Did the Adrian Martinez Classic just start the Men's mile from the wrong line?!
The 10m relay exchange zone is clearly just behind the main white line (THE ACTUAL MILE START LINE) but the main pack starts at the green line that is clearly a couple metres further forward meaning they did NOT run the full mile...Does this cost Torrence a World's qualifier?? Discus...
It definitely looks like the wrong line in that picture
Nope. It's always been like that at the Adrian Martinez classic. Not sure what the other line is for (maybe a relay? DMR, etc?) but they definitely started in the right place. Henceforth Terrence will keep his world qualifier as he did run a full mile
I think I remember a question like this coming up in past years. Something about the peculiarity of this track.
D5Star beat me to it.
Ok, we saw this thread and went to talk to the race director about it. He said that normally the track does not have a rail. When you don't have a rail, you measure lane 1 30 cm the line. When you do have a rail (which was added so these times could count), you measure 20 cm from the line so each lap is longer.
So the white line is where you'd start if there was no rail. The green line is where you start if their is a rail. David Katz has been consulted. These times count.
If that is a 400m track then they started at the wrong line.
Maybe it's 400.5 meters around.
What?
Do they move the 1500m start and the 5000m start forward when the rail is up?
Do they start the 10,000 in front of the finish line?
It wouldn't only be the mile moving up.
I am hearing that times won't count.
Yeah this rail explanation isn't winning me over.
Star wrote:
What?
Do they move the 1500m start and the 5000m start forward when the rail is up?
Do they start the 10,000 in front of the finish line?
It wouldn't only be the mile moving up.
Yes. Yes.
Why is this so hard to understand? There are green lines in several locations on the track that are used when the rail is up.
This thread is proof that the average letsrun visitor has the intelligence of a potato
A standard high school track is measured 20cm away (as there track is).
With a trail, a track is measured 30cm away.
Each lap is ~400.65m when measured 30cm away. You have to run ~1609.44m for a full mile.
If each lap is now 400.65m, running 4 laps at the traditional start/finish line is 1602.6m.
You then need to do 1609.44-1602.6 = 6.84m.
So you start the race 6.84m behind the traditional start/finish line and then you have a new mile start.
The other mile line is 9.44m behind the start line when there is no rail present. Mass is one of the only states that runs a full mile outdoors, so you'll see a full mile line on a lot of those HS tracks.
This is a correct start line and the meet director knows what he is doing. One of the few that does.
So you get to run less distance with a rail?
Awesome.
LetsRun.com wrote:
Ok, we saw this thread and went to talk to the race director about it. He said that normally the track does not have a rail. When you don't have a rail, you measure lane 1 30 cm the line. When you do have a rail (which was added so these times could count), you measure 20 cm from the line so each lap is longer.
So the white line is where you'd start if there was no rail. The green line is where you start if their is a rail. David Katz has been consulted. These times count.
El wrongo. When there is no rail (curb), the measure line is 20 cm out. With a curb, the measure line is 30 cm out. You got them switched, confirming another poster's comment.
The explanation is fine.
It just seems to overcomplicate things to make two distinct starting lines for each and every distance for a rail or no rail.
That track must be all marked up.
I assume the track was originally marked to be run without a rail and they revised each starting line when a rail was added. Easier than resurfacing the track.
I guess it's similar to running metered events on a yards track.
But I am used to seeing either a 400m track or a 440 yard track, not a 400.6 m track.
I have been to a lot of tracks and never seen this arrangement before.
I'm ok with the times being legit if it was originally configured to not have a rail.
In most cases, they'd throw a rail down and keep the lines the same.
Always better to run farther than risk running short.
The organizers reached out to me a few years ago to ensure that the times from their meet would be accepted by the IAAF - which requires a curb (rail).
A curb is only required on the turns and not the straight sections.
But, by placing a curb that changes the location of the "measured line" of the track.
When a track is designed not to have a curb, the "measured line" is 20cm out from the outer edge of the inside white line. This is the same measurement for races run in lanes (2-8).
Tracks with curbs have a "measured line" 30cm from the outer edge of the curb.
Placing a curb on a track that normally would not have one increases the radius by 10 cm and the overall length of the oval by 63cm (C=2 x pi).
The starting lines would need to be sifted forward by 63 cm x #laps. For the mile the starting line is shifted approximately 2.52 meters forward.
I did the same for the adidas meet last year.
It only becomes 400.6m WHEN you measure it with a rail in place (30cm away).
It's 400m sans rail, 400.62 with a rail. They install a rail one day only for a single meet and those lines are only used for one day a year.
The track itself is still a 400.00m oval with 100m straights and 100m curves. Only with a rail does it change.
What is the basis for this? The track is still the same distance around with or without the rail.
The IAAF requires a curb for qualifying for the World Championships or Olympic Games.