Notre Dame DMR is questionable to me

And, as a heads up, I'm going to challenge these marks with the NCAA and I don't see how it won't be recognized that you can't legally have a track that has a railing one year and cones on the inside the next.

Translation:

'I am not going to Nats and I am bitter."

What they should do is have different qualifying times for oversized tracks. A team running 9:30 on a track like Washington or ND is completely different than a team running a 9:30 on a flat 200m track.

Challenge Period. Challenges regarding an athlete’s eligibility or performance must be submitted in writing via e-mail (rpodkam@aol.com) to Bob Podkaminer for review

by the Division I track and field committee. The challenge period begins December 1, 2008, and ends at 3 p.m. (Central time) March 9, 2009.

I will submit a challenge to the Notre Dame marks today.

The basis of my challenge is that in 2008 Notre Dame had a railing on its inside lane, but, on the same track, in 2009 it only set up cones off the track on the inside. Measurement of the track when a rail is in place is 30 centimeters from the rail, when a cone is in place it is to be 20 centimeters the inside line. In order to comply with that rule, the cones should have been placed such that they would have been 10 centimeters to the right of the inner lane, not to the inside of the inner lane.

If someone has an explanation for this discrepancy, I would appreciate enlightment.

Quick question, can you show me the math you used to get that it would be 5 seconds faster?

Oversized and 200 banked are treated the same and 200 flat tracks get conversions. Maybe you meant to say 200 banked and oversized need to be treated different as well.

they all ran on the track, i didn't see anyone cut inside. stop bitching and just realize some people are faster than you

oh, you mean they didn't have railing on the track like at Washington? I guess none of those times should count either.

jack daniels is thirsty wrote:

oh, you mean they didn't have railing on the track like at Washington? I guess none of those times should count either.

Do any of you people read. His point is that there are two ways to measure a track, one with a curb and one without. Notre Dame had a curb last year and just cones this year, so the measurement is either wrong in the year they had the curb or the year they didn't. If they measured the track as if it had a curb, then this year with no curb, the track would be short. It really isn't that hard to figure out what he is saying, but most people are ignoring his point.

My personal thought is that when the track first went in, I don't think there was a curb, so the measurement is probably without the curb. Therefore, last year when there was a curb supposedly, then the track was actually long, as opposed to it being short this year. Also, I would like to see the math where it says it would make about 5 seconds difference for a 4000 meter distance medley.

On a 400 m track, a runner 0.5 m farther from the curb than necessary will cover nearly 12 m (11.875)of extra distance in a 5000 m race.

The track may have been recertified. It may have been remarked.

But, part of the challenge is usually that you have to be a coach/athlete who actually ATTENDED the meet.

Were any cones struck during the race?

With that many runners close together they couldn't have been all hugging the turns.

They all certainly covered at least 4000m if they ran from the correct start line.

Someone would have to be very bitter and crochety to file a protest that would disqualify 15 teams.

On a side note, I thought that track used to be 5 laps for a mile. Has this been re-configured to be 5 laps for 1600m or are there different start lines for every single distance that is measured in meters?

I can see how starting at the wrong starting line could have a big impact on the finshing times.

Yeah did you notice that guy that ran the entire mile in the outside of lane one? Like 4 feet from the cones because of traffic? We should DQ them too, because they ran too far man.

Realize that nobody actually hugged the inside line the entire race. Teams bunched up, runners were out in lane two, etc. Seems pretty silly to me, i don't think it made a difference.

The NCAA rule regarding curbing and track measurement which pertain to indoor events is Rule 10.2.3, which includes the following language:

"Where the inside edge of the track is bordered by a white line, it shall be marked additionally with cones. The cones shall be at least 15cm high. Cones shall be placed on the track so that the outward face of the cone coincides with the edge of the white line closest to the track when the track is surveyed based on the existence of a curb. Otherwise, cones shall be placed on the infield adjacent to the line."

So, if the ND track was measured 20cm from the line, the cones were properly placed. If the track was measured 30cm from the line, as if there were a curb, the cones were improperly placed.

"'I am not going to Nats and I am bitter."

-quote of the day. seriously, man. buck up. quit being a whiny little chalupa, and just run faster next tme.

"'I am not going to Nats and I am bitter."

-quote of the day. seriously, man. buck up. quit being a whiny little chalupa, and just run faster next tme.

washington doesnt have a rail either...you should probably contest every single mark run there this year. like seriously...make it your life goal

Rojo you do realize that means your team ran 5 seconds slower too right?