Racewalkers unite in opposition to chips in insoles being mandated by IAAF that would determine it they are actually walking

If they don’t change the distances they will have to wipe the record books clean once they implement the sensors. I predict at least 1 minute per mile slower once the sensors are in use, no way anyone is walking 6 minute miles when they actually have to keep one foot on the ground at all times.

runn wrote:

I saw this on Let's Run and I agree 100% (I use it all the time):

Race Walking is like having a contest to see who can whisper the loudest.

Yes, it's hard- a lot of things are hard- construction work is hard, cutting wood is hard, but I just personally don't think there is any place in the sport for race walking.

Wow, such a deep thought there. I'm sure you've spent a lot of time pondering this.

If you're a distance runner, other people rip your sport as well. There are always personal opinions about why people don't like things, but to make a statement about how something that others do shouldn't have a place, that's truly ignorant.

People get involved in all sorts of things, eating contests, nascar, video gaming, line dancing, triple jumping, ping pong, etc. I have little or no interest an any of those things, but they obviously have a place since people do them. If people find enjoyment and challenge in doing something, who the hell are you to criticize?

Just do your thing and have a nice day.

Star wrote:

For the chip, they would have to test it for years.

Make it mandatory to wear, but not be used for DQs until they can study the data over a period of time.

They may determine that constant contact is not required, and set a maximum time of no contact on each stride.

Then add time penalties instead of DQs, except when missed contacts are egregious.

I flip around the TV channels and I see curling. It's not there a lot of the time but it's there more than track is. If people can get interested in watching curling they could conceivably get interested in watching race walking. That's not saying that they will, but it's not inconceivable.

I'm big on any sport, and follow some of the most niche things ever.

But racewalking is just stupid, and always has been. At least within the context of the Olympics, there are several sports that are no longer contested. This needs to be one of them. Otherwise, it needs to remain about as visible as Sky Surfing and Street Luge.

In other news, the IAAF responds to opposition by cancelling racewalking due to its ridiculousness of being an exercise parade.

Definitely include the shoe sensors and just set it up like the ski biathlon where there's a penalty loop based on missed shots. On a set course for each long loop completed, add a 100m short loop that must be added for each infraction on a long loop. It's rough for the skiers and can make the difference in close races.

trotters and pacers wrote:

No kidding. The chips would show that every walker is actually running, it just can't generally be seen by the naked eye.

The whole field would be DQed before they even left the stadium.

It IS a lot like trotters and pacers. Let's see how fast a horse can run without letting it actually run. The difference being that with a four-legged animal, the difference in gait (sequence of footfalls, not just float phase) is very different between a trot, a pace, and a gallop. It's easy to determine whether a horse should be DQ'd for breaking stride.

runn wrote:

I saw this on Let's Run and I agree 100% (I use it all the time):

Race Walking is like having a contest to see who can whisper the loudest.

Yes, it's hard- a lot of things are hard- construction work is hard, cutting wood is hard, but I just personally don't think there is any place in the sport for race walking.

I see it as the butterfly in swimming - it's basically handicapping everyone to see who can cover distance in a strange way.

Copying swimming's freestyle, breaststroke, backstroke and butterfly, maybe we should have olympic running, walking, hopping and handstand walking.

dunes runner wrote:

Star wrote:

For the chip, they would have to test it for years.

Make it mandatory to wear, but not be used for DQs until they can study the data over a period of time.

They may determine that constant contact is not required, and set a maximum time of no contact on each stride.

Then add time penalties instead of DQs, except when missed contacts are egregious.

I love this idea, I don't think you should get any warnings and just have a box where they have to serve their penalty. Perhaps it is 60 seconds for the first infraction, 2 mins for the second on up.

You can say that almost any sport is stupid and always has been. You just don't usually say it about the sports you like. I kind of like the triple jump. But if I really think about it, I think it's stupid. I get the long jump, let's see how far you can jump with a running start. But what's the point of having two little jumps before the big one? To me, it's stupid though kind of interesting. If you want a second jumping event, bring back the standing long jump. And as often comes up in these discussions about race walking, why do swimmers have races where they're restricted to using a particular kind of stroke? Is the butterfly any less stupid than the race walks and if so, why?

dunes runner wrote:

Star wrote:

For the chip, they would have to test it for years.

Make it mandatory to wear, but not be used for DQs until they can study the data over a period of time.

They may determine that constant contact is not required, and set a maximum time of no contact on each stride.

Then add time penalties instead of DQs, except when missed contacts are egregious.

You can't add time penalties.

The person who crosses the line first wins.

You can't have the race end for everyone and then have a computer reshuffle the finishing places after adding time penalties that are created in a subjective matter.

hard work wrote:

runn wrote:

I saw this on Let's Run and I agree 100% (I use it all the time):

Race Walking is like having a contest to see who can whisper the loudest.

Yes, it's hard- a lot of things are hard- construction work is hard, cutting wood is hard, but I just personally don't think there is any place in the sport for race walking.

I see it as the butterfly in swimming - it's basically handicapping everyone to see who can cover distance in a strange way.

Copying swimming's freestyle, breaststroke, backstroke and butterfly, maybe we should have olympic running, walking, hopping and handstand walking.

Exactly. Then Bolt would have won as many medals as Phelps, etc.

Don't they already have "pit stops" where they make you wait for a certain time if you have a penalty?

Go, Laura! wrote:

Yes,

Reading the Save The Race Walking website linked in that AW piece ... They're not against the proposed insoles but just concerned that this technology is adequately tested first before being used in competition and then, if it is deemed a good solution, that it should be available for use at all races. They accuse the IAAF of being secretive about a lot of the detail and plans for implementation.

I think you mean "Save The Racewalking website," not "Save The Race Walking website." The latter sounds like a website for nationalistic/racist walking enthusiasts.

Drainthefecesswamp wrote:

Go, Laura! wrote:

Yes,

Reading the Save The Race Walking website linked in that AW piece ... They're not against the proposed insoles but just concerned that this technology is adequately tested first before being used in competition and then, if it is deemed a good solution, that it should be available for use at all races. They accuse the IAAF of being secretive about a lot of the detail and plans for implementation.

I think you mean "Save The Racewalking website," not "Save The Race Walking website." The latter sounds like a website for nationalistic/racist walking enthusiasts.

Nobody thought that.

RWer wrote:

If you're a distance runner, other people rip your sport as well.

People get involved in all sorts of things, eating contests, nascar, video gaming, line dancing, triple jumping, ping pong, etc.

Just do your thing and have a nice day.

I bet if you asked the general public to rank all those activities in terms of legitimate competition, 99% of people would rank everything you mentioned as more legitimate than race walking. The 1% that didnt either compete in the race walk or were confused by the question.

Mugician wrote:

RWer wrote:

If you're a distance runner, other people rip your sport as well.

People get involved in all sorts of things, eating contests, nascar, video gaming, line dancing, triple jumping, ping pong, etc.

Just do your thing and have a nice day.

I bet if you asked the general public to rank all those activities in terms of legitimate competition, 99% of people would rank everything you mentioned as more legitimate than race walking. The 1% that didnt either compete in the race walk or were confused by the question.

You may be correct if your general public lives in the US. Outside the US there is considerably more interest in race walking. Robert Heffernan is a reasonably big name in Irish sports. When we had guys like Ron Laird and Larry Young who contended for and occasionally Olympic medals race walking was viewed more favorably here than it si now, though it was always a niche sport.

Mugician wrote:

RWer wrote:

If you're a distance runner, other people rip your sport as well.

People get involved in all sorts of things, eating contests, nascar, video gaming, line dancing, triple jumping, ping pong, etc.

Just do your thing and have a nice day.

I bet if you asked the general public to rank all those activities in terms of legitimate competition, 99% of people would rank everything you mentioned as more legitimate than race walking. The 1% that didnt either compete in the race walk or were confused by the question.

Yes, in much of America. In other countries, not so much.

Depends what you grow up seeing.

Honestly, I think much of the anti-walk talk stems from either immaturity, inflated ego, or insecurity. It's no different than playground bullying mentality. It's people ripping things they wouldn't do because they want the things they do to seem more meaningful. And anyone who has this mentality is, for the most part, not capable of seeing their own actions objectively (and therefore not worth arguing with).