I was there for the measurements. To clearify a couple of things:
A. The track is a 200m track. In lane one, it is exactly 200m. The track, itself, is NOT short.
B. The 60m time from early in the season has nothing at all to do with this.
C. The problem with the track was the new lines for the 200m that they put down about 8-10 years ago. There is a slight bank to the track at turn one. Using the common start/finish line, you had to slightly run uphill in lanes 3-6. So, years ago, they re-lined new staggers for the 200m (moving them up about 15-meters)and adding an additional finish line at the end of the straight.
The problem is, that the finish line they put down is actually on the beginning of the turn. The finish line was painted straight across the lanes so that it was parallel to the common start/finish line, but NOT perpendicular to the actual lanes (because you are on the turn). In order for it to be exactly 200m for all six lanes, you would have to have a finish line that is perpendicular the lanes.
Lane one was exactly 200m. Then, as you went out, it became slightly less and less because the finish line was going straight but the lanes were curved. So, lane 6 was 3.25m short. Lane one was 200m. Lane two would have been likely about .75m short. Lane 3 about 1.5, etc. etc.
In order to rectify the situation, they simply went back to the old staggers that go off the common start and finish.
Kevin Hadsell
Head Coach
University of Toledo