Rupp's3k race in Washington invalid!

I think we can be fairly sure because I don't think anyone has ever actually seen a rail at the Dempsey. There was this same controversy last year with the ND track. That was more significant because they had had a rail in the past.

ivvonvaenfnfnv wrote:

I think we need a nationwide movement to get railed at every indoor and outdoor track.

Def not. How bout a nationwide movement to get rid of rails at every indoor and outdoor track. I've seen enough people get injured from getting pushed into rails, stepping on them, ankle twisting....no track should have a rail.

Of course it would, but don't you think the Rupp/Salazar camp also assumed they would be using his 3k time for USAs if he had scratched from the 5k last week? Perhaps others from the 3k at UW are planning to use those times for USAs as well.

"The rule was clarified in the last two years. Cones are no longer supposed to be on the actual line if the track was certified without a rail. (Cones on the line ACT as a rail, and thereby lengthen the distance one would travel)"

Who clarified this?

When there is a curb ("Kerb" for everyone on the otherside of the pond), the track is measured 30 cm from the outer edgeof the curb. All other lanes are measured 20 cm from the white line.

When there isn't a curb, the track is measured 20 cm from the white line and cones must be placed on the white line so the outer edge (nearest to the runner) of the cone is in line with the outer edge of the white line.

An easy way to tell if a track was measured with or without a curb:

Measure the distance from the common finish to the stagger (any stagger) in lane 1, then measure the distance from lane 1 stagger to lane 2 stagger - you don't even need a tape measure, you can use a string.

If the staggers are the same then the track was measured without a curb. If they are different, then it was measured with a curb.

Cones should never be used to replace a entire curb. The IAAF allows cones to replace short sections as with the high jump or javelin approaches.

Remember that the white line in all lanes is part of the lane to the runners left.

d3 runner wrote:

in the grand scheme of things a runner is not going to be able to run on that line the entire race, which throws out the argument that it makes any times on the track irrelevant.

So, exactly how short does a track have to be in order for you to deem performances on it irrelevant?

i have an idea wrote:

Of course it would, but don't you think the Rupp/Salazar camp also assumed they would be using his 3k time for USAs if he had scratched from the 5k last week? Perhaps others from the 3k at UW are planning to use those times for USAs as well.

Nice back pedaling...The question was posed, "what would he use this 3k qual for"...not what would he have used it for at the time if he didn't end up qualifying in Boston.

You then decided to be a smart ass and responded that he'd USE it for USATF in 2 weeks, not knowing you were being a fool. So it's irrelevant that he "could" have scratched, since he didn't.

You have no idea should be your name

Whatever floats your boat. The 3k from UW is a qualifying mark for USAs, nothing foolish about it.

So, David, are the cones in the video in the correct place? They seem to be well inside the line.

As the resident expert on all things technical in track and field in the US...we are waiting for your answer.

Should these marks from this race be recognized as valid for qualification for US Nationals in Albuquerque?

I always try to lean to protecting the rights of the athletes. I wouldn't penalize an athlete for a slightly different interpretation from meet managment.

This is indoor track - all sorts of odd ball stuff happens. You get my vote if USATF accepts performances from this oversize track. The time gets you to the big dance - that's all.

Was the track set up correctly, David? They were clearly told last year how to set it up - as people have pointed out. They didn't do it. Apparently they would rather have fast times than adhere to the rules.

Short enough to make a difference. If you really want to make things fair, have everyone build the exact same track with the exact same dimensions. Until then, it will never be fair to say that a 200m flat, 200m banked, 292m, 300m, 307m, etc yield equivalent performances. Oh yea, don't forget about altitude...and temperature...and humidity...

I guess life is invalid since everyone's is not the same.