifiable number for energy return or whatever it’s called. The article states that the Mondo track is just inside the legal limit, so there does appear to be some more objective ways to understand this issue.

upi.com

Fast, hot times on Atlanta track - UPI Archives

Foreign athletes looking at the times posted at the U.S. Olympic Track and Field Trials should be salivating over the prospect of breaking records when they...

Open link

Bizarre wording my friend. Makes it hard on those of us for whom English a second language, but wherever Trevor.

Records only count when run by one of my favourite runners regardless of where the record has been run.

That track is bouncy as hell 😂. I almost pr’d in low top vans once lol