Is the Fayetteville track too short?

there are about 4 other threads on this topic. try looking at the forum first or search before you have the trigger happy clicking of "post new topic"

If the track was too short making the sprints faster wouldn't the distance races post even more ridiculously faster times? That didn't happen even in the races that weren't slow due to tactics.

What is the difference between a track that is short? and a track that is TOO short? Are track allowed to be short of the actual distance, just not TOO short?

Not a believer wrote:

What is the difference between a track that is short? and a track that is TOO short? Are track allowed to be short of the actual distance, just not TOO short?

I was thinking the same thing.

Sorry, I'm not a native speaker and the search function sucks.

no, it's the right distance. The trick is knowing where the shortcuts are.

With a world record on Saturday night, I am sure that the track will be thoroughly measured in the near future!!!

It's not too short, it's too fast!

They were remarking it was especially fast for 400's when you start up on the bank (ie. you have a net elevation drop over the whole race).

Not a believer wrote:

What is the difference between a track that is short? and a track that is TOO short? Are track allowed to be short of the actual distance, just not TOO short?

well if you want to be an asshole about it...

short CAN mean just having a small amount of length...a 200m track could be considered a short track as that is not a great distance. the word short is NOT always used as a comparison against the norm. so...jerk, when he asked if it was "too short", there really isnt any grammatical or semantic reason to correct him.

If the track was actually short you'd think you'd see huge PR's in the distance races. Come on...the 200m is one lap and the 5000m is 25.

The track is accurate. It's new, fast, and attracts some of the top runners in the country...which makes for a perfect situation to produce fast times.

You guys are right. The track is short. It also is downhill the whole way. On top of that I saw Victor Conte juicing guys up in the warm-up area.

Just enjoy some great track and field performances for Christ sake.

They run slow you bitch. They run fast you bitch.

well it could be marked incorrectly (the staggers) which would allow for a difference in the sprints and not the distances - so this is a valid question.

Actually a track is not measure from the inside white line - it is measured from the middle of the lane.

So - if you are great at running very close to the line - you run less than the actual race distace. Indoors in a 200 if you are a good curve runner - you get to run it twice - which probably isn't relevant to total curve distance being more or less than on an outdoor track, but it could help someone who is able to accelerate by leaning. I have that feeling - even when running on the roads I accelerate on turns naturally. It at least makes me feel fast - which may be what is happening to the sprinters.

jerrry wrote:

Actually a track is not measure from the inside white line - it is measured from the middle of the lane.

Wrong (except for the "inside the white line" part).

USATF Competition Rule #160, sec 2:

All distances run or walked shall be determined on the basis of a hypothetical line 30cm outward from the inner edge of the track, except that for races upon straightaways, the distance shall be measured in a raised direct line from the starting mark to the finish line. For any track without a raised border, the measurement shall be made 20cm from the outer edge of the white line marking the border of the track. (See Rule 160.3(b)) For events run in lanes around a turn, all lanes except the one on the inside border shall be measured 20cm outward from the inner lane line.