login
IAAF Track and Field Championships
-
No new posts
|
 2011-08-26 5:17 PM |
Champion  6931      Bellingham, Washington |  Subject: IAAF Track and Field ChampionshipsLinks for the watching of the World Championships. http://tracksuperfan.com/track-on-tv-and-the-web
First Day events: http://daegu2011.iaaf.org/ResultsByDate.aspx Edited by BellinghamSpence 2011-08-26 5:18 PM |
| 2011-08-26 6:51 PM in reply to: #3661428 |
Pro 4174 Keller, Texas | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships One of the reasons I am so happy that Direct TV now has universal sports |
| 2011-08-27 12:06 PM in reply to: #3661428 |
Melon Presser 52116 | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships I'm gonna be glued to the TV tomorrow night -- that's when (my time) Usain Bolt oughtta be trying to tie Carl Lewis's record of winning the 100m three years in a row ... |
| 2011-08-28 11:58 AM in reply to: #3661428 |
Elite 4564 Boise | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships So as not to spoil anything, I'll just say they need to get rid of the 1 false start rule. |
| 2011-08-28 3:54 PM in reply to: #3662733 |
Champion 6931 Bellingham, Washington | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships Agree, stupid rule. |
| 2011-08-28 4:15 PM in reply to: #3661428 |
Pro 4174 Keller, Texas | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships Crawl on ABC gave it away |
| 2011-08-28 8:57 PM in reply to: #3661428 |
Master 1404 Saratoga Springs, Utah | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships You can see video over on letsrun.com that shows the winner should have been the one DQed. |
| 2011-08-29 9:15 AM in reply to: #3661428 |
Champion 6931 Bellingham, Washington | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships Nice to see Trey Hardee and Aston Eaton went 1-2 in the Decathalon. With Bryan Clay being hurt, could have been 123. Can Bolt come back in the 200 and blister the track to show he is in great form? Can Felix win the 200-400 double? Doesn't David Oliver have the widest shoulders? Huge deltoids. |
| 2011-08-29 9:23 AM in reply to: #3661492 |
Champion 7347 SRQ, FL | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships dodgersmom - 2011-08-26 7:51 PM One of the reasons I am so happy that Direct TV now has universal sports It's only a trial. They are going to add it to one of the overpriced sports packages in a month or so |
| 2011-08-29 9:24 AM in reply to: #3661428 |
Extreme Veteran 586 Edgewater, CO | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships 2 great races today in the W100 and W400! |
| 2011-08-29 10:28 AM in reply to: #3663186 |
Champion 15211 Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships gerald12 - 2011-08-28 8:57 PM You can see video over on letsrun.com that shows the winner should have been the one DQed. How so? ETA: Nevermind. I checked it again. I'm not convinced. Edited by crowny2 2011-08-29 10:30 AM |
| 2011-08-29 10:31 AM in reply to: #3663792 |
Runner | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships crowny2 - 2011-08-29 11:28 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-28 8:57 PM You can see video over on letsrun.com that shows the winner should have been the one DQed. How so? The argument is that Bolt went because Blake twitched, which would be considered a false start. The issue is that the refs missed Blake's movement, and also with the change in the starting rules that were recently imposed (it used to be that the first false start was a freebie, but applied to the entire field, then the next one was the DQ, no matter who). Sprint starts suck, because there is so much on the refs and the start is critical to performance. If anyone ever had a long hold, they know exactly what I mean. |
| 2011-08-29 10:43 AM in reply to: #3663807 |
Champion 15211 Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships Scout7 - 2011-08-29 10:31 AM crowny2 - 2011-08-29 11:28 AM The argument is that Bolt went because Blake twitched, which would be considered a false start. The issue is that the refs missed Blake's movement, and also with the change in the starting rules that were recently imposed (it used to be that the first false start was a freebie, but applied to the entire field, then the next one was the DQ, no matter who). Sprint starts suck, because there is so much on the refs and the start is critical to performance. If anyone ever had a long hold, they know exactly what I mean.gerald12 - 2011-08-28 8:57 PM You can see video over on letsrun.com that shows the winner should have been the one DQed. How so? Yeah. I went back and watched it. And I've done sprint starts. Used to be a 400m hurdler as well as high jumper in college. I hated long holding starters. Would completely throw you out of your rythym. That said, I'm not 100% convinced. Then again, what do I know. I'm just a triathlete.  |
| 2011-08-29 10:54 AM in reply to: #3663839 |
Runner | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships crowny2 - 2011-08-29 11:43 AM Scout7 - 2011-08-29 10:31 AM crowny2 - 2011-08-29 11:28 AM The argument is that Bolt went because Blake twitched, which would be considered a false start. The issue is that the refs missed Blake's movement, and also with the change in the starting rules that were recently imposed (it used to be that the first false start was a freebie, but applied to the entire field, then the next one was the DQ, no matter who). Sprint starts suck, because there is so much on the refs and the start is critical to performance. If anyone ever had a long hold, they know exactly what I mean.gerald12 - 2011-08-28 8:57 PM You can see video over on letsrun.com that shows the winner should have been the one DQed. How so? Yeah. I went back and watched it. And I've done sprint starts. Used to be a 400m hurdler as well as high jumper in college. I hated long holding starters. Would completely throw you out of your rythym. That said, I'm not 100% convinced. Then again, what do I know. I'm just a triathlete. Not convinced in regards to what part of the issue? I am guessing you mean that Blake's movement caused Bolt to FS. If so, yeah, it's debatable and Bolt hasn't really said anything one way or the other (makes sense, they are teammates and training partners). But, the argument could be made that Blake was Bolt's biggest competition, and if Bolt had eyes on anyone in the field it would be Blake, so with that in mind any movement from Blake could have caused a jump. In the end, I think the bigger issue is going to be how the start rules change (if at all). |
| 2011-08-29 11:07 AM in reply to: #3663869 |
Champion 15211 Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships Scout7 - 2011-08-29 10:54 AM crowny2 - 2011-08-29 11:43 AM Not convinced in regards to what part of the issue? I am guessing you mean that Blake's movement caused Bolt to FS. If so, yeah, it's debatable and Bolt hasn't really said anything one way or the other (makes sense, they are teammates and training partners). But, the argument could be made that Blake was Bolt's biggest competition, and if Bolt had eyes on anyone in the field it would be Blake, so with that in mind any movement from Blake could have caused a jump. In the end, I think the bigger issue is going to be how the start rules change (if at all).Scout7 - 2011-08-29 10:31 AM crowny2 - 2011-08-29 11:28 AM The argument is that Bolt went because Blake twitched, which would be considered a false start. The issue is that the refs missed Blake's movement, and also with the change in the starting rules that were recently imposed (it used to be that the first false start was a freebie, but applied to the entire field, then the next one was the DQ, no matter who). Sprint starts suck, because there is so much on the refs and the start is critical to performance. If anyone ever had a long hold, they know exactly what I mean.gerald12 - 2011-08-28 8:57 PM You can see video over on letsrun.com that shows the winner should have been the one DQed. How so? Yeah. I went back and watched it. And I've done sprint starts. Used to be a 400m hurdler as well as high jumper in college. I hated long holding starters. Would completely throw you out of your rythym. That said, I'm not 100% convinced. Then again, what do I know. I'm just a triathlete. Yeah. This. That being said, I was NEVER a fan of the one and done when they came up with it last year. Just crazy. I know they were trying to stop guys from jumping and giving the whole field a FS and therefore potentially making a fast starter just a tick slower out of the blocks. But this, to me, is even worse. I don't envy the rule makers, that's for certain. |
| 2011-08-29 5:20 PM in reply to: #3661428 |
Master 1404 Saratoga Springs, Utah | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships What I find interesting is that this false start rule is now such a big issue now that Bolt is a victim of it. I understand he is the biggest star in T&F, but still. He was not the only defending champion DQed because of a FS. At the 2009 Worlds Bolt when questioned about the rule, stated that he was for the rule and that he would never be effected by it because he does not false start. I wish they would make a change to the rule. Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! |
| 2011-08-30 9:06 AM in reply to: #3664801 |
Extreme Veteran 586 Edgewater, CO | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? |
| 2011-08-30 9:31 AM in reply to: #3665444 |
Extreme Veteran 6066 Montreal, QC | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. |
| 2011-08-30 10:14 AM in reply to: #3665493 |
Champion 15211 Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships LockOut - 2011-08-30 9:31 AM jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. Now THAT is an interesting one. And one I like. ETA: and for the record, I was never a fan of one and done. Edited by crowny2 2011-08-30 10:14 AM |
| 2011-08-30 10:18 AM in reply to: #3665586 |
Extreme Veteran 6066 Montreal, QC | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships crowny2 - 2011-08-30 11:14 AM LockOut - 2011-08-30 9:31 AM jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. Now THAT is an interesting one. And one I like. ETA: and for the record, I was never a fan of one and done. I never followed T&F, so I don't really remember the history, but I remember the 1 for the race, then 1 and done, and I really remember people FSing on purpose. Especially on such a grand stage, with nerves, and everything that is riding on the races, 1 and done seems a bit stringent. |
| 2011-08-30 10:34 AM in reply to: #3665493 |
Runner | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships LockOut - 2011-08-30 10:31 AM jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. At one point (and in some races they may still do this), they gave everyone a freebie for each race. That made for a long time to get to the actual race (relatively speaking). Of course, the idea of one freebie for the entire event seems an interesting compromise. Another option I've seen mentioned would be to eliminate the start as a source of contention. In other words, the timing would be standardized. This standardization would make it more about the actual race than about the ability to second guess the starter, and FS would result in an automatic DQ (like the current rules). |
| 2011-08-30 10:36 AM in reply to: #3665626 |
Extreme Veteran 6066 Montreal, QC | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships Scout7 - 2011-08-30 11:34 AM LockOut - 2011-08-30 10:31 AM At one point (and in some races they may still do this), they gave everyone a freebie for each race. That made for a long time to get to the actual race (relatively speaking). Of course, the idea of one freebie for the entire event seems an interesting compromise. Another option I've seen mentioned would be to eliminate the start as a source of contention. In other words, the timing would be standardized. This standardization would make it more about the actual race than about the ability to second guess the starter, and FS would result in an automatic DQ (like the current rules).jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. Like... the Christmas Tree in drag racing? Or basically make it a TT, timing starts when the feet leave the block? |
| 2011-08-30 10:47 AM in reply to: #3665634 |
Champion 17756 SoCal | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships LockOut - 2011-08-30 8:36 AM Scout7 - 2011-08-30 11:34 AM LockOut - 2011-08-30 10:31 AM At one point (and in some races they may still do this), they gave everyone a freebie for each race. That made for a long time to get to the actual race (relatively speaking). Of course, the idea of one freebie for the entire event seems an interesting compromise. Another option I've seen mentioned would be to eliminate the start as a source of contention. In other words, the timing would be standardized. This standardization would make it more about the actual race than about the ability to second guess the starter, and FS would result in an automatic DQ (like the current rules).jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. Like... the Christmas Tree in drag racing? Or basically make it a TT, timing starts when the feet leave the block? The 100 m cannot be a bracket race IMO, it should stay who crosses the line first wins. For the rule I think as it stands now its lame. |
| 2011-08-30 10:53 AM in reply to: #3665657 |
Extreme Veteran 6066 Montreal, QC | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships Big Appa - 2011-08-30 11:47 AM LockOut - 2011-08-30 8:36 AM Scout7 - 2011-08-30 11:34 AM LockOut - 2011-08-30 10:31 AM At one point (and in some races they may still do this), they gave everyone a freebie for each race. That made for a long time to get to the actual race (relatively speaking). Of course, the idea of one freebie for the entire event seems an interesting compromise. Another option I've seen mentioned would be to eliminate the start as a source of contention. In other words, the timing would be standardized. This standardization would make it more about the actual race than about the ability to second guess the starter, and FS would result in an automatic DQ (like the current rules).jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. Like... the Christmas Tree in drag racing? Or basically make it a TT, timing starts when the feet leave the block? The 100 m cannot be a bracket race IMO, it should stay who crosses the line first wins. For the rule I think as it stands now its lame. I completely agree. I'm just trying to figure out which Scout was talking about. I imagine it would be more of an electric tone start as opposed to a human starter? |
| 2011-08-30 10:55 AM in reply to: #3665634 |
Runner | Subject: RE: IAAF Track and Field Championships LockOut - 2011-08-30 11:36 AM Scout7 - 2011-08-30 11:34 AM LockOut - 2011-08-30 10:31 AM At one point (and in some races they may still do this), they gave everyone a freebie for each race. That made for a long time to get to the actual race (relatively speaking). Of course, the idea of one freebie for the entire event seems an interesting compromise. Another option I've seen mentioned would be to eliminate the start as a source of contention. In other words, the timing would be standardized. This standardization would make it more about the actual race than about the ability to second guess the starter, and FS would result in an automatic DQ (like the current rules).jneugeba - 2011-08-30 10:06 AM gerald12 - 2011-08-29 4:20 PM Can you imagine false starting the decathlon 1500! The multi-events do not follow the same false-start rules. This is the question I keep coming back to. In the old rule (one charged to the field, then a DQ) in almost every single race there was gamesmanship and someone would jump the gun. Everyone knew it was coming. So after that it was still one-and-done, so how is that much different? Exactly, this doesn't change anything, in my eyes. An interesting take that I heard on the radio the other day: Each competitor gets 1 FS... in the entire event. From the heats, through to the finals. In the 3 or 4 races that you do, you can only FS once. Just a different idea that I hadn't heard before and I thought it makes sense. Like... the Christmas Tree in drag racing? Or basically make it a TT, timing starts when the feet leave the block? It would be more like the drag racing start. I agree with Appa that a TT start wouldn't be very good or effective for these types of races, and sort of ruins the purpose. Running races in general have been oriented towards who crosses the line first. ETA: A tone would work, or any other type of system really. The important aspect would be a known, standardized period of time between commands. Edited by Scout7 2011-08-30 10:56 AM |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK