Think about it. Spectators could see the action much more clearly, and experience the runners passing right by them twice as many times.
Think about it. Spectators could see the action much more clearly, and experience the runners passing right by them twice as many times.
Also, a smaller venue would give the illusion of more spectators and more excitement as the crowd noise would be more audible.
I agree and as a coach it would be much easier to conduct meets and practices.
Consider this.... wrote:
Think about it. Spectators could see the action much more clearly, and experience the runners passing right by them twice as many times.
Outdoor track would be more popular still if they played football on the infield.
But that wouldn't be outdoor track.
Get it?
Outdoor track is on a 400m oval. Period.
meh
Not so much. Athletes would get dizzy running 50 laps for a 10k! Every distance runner would end up with right ankle overuse injuries because of double the number of turns and their tightness.
F*** that.
PoisonIvy wrote:
Not so much. Athletes would get dizzy running 50 laps for a 10k! Every distance runner would end up with right ankle overuse injuries because of double the number of turns and their tightness.
F*** that.
The problem with that, is not the indoor track, but the fact that track 10k is really, really, boring.
Consider this.... wrote:
Think about it. Spectators could see the action much more clearly, and experience the runners passing right by them twice as many times.
1908 track was run on a 3 lap to a mile track.
I think the oval should be 500 meters. 200 meters should be straight with no curve and could be run in either direction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_1908_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_1500_metres500M wrote:
1908 track was run on a 3 lap to a mile track.
I think the oval should be 500 meters. 200 meters should be straight with no curve and could be run in either direction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_1908_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_1500_metres
Good luck with that! That is, getting new tracks built in this country to a different size, and a larger size at that, and getting seating installed. The interest in T&F in this country is such that we're lucky that we have the existing facilities that we do.
500M wrote:
Consider this.... wrote:Think about it. Spectators could see the action much more clearly, and experience the runners passing right by them twice as many times.
1908 track was run on a 3 lap to a mile track.
I think the oval should be 500 meters. 200 meters should be straight with no curve and could be run in either direction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_1908_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_1500_metres
My high school had a 220yd cinder straightaway before they reconfigured in the 1990's!
Coach would kill us with 220yd repeats into the wind (and being by the ocean, it would blow regularly and hard).
Damn, I feel old just thinking about it.
assessment wrote:
Outdoor track is on a 400m oval. Period.
No, comma. 400m or 440y will do just fine.
I think it would confuse the common person to watch them cross by so many times. Especially in like a 10k
I doubt many runners or track officials can count up to 50 reliably. 10k would be too much.
My dad said in high school they ran their races on a horse track, 1/2 mile I think he said.
Penn has a 393 meter track and look how much more popular it is than any other meet in the US. Now extrapolate and imagine if it were only 200!
dfdfhdfh wrote:
PoisonIvy wrote:Not so much. Athletes would get dizzy running 50 laps for a 10k! Every distance runner would end up with right ankle overuse injuries because of double the number of turns and their tightness.
F*** that.
The problem with that, is not the indoor track, but the fact that track 10k is really, really, boring.
..as is a track 5K and a track 3000 and track SC and a track 1500.
here in uk it's as popular as it ever was. Tickets for next year's world champs are already oversubscibed by 300,000:
without baseball, football and basketball around, track would be more popular in the U.S. as well.
not needed wrote:
here in uk it's as popular as it ever was. Tickets for next year's world champs are already oversubscibed by 300,000:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/37253901
300 meters is about right for a track. The 200m and 400m races have the same number of curves as on a 400m track. The turns are a lot wider than on 200m tracks. I train indoors on a 300m track all winter and I love it.