I once witnessed a girls high school 3200 where two runners ran side by side in lane one for the entire race. One girl was always on the inside of the other girl. Their order never changed.
Then in the home stretch, the girl on the inside position won by about 10 yards or so.
I read or heard somewhere that a person doing what the outside girl did, ran at least 50 extra yards by taking that outside position. Does anyone know where I could find that information again or do you think it is false?
4.54m/lane/lap I think
HardwareHank wrote:
I once witnessed a girls high school 3200 where two runners ran side by side in lane one for the entire race. One girl was always on the inside of the other girl. Their order never changed.
Then in the home stretch, the girl on the inside position won by about 10 yards or so.
I read or heard somewhere that a person doing what the outside girl did, ran at least 50 extra yards by taking that outside position. Does anyone know where I could find that information again or do you think it is false?
Or was Montanao running at the extreme outside of her lane in the kooky 800M?
Frat House:
So you are saying 4.54 meters per lap to run on the outside of a runner inside of them? In this case that would be wind up being 4.54 x 8 = 36.32 meters.
Where did you find that figure?
You can look it up online. Off the top of my head, it's about 7 and half meters per lap per lane. Running half a lane wide would add about 3 3/4m per lap, I think.
Frat House Runner wrote:
4.54m/lane/lap I think
This means that Montano would have still been leading the race coming off the final curve if she had stayed on the rail. Insane, simply insane.
It isn't 7.5m/lap.
It is really easy to figure out. Go to the common start and look at the difference in the 400m stagger from lane 1 to lane 2. It is usually clearly marked.
The outside of lane 1 will be somewhere between 2/3rds and 3/4ths of that distance per lap.
You're looking more at 3ish to 3.5ish meters per lap because the runner is in the outside of lane 1 and not in lane 2. The outer runner could even be closer to the middle of lane 1 if the inside runner is hugging the curve.
There is no exact value because of lane width, length of straightaway/curve, etc. The usually value is somewhere slightly more than 2m PER CURVE as posted above. (4-something m per lane outside of 1).
My guess Is going to be somewhere between 16 and 28m extra distance depending on lane position.
roughly one stagger per turn
I believe the guy in charge of the 800/1500 runners for the USATF encourages 800 and 1500 runners to run on the outside lanes early in the race so they do not get boxed.
While this tactic is somewhat logical in the 800, it is certainly not smart in the 1500.
I also think that the first lap will always be tight, except for a fool who goes way too fast and will come back to the pack. So it is not necessary to run in the outside lanes in the first lap. I know this is not conventional thinking. However it might be another reason why the USA has so much trouble in the 800/1600. We choose foolish tactics.
I know that many 5K and 10K runners run way to fast at the beginning of the race. If your best time is the 15th best in the race, you have no business running in the top 5 early in the race. Perhaps the Prefontaine movement is still in effect. (At least one of Prefontaine's teammates said he was a "retard.")
So these guys ranked 10-20 should trail the pack in the first lane and hope that the leaders pull them to a good time. They should not try to win the race.
If my best is 28:15 and your best is 27:15, should I be trying to beat you?
I can see trying to stay close, but 28:15 should not be in front of 27:15 in anybody's world!!!
On a curbed track with full-sized 1.22m (48") lanes, from the Lane 1 measure line to the center of the L1-L2 stripe: 5.6m/lap. From the L1 measure line to the L2 measure line: 7.0m/lap.
Please note that the measure line for L1 is 30cm (12") out from the curb, and all the other lanes' measure lines are 20cm (8") out from the stripe.
If the track has narrower lanes or has no curb, calculate it yourself.
This is not complicated; I learned it in 4th grade. Pi times diameter equals circumference.
You can also look on page 136 of T&FN's Big Gold Book (if you don't own a copy you're not a serious track fan). There's a table that shows the effect of running wide on a curve. Example: 4 ft farther from the curb than necessary costs 50 ft in an 800m race. Or, metrically, an extra 1m out costs 12.6m in an 800. They've had this table since the 1970s.
I am an old time runner and coach that remembers the Red Book. For the life of me I do not understand the tactics or advantage of the bunched hugging of the lane two line. It would be interesting to see the finish positions of those positioned furthest from the curb for the longest amount of time. I would assume it matters in any race.
Igy
Circumference = 2 * pi * r
Difference in distance is 2 * pi * (change in r)
So if one athlete is running about a meter to the outside of the other, the extra distance is about 2*pi, or roughly 6 meters.
I suppose "not a serious track fan," is similar to "hobby jogger."
Nonsense words.
People sure get off ripping on people on LRC. I guess that somehow makes up for their own sorry lives!
fisky wrote:
You can look it up online. Off the top of my head, it's about 7 and half meters per lap per lane. Running half a lane wide would add about 3 3/4m per lap, I think.
This is the answer. Outside of lane 1 is about half a lap, so half a full lap's stagger - ie 3.75m per lap.
Ballsack wrote:
I suppose "not a serious track fan," is similar to "hobby jogger."
Nonsense words.
People sure get off ripping on people on LRC. I guess that somehow makes up for their own sorry lives!
Okay for me, it's your funeral. Save $15 on a little booklet and instead spend all your time on a MB guessing at numbers without having any idea how to use pi, nor knowing what the lane width is on the track in question nor exactly how wide a runner has positioned themselves. Pull figures out of your butt, post messages all day . . . or get a book and look at the appropriate table.
I apologize. Maybe there are serious track fans who are simply ignorant of both the BGB and geometry.
No matter how precisely you calculate the extra distance, you are just wasting your time if you ignore the physics of turning. Hugging the kerb doesn't mean you'll finish any sooner, because it is a tighter turn and requires more centripetal force to execute, diminishing the force available for forward propulsion. Sprinters in a 200 or 400 regularly run wide in their lanes because the greater top speed they achieve outweighs the extra distance they run.
This may matter less at lower speeds, but it does still matter. Even if it doesn't outweigh the extra distance, it is still pointless to make pat statements about that extra distance when it's not that simple.
the chart is on page 122 in The Big Green Book
the progression with reprint years
Little Red Book-'74'76'79
Little Green Book'83
Little Gold Book''84
Little Blue Book'89
Big Red Book'93
Big Green Book''00'03
Big Gold Book'05 updated '08&'11
Is there a more recent edition?
BTW the marathon pace chart per mile only goes down to 2:04:32--4:45
per kilometer ends at 2:55 per for 2:03:04
make it simple - .6214 meters for every 10 cm (about 4 inches) out per lap
7.66/lane/lap
Standard lane is 1.22m as per IAAF
200 = 2*Ï€r
Solve for R and add 1.22, solve for C and you get 207.66
Assumes turns are 100m. A track like Franklin Field, the turns will be longer so the distance further.