Explain to me how Felix loses because the other runner dived and she didn't?

Exactly. Miller would have won anyways. She had the momentum and was going to pass Felix at the line no matter what. Her dive actually slowed her up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVOQftEjbps

I notice Michael Johnson and the BBC commentary team didn’t find any fault with the result and they didn’t even consider it a dive, more that in attempting to outlean Felix, her legs gave way and she stumbled across the line rather than deliberately dived.

I see no reason why intentional diving shouldn't be against the rules.

Felix needs to file a protest and if not then rerun the race

Stick with eharmony wrote:

I see no reason why intentional diving shouldn't be against the rules.

Felix needs to file a protest and if not then rerun the race

Why would it ever be against the rules?

How, exactly, is it different than running? Runners maintain a slight forward lean, and both feet leave the ground. A dive is a more exaggerated forward lean, and both feet leave the ground. At which point, in your imaginary new rule, would running suddenly transform into diving?

Fact is that a dive is nothing more than a much bigger step -- and one that is both potentially painful and impossible to recover from. It's risky, so it's rare. But it's still effectively running.

How to finish faster wrote:

The same reason why MLB players don't dive into 1st; they run through it. It's faster. Also, I'm sure diving onto the track probably HURTS.

This is factually false. In baseball, you want to get an extremity to a given point. Your foot is almost always faster, particularly as it is closer to the ground.

But in track, you have to get a part of the torso ahead, and by rotating oneself from vertical to horizontal, the center of mass stays the same but the relevant contact point is moved forward. This is often faster. outweighing the partial stride lost.

QED.

That's not why baseball players don't dive into first base. Diving would get their hands there before their feet easily. They don't slide however because runners are allowed to run through first base. If one dives into first, then they must also maintain contact with the base at all times or risk being called out.

Yea.....Miller won technically but it was a "Chicken $hit" victory. Can't power your way ahead so you throw yourself under the truck! Ugly.

Suck it up! Take the loss! Honestly the stupidist thread I've seen. She lost because "America doesn't win anymore." She crossed the line second and Miller was first. American's are the worst losers just like Hope Solo. Of course Felux is sad and wanted to win but that's the way it goes.

It was either a dip that failed or a stumble followed by a desperate leap for the line.

People making out she somehow cheated... you do realise she used her own propulsion from her own legs, dipping, falling and jumping are all legal moves used frequently in sprinting.

Diving also does not allow one to keep accelerating or moving like running does. Once your feet leave the ground you are decelerating.

Not to mention she was just ahead and the only way Felix would have won that is if Miller's fall didn't cross the line. Now that would be cheap.

Metric Miler wrote:

It was either a dip that failed or a stumble followed by a desperate leap for the line.

People making out she somehow cheated... you do realise she used her own propulsion from her own legs, dipping, falling and jumping are all legal moves used frequently in sprinting.

Diving also does not allow one to keep accelerating or moving like running does. Once your feet leave the ground you are decelerating.

Not to mention she was just ahead and the only way Felix would have won that is if Miller's fall didn't cross the line. Now that would be cheap.

This is true with a dive where you leave your feet, but with a lunge you propel with your legs and you use gravity.

Because the other runner was willing to experience the pain of diving onto the track, Felix chose not to.

Eleven wrote:

Because the other runner was willing to experience the pain of diving onto the track, Felix chose not to.

^

/thread.

how do you distinguish intentional vs unintentional diving? We can't start judging intentions.

and why does it matter? The rule says when the torso reaches the line, it's over. As long as there isn't a mechanical aid in getting there...

yes, no less an authority than Michael Johnson said diving is slower. How many instances besides this one race have shown a diver winning the gold medal? Ask:

Carl Kaufman (vs Otis Davis in the 1960 400m)

Yevgeny Arzhanov (vs Dave Wottle in the 1972 800m)

if Miller's dive was a foul, then 20,000 people in Eugene screaming for Brenda Martinez in the 1500 were wrong, too. David Neville, Christian Smith, Jeff Porter...

A dive suggests full commitment and desperation, which is what true track fans appreciate. It rarely works when trying to win a race, and sometimes works for 3rd place.

No, but we should just probably acknowledge that the only ways a Girl has got to beat Felix is to dive or miss drug tests.

Miller isn't a doper.

But Allyson does have 3 Silver medals.

diving is a sport wrote:

No, but we should just probably acknowledge that the only ways a Girl has got to beat Felix is to dive or miss drug tests.

Miller isn't a doper.

But Allyson does have 3 Silver medals.

so what you are saying is... the only way to beat Felix is to be faster than her, fair and square, or be a doper.

I am shocked by the outrage at the dive and its being labeled a cheap victory. Both my casual Olympic-watching friends and so many people on here are bashing it.

I've always looked at diving as a strategy that is very rarely successful but always a show of tremendous effort, will, and bodily sacrifice, and on the rare occasions when it works, as an epic finish. It's within the rules - all that matters is getting the torso to the line first. That's why it's called the FINISH LINE. Getting there - not what you do afterward - is the end of the race. I have such a hard time seeing it from the other point of view that I am struggling to come up with suitable arguments in defense of Miller as it is just so obvious to me that she just epically won the race in breathtaking - and completely fair - fashion.

Intergalactic wrote:

...all that matters is getting the torso to the line first.

What torso? All that was at the line was half her head and arm and her collar bone. No doctor would every claim a torso was shown if that was all they could see. You see more torso exposed in her singlet than at the finish line photo.

This could be interesting thread if someone would ban all the retards whining about what countries are involved. Who cares who is from what country. Focus on the interesting part of the question--for example, are shoulders canonically part of the torso, or does each race judge get to make up their own decision?

Tor So wrote:

What torso? All that was at the line was half her head and arm and her collar bone. No doctor would every claim a torso was shown if that was all they could see. You see more torso exposed in her singlet than at the finish line photo.

Finish line photo.

Top of right shoulder.

lane violation wrote:

I'm not mad bro, and it's not a guy/girl thing, I'm asking a question....A runner from Jamiaca got DQ'ed earlier in the evening for going out of her lane in the 400 hurdles....Thus the question, if you get DQ'ed for stepping out of your lane (and she did not impede another runner, she was well back) do you also get DQ'ed for diving and being out of your lane in a lane race?

In hurdle races, hurdlers can get DQed if they go out of their lane on a curve because it's possible they can pull their leg AROUND a hurdle instead of over it. On a curve if they step on the inside line of their lane, they are running less than 400 meters so again, a DQ.