Back in the old ITA days they used similar lights for their indoor meets.
Back in the old ITA days they used similar lights for their indoor meets.
rojo wrote:
My thoughts.
1) I think the lighted rail is really cool. Personally, down the road, I'd much rather see the sport get rid of human rabbits and just use a robotic light like this.
I think the main benefit -- a big one -- is that it keeps the pacers on pace.
Bram Som knows that his days as a pacer are numbered, so why not make money for himself as he prevents other pacers from earning money and possibly replacing him as one of the all-time great pacers. However, this won't make pacers go away because they still serve the physical function of enabling other runners to run more efficiently behind them by blocking the wind and the psychological function of having someone to keep up with.
The IAAF was probably paid by the company to allow this (no, not graft or kickbacks, "sponsorship fees"). That's what Som means by "we worked with the IAAF" to get this in. Just as Jos Hermens worked with the IAAF to keep his runners from being exposed for their "work" with Operation Puerto, Healing Hans, and big Pharma, and just as many athletes "worked" with the now disgraced former IAAF head and his son to keep positive tests hidden, so too did they work with the IAAF to cheat.
Can we also make track downhill? It would be good for spectators.
Nothing new wrote:
Cavorty wrote:
They had the same thing in the 'A' races at the Night of the 10000m PBs at Parliament Hill a couple of weeks ago....
Yes, and another event in Europe as well. The owners are too busy enjoying non-running BS threads to notice, apparently.
I was going to watch the race and even embed the stream in the QOD spot but then realized it was behind a paywall and became annoyed. In hindsight, doesn't look like I missed much. I hyped that race up pretty good nonetheless.
I agree - Electronic pacing isn't necessarily a bad thing but it is against the rules. If the IAAF wants to allow it they should go through the process of changing the rule rather than "approving" it on an ad hoc basis.
True, they were used way back in the early '70s. The old ITA actually had some pretty cool ideas but the powers that be did all they could to kill it.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Track_Association
runnersweb wrote:
Back in the old ITA days they used similar lights for their indoor meets.
Hurdle Guy wrote:
I agree - Electronic pacing isn't necessarily a bad thing but it is against the rules. If the IAAF wants to allow it they should go through the process of changing the rule rather than "approving" it on an ad hoc basis.
It could be that they do intend to revise the rules but want to see it in operation in a few real world situations before revising the rules.
Team sports such as Ice Hockey have an easier path when it comes to dry running rule changes. They can institute a rule change at a lower league level and see how it works out. If it works well they can introduce it at the top level, if not, then they quietly drop it. The only way you could do a similar thing in Track & Field would be to try it at an event such as the NCAA championships. But as they are races for position rather than races for time, the lights may just be ignored.
The lights should be used WITH pacers to keep them on track. It would expose some of the abysmal pacing (especially for women) we have seen in IAAF events. More controversial: allow male pacers for women, especially for events with E Euro/Chinese records ;)
zcxvzxcv wrote:
Bram Som knows that his days as a pacer are numbered, so why not make money for himself as he prevents other pacers from earning money and possibly replacing him as one of the all-time great pacers. However, this won't make pacers go away because they still serve the physical function of enabling other runners to run more efficiently behind them by blocking the wind and the psychological function of having someone to keep up with.
The IAAF was probably paid by the company to allow this (no, not graft or kickbacks, "sponsorship fees"). That's what Som means by "we worked with the IAAF" to get this in. Just as Jos Hermens worked with the IAAF to keep his runners from being exposed for their "work" with Operation Puerto, Healing Hans, and big Pharma, and just as many athletes "worked" with the now disgraced former IAAF head and his son to keep positive tests hidden, so too did they work with the IAAF to cheat.
Besides the absolute dorkiest of the dorks who follow distance running closely, do you honestly anyone thinks about someone being an 'all time great' pacer?
The computer should be disqualified immediately!
Raddison wrote:
rojo wrote:
The sport is kind of in a weird spot.
You run the Olympic marathon in shoes that no one else has (except for a couple of other Nike athletes), that clearly give you a huge advantage and get no ban.
The shoe thing needs to be clarified. Hopefully we get that soon.
The shoes are a bigger issue. Pacing lights are like clocks or the lap counter - everyone gets to see the same thing, there is no individual advantage. Prototype shoes only being available to certain athletes is another matter. Also, does the shoe company have to get the IAAF's permission to have prototypes at a meet? Or can they just give the athlete a pair a few days before the meet and not tell the IAAF anything?
The lights have been around since the old ITA pro track circuit (1972-1976).
Every brand of shoes has prototypes for their elite athletes.
So, it is not really an issue.
For fans this is a nice improvement. I don't see lights giving much more advantage versus hearing lap splits from the announcer or coach from the stands, or runners looking at a running time trackside.
This benefits fans in the stands. Imagine a 5000 at the Prefontaine meet in the new Hayward Field. Wouldn't it be nice for them to display an Olympics or World Champs qualifier pace? They could also show different colors for American record, World record... multiple lights at the same time. Perhaps this only is turned on for the last half of the race and only if the runners are close to one of these marks.
Human rabbits must be more advantageous to runners because of less wind resistance.
rojo wrote:
Nothing new wrote:
Yes, and another event in Europe as well. The owners are too busy enjoying non-running BS threads to notice, apparently.
I was going to watch the race and even embed the stream in the QOD spot but then realized it was behind a paywall and became annoyed. In hindsight, doesn't look like I missed much. I hyped that race up pretty good nonetheless.
The women’s race was incredibly high quality and pretty exciting too.
That is not a technical device. Period. That's why it's legal.
Next.
Runner-9999 wrote:
Also another question, will these be allowed on championship races where we traditionally don’t see rabits/pace makers?
Is this a serious question?
The IAAF Council approved the use of this technology to help enhance the spectator experience. It will be in the new rule book
144.4 allowed
(h) Electronic lights or similar appliance
indicating progressive times during a
race, including of a relevant record.
Progress wrote:
Good. Yet another "job" that humans have been replaced at by smart AI.
Slow nonelite 10K runners will need a new income source other than rabbitting.
A few lights on a timer is hardly artificial intelligence any more than the mechanical rabbit used for decades in dog racing.
They don't get to draft a light either.
Technically it's against the rules
it's not a pacer, it just lights up when the athletes run by....
only the crowd can see the lights, the athletes can't....
rojo wrote:
Did anyone see what they used as a pacemaker in Hengelo? They had computerized lights on the rail running a perfectly even 65 seconds. Take a look at this video I took from the NOP instagram page.
https://youtu.be/Frjdfu81RjQMy thoughts.
1) I think the lighted rail is really cool. Personally, down the road, I'd much rather see the sport get rid of human rabbits and just use a robotic light like this.
2) Despite me loving it, how in the world is this legal? Here is the IAAF rule on pacing.
IAAF Rule 144.3. wrote:
Assistance not Allowed
3. For the purpose of this Rule, the following examples shall be
considered assistance, and are therefore not allowed:
(a) Pacing in races by persons not participating in the same race, by
athletes lapped or about to be lapped or by any kind of technical
device (other than those permitted under Rule 144.4(d))
Here is part 144.4(d):
Assistance Allowed
(d) Heart rate or speed distance monitors or stride sensors or similar
devices carried or worn personally by athletes during an event,
provided that such device cannot be used to communicate with
any other person.
Editor's note: There is a large addendum at the end of the rule that says the following:
Rule 144 has been the subject of constant change in recent years to reflect
the way in which athletics is conducted, to respect the role of coaches, to
manage innovation and new products, etc. The IAAF will continue to
respond to new products and trends as soon as they become common
place during events and competitions.
Changes to these Rules are designed to facilitate the athletes’
participation in the competition as much as possible and to reduce
unnecessary conflict between athletes/coaches and the officials. Each of
these Rules should be interpreted in this light whilst always ensuring the
competition is conducted fairly to all.
Rule 144.3(e) however makes it clear that the officials should not assist
any athlete beyond what is required of their role – and specifically states
as an example that officials should not provide details of the take-off
position in jumping events, other than for the purpose of indicating the
point of “impact” in a foul jump in Horizontal Jumps.
So my reading of the rules indicates that pacing by technical devices is strictly prohibited unless it's "carried or worn personally" by the athlete. That clearly wasn't the case yesterday.
Am I misinterpreting something?
If not, I think the IAAF should allow the times for qualifiers for Worlds but issue a warning for future races that such a stunt is illegal (and perhaps strike all the times from the alltime lists).
Then change the rule to allow the lights to be used as a pacer.
Same thing was done at the Night of PBs 10K in England. I didn't hear any complaints.
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Strava thinks the London Marathon times improved 12 minutes last year thanks to supershoes
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Clayton Murphy is giving some great insight into his training.
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
NAU women have no excuse - they should win it all at 2024 NCAA XC