Runningart2004 wrote:
I know there were some whispers about the Atlanta track being illegal...but wouldn't the IAAF had to test the track anyway BEFORE the games? I mean tracks have to meet certain specifications to be "legal" anyway.
They sold it to the Braves and they ripped up the track. I'm sure someone would have kept a piece of it around somewhere for historical purposes.
Alan
it does have to be tested beforehand - in iaaf lab & then in-situ - obviously passed muster ?!
i think real problem was the base of the atlanta stadium
normally, these are some sort of asphalt & when you put the track on it, the energy-return shoud remain legal
however, it's reported the atlanta base was compacted concrete which was much harder than asphalt & when the track was laid on it, it's energy-return much higher than the standard expected track/asphalt combo
my gut is that the combo of track/base was illegal but once laid down it wouda been hugely embarassing/expensive to tear it up & replace the track
given a firm assurance that the track was going to torn up virtually the day after the games, the iaaf likely let it ago as evidence of illegality was gone & kept hush-hush on the matter
there is also the possibilty that the combo was just about legal at initial laying ( & testing ), but few weeks/months under hot atlanta sun "baking" it & the track "settling" deeper into the base under it's own weight may have made it illegal by start of games
either way, imo that track was dirty