Seattle Track - Legit??

I had the same thought mostly because of Barringer's interview where she said that she was hoping to run 15:20. Wetmore usually has a pretty good handle on what his athletes are capable of running, and this is a pretty big disparity.

If the track is accurate, though, more power to her. I think she is perfectly capable of running 15min on an outdoor track, and this indoor track isn't much smaller. Given the mass volume of fast times, though, I would like to see it re-measured.

The track is over 300m, so if it is "short" they would have messed up measuring the marks on it. It is really fast because you don't have the normal issues with indoor (banking, different surfaces, sharp corners). Plus you don't have the disadvantages to outdoor, wind, weather, wet track etc. Plus you get the benifits of intense crowd support. Additionally running ona 300m track,because it feel closer to a 400m track has a psychlogical benefit because it feels like you are moving so fast.

But Notre Dame has all the benefits you just mentioned and the times don't come close.

It was like this last year?

The whole Dempsey facility is built on gigantic columns because the floor is basically at lake level. The columns go way down to the bedrock...can't remember how far exactly 150 ft?....The floor is actually suspended. This gives the floor a flex and a bounce. When races are going on and the pack passes you, you can definitely feel the bounce. I think the spring of the floor gives a just enough energy return to make it fast. It has the advantage over 200m banked tracks susch as Arkansas' of being bigger and having fewer turns per race and matches Arkansas tracks bounce, and has the advantage over most 300m tracks in that it is not layed on concrete over solid ground, but matches those tracks size. It has the best of both worlds.

I think Wetmore is usually way too conservative about predicting his athletes' performances. How many times have we heard athletes say that they threw out his projected split plans (overrode them) and went on to run way faster than he predicted? He doesn't encourage his athletes to think big. His athletes' best races come when they throw out his splits (one team XC Championship year for women, they won by not following his plan AT ALL).

I am not familiar with the norte dame track. All I know is I trained in the dempsey facility a few years ago and thought, in the right conditions (competition crowd) this could be the fastest track in the united states.

Thats really interesting?

Anyone believe this??

I've heard that from multiple sources.

Dempsey is legit. I have worked out and raced on it for the past several years.

I think the reason(s) that "ce" stated are very accurate. Plus when you get folks here that "want" & "are expecting" to run fast, plus overall incoming talent, plus some aggressive pacing by teammates, then a fast time is going to happen.

Yes, there is a lot of "Time Trialing" going on, but these races are designed for time, not just winning them like what happened at the Tyson Mile last weekend when nobody went with the rabbit and it became a 300m race instead of a Great Mile.

I think it would be neat to see a Lagat or Willis get behind a couple of "bunnies" and see what times they could run!? Or have an Ethopian group come in for some serious onslaught.

Great venue

the track is 307m which helps to explain the cones all over the place.

they designed the building, put in a football field and THEN added a track.

the track IS 307m and is legit distance and IS fast as sh*t.

What if it had been 400m? Would it have been allowed for indoors? Would it have been allowed for outdoors?

They are supposed to build a new track when Husky Stadium is torn down. Maybe they should make it a mondo 400m covered track. The surface of the Husky Stadium track isn't that great.

You can feel a lot of bounce when you're a spectator on the infield. I think it is most pronounced during the 60m. It's pretty cool that way.

There is no real reason for the cones, it's just because Dempsey has no rail.

The cones on the home stretch are because there is an extra lane to the inside used for the 60m dash and 60m hurdles.

the track surface itself provides the most energy return possible for an indoor track...it is a very hard surface there...I heard it was right at the "maximal allowable rating" to be legal in that regard....whatever that means.

The NCAA rules prohibit qualifying on tracks over 322m (or 5 laps/mile, which is the size of the Notre Dame track, currently the largest in NCAA). There is also a rule in place which doesn't allow for any NEW tracks to be over 300m (and be used for qualifying).

I'd like to see FLOTRACK go out there and measure it exactly as it was for the meet. With cones and everything.

Prove it on film

Yepps wrote:

I'd like to see FLOTRACK go out there and measure it exactly as it was for the meet. With cones and everything.

Prove it on film

I wasn't aware the FloTrack guys had surveying experience. Unless you are suggesting they simply 'wheel' the track, which wouldn't prove much of anything give your desired level of precision in the measurement.

Surveying experience?? Do you need that to measure a track?? The wheel would be alright for me. But those cones, the strange start lines, the very fast times, it is suspicious.