This would mean the athletes with the built-in advantage (those in the outside lanes) would have the advantage the entire race instead of half the race, giving them even more of an advantage.
The "built-in advantage" for the outer lanes (if you ran in lanes all the way indoors) would be the same as it is outdoors. Namely, the turns are gentler on the outside.
The "built-in advantage" for athletes starting in the outer lanes on a banked track (the way the indoor 400m is run now, cutting in after 150m) is that the finish line in lanes 1-2-3 is lower than the start or finish lines in lanes 4-5-6. So the athletes starting in the outer lanes are running net downhill, assuming they finish in one of the inner lanes.
I don't think that's quite right - the finish is on the flat. Everyone other than whoever starts in lane 1 has a net downhill, with a bigger advantage the further out you start. The advantage in lane 6 is a wider turn (until the break) and a bigger downhill. Whether you have 3, 4, or 6 people in the race, the outer lane has an inherent advantage.
Another way to make it more fair could be to make the outer lanes run a bit further, to compensate for the downhill advantage.
Or, start with an individual time trial seeding round - the fastest qualifiers then get first choice of lanes in the next round. Nordic skiing does something similar with their sprint events. Athletes choose their heats based on their qualifying time, which adds an interesting element. The #2 qualifier can choose to go in the same heat as #1, usually ensuring a relatively easy heat for those two.
It’s Indoors. Can you name five 400m indoors world champs from the last twenty years, male or female? I’m a huge fan of sprints, and even I had trouble with it. I mean, here are the last ten men’s winners: Christopher Bailey, Alexander Doom, Jereem Richards, Pavel Maslak (3x!), Nery Brenes, Chris Brown, Tyler Christopher, Alleyne Francique. The last 400m indoors champ to win an Olympic 400m medal of any color was Tyree Washington over twenty years ago.
Most sprinters are just trying to avoid injury during indoors, while doing some early season conditioning and short speed work to get ready for the outdoor season. If they want to do a time trial at Indoor WCs, why not?
[PS: Ok, the Wiki with the women’s results is separate from the men’s, and I just checked and saw that Sanya Richards Ross, Femke, and Shaunae Miller-Uibo all won indoor 400m golds… but my point stands.)
But they are racing. It's absolutely no different to outdoors where you have to make a decision during the race to change or follow your predetermined race plan.
Outdoors, if your main opponent goes off hard/er that you, do you then try and follow them ('race'?), or do you stick to your own race plan ('barter')? This happens all the time outdoors when the top athletes meet each other at a Championships for the first time.
Two good examples are Christine Ohuruogu's 2013 & 2015 World runs. By your implication, in 2013 Ohuruogu 'bartered' by sticking to a predetermined strategy of late surge, allowing her biggest competition to gain a lead, and then run them down in the final meters.
In 2015 she 'raced', and decided to stick with Felix as best she could, stupidly running the second 100m way too fast for her, off plan, and she died in the home straight, finishing last. Total disaster.
Sometimes, you gotta 'barter' to run your best race.
On Bol v Klaver, Bol said she was prepared for Lieke to go off harder and if she did, she would not have to tried to contend the lead with her. She actually did not know what Lieke's planned split was going to be. It was not bartering, it was sticking to a race plan. On the other hand, Lieke went into the race knowing Bol would just overtake her after 250m, and as Bol had set a faster 200m PB that year, what was the point in trying to outblast her? Bol was consistently 1 sec faster than her indoors over 400m. It's smart racing.
It is different because outdoors they are in lanes the whole way on a flat surface, pretty simple. Indoors you have 6 people who will run in 1-2 lanes after 200m with different levels of downhill and the angle on the turns factoring. Much as you and Bols coach might hate it, it’s a completely different dynamic and teammates/training partners do barter.
If WA are concerned re the fairness of being assigned lanes 1 -3, the alternative is to have two finals, but an A and B final, where the A final you fight for gold, silver and bronze, and B final you fight for places 4, 5 & 6 (still worth it for prize money)
To Q for the A final you need to finish first in your SF or are the fastest of the second placed athletes in the SF's.
I feel this is a good compromise.
Yes, that's exactly the way it should be done. Good thinking!
Really? And if the winner of the B final runs a faster time than the winner of A?
Really? And if the winner of the B final runs a faster time than the winner of A?
And if the winner of the B final breaks the WR?
Exactly. The viewers would tone down their celebrations because they know there's going to be an A final with "the favorites" and they'll surely break that WR again, right ? Practically nobody will celebrate retro-actively after final A for the winner of final B.
Also, if you think you have a chance to time trial a WR, it might be tactically beneficial to fumble your SF to get in the B final so you have no real opposition in your way ...
Does this "broad statistical analysis" take into account slower people are seeded in inside lanes 99% of the time? Of course people in lans 1 and 2 are slower, because they are slower to begin with. Show me a statistical analysis of fast people who have been seeded in 1 or 2, then we can talk.
I'm pretty sure it does, that'd be stats 101. The outer lanes get to run a larger net downhill and the benefit of wider turns (and seeing their competition). There is a lot to overcome from lanes 1 and 2.
Yes, the fairest way to run an indoor 400 would be to start in the straight that way you avoid the net downhill effect.