How are the pacing track lights not a violation of World Athletics Rule 144.3(a)

your posts suck wrote:

Star wrote:

I jumped in on that last thread questioning it.

Rules evolve.

He got paid to run.

That used to be against the rules.

Except the rule didn't evolve. It's still on the books.

That's a crazily flawed logic - "he got paid to run, that used to be against the rules". Yeah - until they changed the rules and then it was within the rules.

In this case the rules haven't changed so we can debate the merits behind that but it's irrelevant until it's changed.

I think in general we know why these records are being allowed right? Track and Field is struggling with it's past which was rampant and exorbitant PED use which was great when records were being consistently broken because it creates public and sponsor interest in the sport and keeps the perception of it being dynamic and evolving. When they started cracking down on that (especially EPO post 2005), distance records in particular got very stagnant. Now, along with shoes, they have a means to have records broken and generate interest again without it being associated with drug taking, thus showing the sport hasn't tapped out in terms of ultimate performances. That would be my guess as to why WA are looking the other way when this is clearly and obviously against their own rules.

I think they're due for a rule change. This isn't just about time trial performances or record attempts, it's about the experience for fans. Track needs to evolve to get greater viewership and I think wave light is one way for more casual viewers to understand what's going on and get excited about it.

As far as the technology's effects on performances, who cares? The surfaces, the shoes, the clothes, the training, and other factors all evolved throughout the years and they've offered significant advantages over outdated tech. It's just the natural progression of things. Records are made to be broken. PEDs are different because they're actually harmful to athletes and it ruins the spirit of having a level playing field. I don't think this opens to the door to OK'ing PEDs because there's still a lot of social pressure against drug cheats.

With all these schools eliminating track and field programs, it's more important than ever to revitalize the sport and make more people care about it. They're keeping football at the expense of less popular sports, not because they generate profit, but because they're more popular. Revenue-generating does not equal profit generating. MOST college football teams break even or lose money, yet they're still seen as more important than sports like track. College football teams that bring in more money than they spend are in the minority.

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

In this case the rules haven't changed so we can debate the merits behind that but it's irrelevant until it's changed.

Kicker wrote:

I think they're due for a rule change.

Guys. The rules have changed:

Technical Rules, Book C – C2.1

Section 6.4.8:

Electronic lights or similar appliance indicating progressive times during a

race, including of a relevant record.

Raddison wrote:

Guys. The rules have changed:

Technical Rules, Book C – C2.1

Section 6.4.8:

Electronic lights or similar appliance indicating progressive times during a

race, including of a relevant record.

https://www.worldathletics.org/about-iaaf/documents/book-of-rules

Good to know, thanks!

Raddison wrote:

Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:

In this case the rules haven't changed so we can debate the merits behind that but it's irrelevant until it's changed.

Kicker wrote:

I think they're due for a rule change.

Guys. The rules have changed:

Technical Rules, Book C – C2.1

Section 6.4.8:

Electronic lights or similar appliance indicating progressive times during a

race, including of a relevant record.

https://www.worldathletics.org/about-iaaf/documents/book-of-rules

They should not have changed the rules, for once World Athletics got it right the first time. There has to be more to this, somewhere money had to have changed hands. Are they getting a piece of the technology? What's in it for them because it's pretty stupid. No one is saying it can make anyone run faster, what it can do is make it easier for someone to run to their potential. Some pacers are God awful and 1 incorrectly timed lap can destroy the whole race. With Wavelight there is no risk of going out too fast or too slow. It doesn't get tired, you cannot run up on it's heels. Set it and forget it is not what racing on the track is supposed to be.

In a way this is the worst possible sort of technical assistance to allow, because it will be installed at a minority of tracks and further befuddle attempts to compare with performances at other tracks. Yet another asterisk to put on stats, and to argue about how many seconds per lap it's worth.

The one thing in the sport that makes a "world record" meaningful is that time is a universal constant. 60 seconds on one track should be as close to equivalent as possible to 60 seconds on another.

Footwear has some data to back up its effect on running economy.

Real Cici wrote:

I was thinking the same thing. Bekele didn't have lights to chase and it makes pacing a lot easier when you have them. Incredible performance but I would say Bekele's was more impressive given that he was running without that high tech stuff.

But Bekele was running on a 20 degrees cooler day with thousands of cheering fans so his time with Chep's weather would be 26:30.

LEVEL FIELD wrote:

I totally agree with this. The wave light technology saves an athlete at least 10 seconds over 10000m. The carbon plated shoes saves another 10 to 15 seconds. That makes Joshua's time around 26:30-36 if done under same technology as Bekele's.

You realize the dragonflys don't have a carbon plate right? and as mentioned earlier there's no PHYSIOLOGICAL benefit to the lights (ie no drafting effects). The lights are of a purely mental benefit. Cheptegei and Gidey still covered the distance in record time. Shoot, Chep had to run the last 5k alone. The first pacer was falling off pace after 3k! Sorry but I don't think the lights help THAT much. I for one am enjoying the breakthrough.

Old is as old does wrote:

Nonsense! wrote:

Rule 144.3(a)

3. For the purpose of this Rule, the following examples shall be

considered assistance, and are therefore not allowed:

(a) Pacing in races by persons not participating in the same race, by

athletes lapped or about to be lapped or by any kind of technical

device (other than those permitted under Rule 144.4(d))

Rule 144.4(d)

(d) Heart rate or speed distance monitors or stride sensors or similar

devices carried or worn personally by athletes during an event,

provided that such device cannot be used to communicate with

any other person

Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Rule 144.4(d) specifically say "Carried or Worn" which the Wave-light neither. But I will say that comparing what Bekele or Gebrselassie did without it to these new performances is ridiculous. Seems like it should be considered a completely different record to me.

The lights are there mostly for the viewer. A guy like Cheptegei doesn't need the lights to run 62.x for 25 laps. He knows what his race pace feels like. You can absolutely compare it to Bekele and Geb

rungeek13 wrote:

LEVEL FIELD wrote:

I totally agree with this. The wave light technology saves an athlete at least 10 seconds over 10000m. The carbon plated shoes saves another 10 to 15 seconds. That makes Joshua's time around 26:30-36 if done under same technology as Bekele's.

You realize the dragonflys don't have a carbon plate right? and as mentioned earlier there's no PHYSIOLOGICAL benefit to the lights (ie no drafting effects). The lights are of a purely mental benefit. Cheptegei and Gidey still covered the distance in record time. Shoot, Chep had to run the last 5k alone. The first pacer was falling off pace after 3k! Sorry but I don't think the lights help THAT much. I for one am enjoying the breakthrough.

I would argue there's a physiological benefit because it enables runners to lock on pace. It's no coincidence that all 3 WRs recently set were all run at a consistently even pace, almost as if they're running on a treadmill. So while it may not be as tangible as, say, track surfaces or shoes, it's still a huge physiological benefit.

bulbasaur wrote:

Old is as old does wrote:

Rule 144.4(d) specifically say "Carried or Worn" which the Wave-light neither. But I will say that comparing what Bekele or Gebrselassie did without it to these new performances is ridiculous. Seems like it should be considered a completely different record to me.

The lights are there mostly for the viewer. A guy like Cheptegei doesn't need the lights to run 62.x for 25 laps. He knows what his race pace feels like. You can absolutely compare it to Bekele and Geb

But no matter how good your pacing is, you can't run at a dead even pace like that. Even Komen, who was the human metronome, couldn't do that for his 3K WR.

The clock at the finish, the clock on the scoreboard, your watch, and your coach reading off splits = OK

Wavelight = Not OK?

Basically the same damn thing.

macdaddy OG wrote:

The clock at the finish, the clock on the scoreboard, your watch, and your coach reading off splits = OK

Wavelight = Not OK?

Basically the same damn thing.

Clocks and watches help to some extent, but Wavelight eradicate the variable. That's the difference.

George213 wrote:

macdaddy OG wrote:

The clock at the finish, the clock on the scoreboard, your watch, and your coach reading off splits = OK

Wavelight = Not OK?

Basically the same damn thing.

Clocks and watches help to some extent, but Wavelight eradicate the variable. That's the difference.

Meh. I'm a peon compared to Cheptegei, but I know how to keep my pace during a 5k as long as I have a clock. You hit your targeted pace for two laps and you're in a rhythm after that.

I'd imagine the 'advantage' for someone who runs 63's for a living would be even less.

macdaddy OG wrote:

George213 wrote:

Clocks and watches help to some extent, but Wavelight eradicate the variable. That's the difference.

Meh. I'm a peon compared to Cheptegei, but I know how to keep my pace during a 5k as long as I have a clock. You hit your targeted pace for two laps and you're in a rhythm after that.

I'd imagine the 'advantage' for someone who runs 63's for a living would be even less.

No. A good sense of pacing can only get you so far. Take a look at Bekele 10K WR, and compare that to the brand new WR. The difference is noticeable, if not enormous.

Bekele's 10000m WR splits:

1000m 2:39.85 ---> 2:39.85

2000m 5:15.63 ---> 2:35.78

3000m 7:53.02 ---> 2:37.59

4000m 10:29.98 ---> 2:36.96

5000m 13:09.19 ---> 2:39.21

6000m 15:44.66 ---> 2:35.47

7000m 18:23.98 ---> 2:39.32

8000m 21:04.63 ---> 2:40.67

9000m 23:45.09 ---> 2:40.46

10000 26:17.53 ---> 2:32.44

Cheptegei's 10000m world record splits:

1000m splits = 2:39, 2:37, 2:37, 2:37 2:38, 2:37, 2:37, 2:37, 2:37, 2:34.

As you can see, Cheptegei was dead on pace (2:37 per k )for 7-8k, while Bekele's WR splits somewhat fluctuated throughout the race.

This. Pacing light for Bekele would have dropped his WR by many seconds (not to mention modern shoes).

On the road. Not the track. Very different surfaces. Please share any data you have on footwear impact on cushioned athletic track surfaces. Thanks