After reading through this thread I disagree with many of them, I think we need less relays, especially at the pro level.
-I'd like to see more "off" distances like the 1k, 2k, 4k and the 8k.
-Time limit for for getting in the blocks for sprints, dq if not ready by 30 seconds
-Standing starts for sprints
The 300m is the one off event that i've always thought should be a primary event. Its the perfect mix of speed and endurance that allows every type of sprinter, from 100m to 400m to shine.
As long as the new events don't eventually take away athlete spots for more traditional events in the WC or Olympics in the future, I'm cool with anything being added
Also give us Steeple 110 Hurdles with the hurdles placed the same distance as the normal size obstacles
Isn't that exactly what the mixed 4 x 400 already does - brings in added athletes who in most cases aren;t good enough to qualify in the M/W individual 400, and a range of other events have to take the hit for the extra number of athletes?
I recently spoke to someone who used to be a big player in international aths admin and they compared the current WA scenario as someone trying to sell a house that has dry rot by painting the walls and tidying the garden. I believe that these 'innovations' are basically straw clutching gimmicks and people who don;t currently find T+F enthralling with it's 40+ events M/W won;t be won over in any numbers, whilst those happy with the existing 40+ events will get a bit more jaundiced
As long as the new events don't eventually take away athlete spots for more traditional events in the WC or Olympics in the future, I'm cool with anything being added
Also give us Steeple 110 Hurdles with the hurdles placed the same distance as the normal size obstacles
Isn't that exactly what the mixed 4 x 400 already does - brings in added athletes who in most cases aren;t good enough to qualify in the M/W individual 400, and a range of other events have to take the hit for the extra number of athletes?
I recently spoke to someone who used to be a big player in international aths admin and they compared the current WA scenario as someone trying to sell a house that has dry rot by painting the walls and tidying the garden. I believe that these 'innovations' are basically straw clutching gimmicks and people who don;t currently find T+F enthralling with it's 40+ events M/W won;t be won over in any numbers, whilst those happy with the existing 40+ events will get a bit more jaundiced
add the 4x800, its the only event that is featured at most state championships in HS for a reason, it is a chance to have distance stars feature in a relay alongside sprinters. I'd just hope the selection process would include milers and 400m runners too, instead of pure 800m runners. Like, if the 4x800 wasn't just the trials 4th, 5th, and two of the three 800m open guys, but it had to be guys that were also in an open event. This would force at least one non-800m specialist to race, and would allow for cool doubles like 400m open and 4x800, or mile and 4x800.
Isn't that exactly what the mixed 4 x 400 already does - brings in added athletes who in most cases aren;t good enough to qualify in the M/W individual 400, and a range of other events have to take the hit for the extra number of athletes?
I recently spoke to someone who used to be a big player in international aths admin and they compared the current WA scenario as someone trying to sell a house that has dry rot by painting the walls and tidying the garden. I believe that these 'innovations' are basically straw clutching gimmicks and people who don;t currently find T+F enthralling with it's 40+ events M/W won;t be won over in any numbers, whilst those happy with the existing 40+ events will get a bit more jaundiced
add the 4x800, its the only event that is featured at most state championships in HS for a reason, it is a chance to have distance stars feature in a relay alongside sprinters. I'd just hope the selection process would include milers and 400m runners too, instead of pure 800m runners. Like, if the 4x800 wasn't just the trials 4th, 5th, and two of the three 800m open guys, but it had to be guys that were also in an open event. This would force at least one non-800m specialist to race, and would allow for cool doubles like 400m open and 4x800, or mile and 4x800.
Part of the charm is that I. HS your best 3rd could be a miler or a 400m guy. In the pros it would be your 4th+5th 800m guy. Making rules to force inferior athletes to run sort of defeats the purpose of seeing best on best.
The other thing with relays is very few countries are deep enough to have a good 4th dude. Relays are participation medals for countries with depth…
Distance Medley Relay is the best event. They should do that.
Can you imagine -
??- Sydney Mclaughlin, Athing Mu, ESP. Not sure who would run the 1200m.
That would be so cool!
The safe team is Mclaughlin, Mu, Hiltz, St Pierre. Hiltz has a 1:59 800 PB, so likely has the speed needed for a solid 1200.
The riskier and more interesting option (but with more upside) would be to put Mu on the 1200 leg, to maximise the amount of time she is on the track, at 4:03 in her second 1500 race, I think there is probably enough endurance there for her to last for 1200. We have a handful of 1:57 - 1:58 women in the 800m. So the question is, can Mu run a 2 second faster 1200 than Hiltz? If the answer is yes, she should probably be on the 1200 leg, as we have 800 runners who could get us a 2 second slower split. But that would be a risky strategy, but she could be all alone on 1200m leg, as the Kenyans and Ethopians will be a couple of seconds behind after the 400m and trying to claw there way up during the distance legs, so you might want someone with more endurance. It's unclear to me.
It would be a fun race.
Kenya would be really strong with Mora and Kipyegon.
Ethiopia with Tsegay, Haylom/Welteji, Duguma.
UK with Muir, Hodgkinson, and Reekie,
Plus lots of outside shots. So many teams would be respectable and could challenge for a medal on a great day. Australia would have an outside shot with a solid distance crop (Hollingsworth and Caldwell would be good choices for 800/1200, and Hull at 1500), but they probably aren't good enough to make up the defecit they'd be in at 400m. Netherlands with Bol and Hassan, but they lack an 800m runner. Sloot is only 2:01. With two strong 400m runners, I'd be really tempted to see what Bol could do in an 800m. But of course with all the other events she does, they wouldn't try it. Jamaica believe it or not might be able to field a decent team with Tracey and Goule given they'll be in the hunt at 400m. Even Ireland might have a respectable team with McGeean (3:55), Healy (3:59), and shanahan (1:59).
Steeple mile just doesn’t sound like it would work, the same people would run a steeple mile as the 3k sc. It just doesn’t make sense to give athletes another way to divide into more events. In order to draw people to watch track, we need close, exciting, and good races. The steeple is always a crowd pleaser to watch but I fear adding a steeple mile will take from the 3k steeple field at large meets, dwindling the excitement of watching.
Steeple mile just doesn’t sound like it would work, the same people would run a steeple mile as the 3k sc. It just doesn’t make sense to give athletes another way to divide into more events. In order to draw people to watch track, we need close, exciting, and good races. The steeple is always a crowd pleaser to watch but I fear adding a steeple mile will take from the 3k steeple field at large meets, dwindling the excitement of watching.
I would imagine they consider doing it instead of - not in addition. 3K steeples can work out to be boring because of either an athletes dominance (run away with it) or jogging around until the kick. If you do the mile distance maybe it’s hard from the gun and more athletes in it until the end.