It’s a distinct advantage for some athletes over others and almost no other races are at altitude, so seems unnecessary with so many non-altitude options. What gives?
It’s a distinct advantage for some athletes over others and almost no other races are at altitude, so seems unnecessary with so many non-altitude options. What gives?
Well in 1989, for example (and not only then), the outdoor NCAA meet was in Provo. It is beautiful there. Not sure how often these meets are at altitude. I have no problem with it, but I understand your point too. Remember heat and cold also sometimes play a role in x-country or track too.
It’s a distinct advantage for some athletes over others and almost no other races are at altitude, so seems unnecessary with so many non-altitude options. What gives?
It's hilarious how you are so clueless about track & field and act as if distance is the only part of it. Altitude is better for the majority of disciplines, including sprinting, hurdling, jumping, vaulting and throwing. If you want fast times, long throws and high jumps and vaults, you hold the meet at altitude. Duhhhhh!!
The fact the meet is segregated to women day/section and night/men section ..looks like there is not enough seating capacity for a combined meet from previous years?
As a way of clarifying why altitude conversions exist. So many people come on here and complain about altitude conversions. Now they get to experience it firsthand.
It’s a distinct advantage for some athletes over others and almost no other races are at altitude, so seems unnecessary with so many non-altitude options. What gives?
Agree. The sprinters don’t actively suffer at altitude, but improve. It’s still an even playing field for the sprinters and field eventers, no matter where they are from. On the other hand, the mid and long distance teams from sea level actively suffer. Some individuals will really suffer the physical effects of altitude a great deal more than others. It’s not an even playing field unless all sea level teams get a few months to adapt to altitude..which they clearly don’t.
It’s a distinct advantage for some athletes over others and almost no other races are at altitude, so seems unnecessary with so many non-altitude options. What gives?
Agree. The sprinters don’t actively suffer at altitude, but improve. It’s still an even playing field for the sprinters and field eventers, no matter where they are from. On the other hand, the mid and long distance teams from sea level actively suffer. Some individuals will really suffer the physical effects of altitude a great deal more than others. It’s not an even playing field unless all sea level teams get a few months to adapt to altitude..which they clearly don’t.
It's not an even playing field when xc nats is held in Florida or Wisconsin either.
The 1968 Olympics were held at 7300 feet in Mexico City. Ask Jim Ryun how that went for him vs. Kip Keino who was born and lived at 8000 ft. Of the other hand, ask Bob Beamon how he liked jumping in Mexico City!
If catering only to distance runners, all indoor championships would be held at BU track and all Olympics would be held in Monaco
It’s a distinct advantage for some athletes over others and almost no other races are at altitude, so seems unnecessary with so many non-altitude options. What gives?
It's hilarious how you are so clueless about track & field and act as if distance is the only part of it. Altitude is better for the majority of disciplines, including sprinting, hurdling, jumping, vaulting and throwing. If you want fast times, long throws and high jumps and vaults, you hold the meet at altitude. Duhhhhh!!
Who cares how many records are set? They’ve already got better shoes and a better track than the old record holders, you have to give them thinner air too?
It’s supposed to be a championship. The goal is a level playing field, not juiced records.
As a way of clarifying why altitude conversions exist. So many people come on here and complain about altitude conversions. Now they get to experience it firsthand.
Correct, Altitude affects performance. But at a much higher level for someone coming from sea level to altitude vs someone who's living and training at elevation. The conversions seem to be set up for the sea level folks and Not those who have trained at elevation. Did you know that the world record for the 1500 (for men) was run at elevation if we're using the NCAA calculator?
Agree. The sprinters don’t actively suffer at altitude, but improve. It’s still an even playing field for the sprinters and field eventers, no matter where they are from. On the other hand, the mid and long distance teams from sea level actively suffer. Some individuals will really suffer the physical effects of altitude a great deal more than others. It’s not an even playing field unless all sea level teams get a few months to adapt to altitude..which they clearly don’t.
It's not an even playing field when xc nats is held in Florida or Wisconsin either.
The 1968 Olympics were held at 7300 feet in Mexico City. Ask Jim Ryun how that went for him vs. Kip Keino who was born and lived at 8000 ft. Of the other hand, ask Bob Beamon how he liked jumping in Mexico City!
If catering only to distance runners, all indoor championships would be held at BU track and all Olympics would be held in Monaco
Because of 68 the Olympic committee had agreed never to hold a championship at Altitude again. That should tell the NCAA something
Agree. The sprinters don’t actively suffer at altitude, but improve. It’s still an even playing field for the sprinters and field eventers, no matter where they are from. On the other hand, the mid and long distance teams from sea level actively suffer. Some individuals will really suffer the physical effects of altitude a great deal more than others. It’s not an even playing field unless all sea level teams get a few months to adapt to altitude..which they clearly don’t.
It's not an even playing field when xc nats is held in Florida or Wisconsin either.
The 1968 Olympics were held at 7300 feet in Mexico City. Ask Jim Ryun how that went for him vs. Kip Keino who was born and lived at 8000 ft. Of the other hand, ask Bob Beamon how he liked jumping in Mexico City!
If catering only to distance runners, all indoor championships would be held at BU track and all Olympics would be held in Monaco
^This guy is pulling out crap from 60 years ago to prove a point like it's still relevant lol
Are WR still marked as WR if the performance was done at altitude? I seem to recall reading somewhere that World Athletics stopped doing this after Pietro Mennea's 200M record in the 200M in Mexico City.
It’s a distinct advantage for some athletes over others and almost no other races are at altitude, so seems unnecessary with so many non-altitude options. What gives?
The best U.S. sprinters have to go to Eugene, OR every spring and summer, either N.C.A.A. outdoors or U.S.A.s. Why not hold indoors somewhere sprinter friendly? Let's move U.S.A.s and N.C.A.A.s outdoors back to Chicago then we can have a discussion regarding moving indoors.