I am currently writing a paper on the history of track and field and was wondering if anyone knew when track and field officially switched from yards to meters. This would be very beneficial so I appreciate your help. Also if anyone has a link to an article or something that helps validate it that would help to. Thanks.
its always been meters, we're the only ones that still use yards
I thought they used to run the 440 yard and 880?
Wasn't there a 100 yard race at one point as well?
only in the very early days of the Olympics and in the US for sometime -- after 1976, I believe, the NCAA and NAIA went metric (they had previously gone metric only in Olympic years to help get qualifying marks).
Trackhead is correct. The last NCAA or USATF (nee AAU) run at imperial distances was 1975. Except for indoors which continued for years afterwards.
I should add that federal law required that the entire country go metric by 1976, which, as we all know, never happened.
For high school competition, it varied from state-to-state. I grew up in New York State, and my freshman and soph. years of track we ran the mile and the 880, 440, etc. then switched to 1500m and 3000m for my junior and senior years.
Michigan switched to yards in 1986 and threw out all previous state meet records. Ridiculous, but gave lots of kids a false sense of accomplishment!
Oops, saw my mistake as it was posting. Meant to say switched from yards to meters. While I'm at it, I'll add that the 1600 and 3200 meter distances are ridiculous.
Add that if you like, but they're no more ridiculous than the mile and 2 mile distances in this day and age.
If you're going to switch to meters to be in line with the rest of the world, why not run 1500 and 3000 meters like the rest of the world?
the 1600 and 3200 are ridiculous -- either run mile/two miles or 1500m/3km
Don't ask me, I had no input into the decision. USAnian cave-dweller administrators are the idiots who think that an even number of laps on a 400 meter track is the only way to go. Don't your tracks have marks at 100 meters and 200 meters where you could paint waterfall starting lines for 1500m and 3000m? Is the concept of a non-whole number of laps too complex for USAnian kids? I agree that 1600 meters and 3200 meters still renders you all backwards in relation to the global sport, but at least the move to meters from the antiquated yards standards of 1 mile and 2 miles was a step forward even if a small and reluctant one. I've noticed that you all still place mile markers on your 5 km, 8 km, 10 km, etc. courses.
The modern Olympic Games have been in meters since they began in 1896 with the exception of one event that was run on one occassion. In 1908, there was a men's 5 mile race. By the way the 5,000 and 10,000 meter races were not contested from from 1986 to 1908. There was a team 5,000 meter race (5 members) with 2 medals given in 1900. There was a team 3,000 meter race (3 members) in 1912, 1920, and 1924.
There were individual and team cross country races in the early 1900s.
USAnians Still Backwards wrote:
Add that if you like, but they're no more ridiculous than the mile and 2 mile distances in this day and age.
The mile makes sense--it's a full unit of measure used by more countries than the United States, and it is still raced by many at international meets--people still care about racing the mile even if they don't car about "mileage."
The two mile doesn't make as much sense since the 3000m SC is a popular event and the 3000m race is pretty much an ugly stepsister to the 5000m in international competition much of the time. Exceptions: Komen's 3k and the random attempts for a sub 8 two-mile clocking.
1600 meters makes total sense if we ran races like 400, 800, 1600...and 6400 (almost 2.5 mi) or 10,000--the only distance race cleanly divisible by 400m. 400 meter increments make sense if you carry them all the way through.
The 1500m and 3000m races make most sense on 500m tracks which are not used today. If you like the 1500m, then why an 800m race? Why not go 500m, 1000m, 1500m, and 3000m? No matter how you shake it up, it's all very arbitrary.
northern boy wrote:
Michigan switched to yards in 1986 and threw out all previous state meet records. Ridiculous, but gave lots of kids a false sense of accomplishment!
Got one even more stupid, I still hold the mile record at my high school (in Michgan) I went back a few year ago and they had it listed as a 1600 meter record, and had did the adjustment based upon what I ran the mile in.
Hrm wrote:
1600 meters makes total sense if we ran races like 400, 800, 1600...and 6400 (almost 2.5 mi) or 10,000--the only distance race cleanly divisible by 400m. 400 meter increments make sense if you carry them all the way through.
The 1500m and 3000m races make most sense on 500m tracks which are not used today. If you like the 1500m, then why an 800m race? Why not go 500m, 1000m, 1500m, and 3000m? No matter how you shake it up, it's all very arbitrary.
Why race 100m and 200m (and 300m hurdles) if they aren't cleanly divisible by 400m? Do sprinters and hurdlers understand something that distance runners cannot? The mile makes zero sense on 400m tracks, period. Some (very few) countries still use furlongs and acres to measure, just like very few use the mile. Just because a handful of countries remain backwards doesn't mean that it makes sense for the distance to be artificially supported in sport. How much do the Pre Mile and Oslo's Golden Mile really rate on the world scene anymore? Very little, strangely enough. How often is the 1500m contested internationally compared to the mile? Quite a bit more, oddly enough.
The length ofthe mile is based on the meter so we are already metric just in a vey odd way. I would rather see metric ditances on metric tracks and Imperial distance on Imperial tracks. Even the trades are going metric as time goes on.
what is the conversion method for yards---->meters?
for example what would a 11.0 in 100 yards b in meters?
no moo here wrote:
The length ofthe mile is based on the meter so we are already metric just in a vey odd way. I would rather see metric ditances on metric tracks and Imperial distance on Imperial tracks. Even the trades are going metric as time goes on.
The origin of the mile has nothing to do with the metric system. In 1592 it was decreed by the British Parliament that a mile was 8 furlongs. A furlong was 220 yards. A yard was the arbitrary, but standardized length of a sash worm by Nobleman.