Does anything need to be done about false starts? There weren't any false starts at any of the sprinting event finals this olympics. In the 90s, when everyone got 1 free false start before DQing, it would take 2-4 attempts before the 100m would actually happen. Then it was 1 free false start for the whole field, now it's any false start is automatically DQ. Ever since that change, hardly anyone false starts anymore. Seems like athletes know how to not false start and use to test the limits of what use to be allowed.
I hate the false start rule having no chill. Like, it's probably possible for a trained sprinter to react 0.09 after the gunshot, without it being a false start. The 0.1 rule is not really scientifically accurate.
– False start rule: Absolutely against changing it.
One of the reasons we have that 0.100 period is to make sure that the athletes wait until they hear the gun, in stead of anticipating and gambling.
If the 0.100 would be replaced by 0.000, we would surely see quite a lot of athletes trying to anticipate the gun …
And the best gembler would become champion, in stead of the fastets runner.
So changing this would effectively kill the sprint events.
– Pole vault, height detected by camera: Absolutely against it.
It would be a quite expensive setup. And as most countries (more or less) follow the World Athletic Technical Rules for T&F events on all levels, that would mean that there would be virtually no Pole Vault events, except for in the richest countries …
So changing this would effectively kill the pole vault event.
– Long Jump, removing the take-of board: Absolutely against it.
It would complicate the procedure for measuring the result, and we would need more volunteers (jury members) for this event.
In low-level competitions, we often have 2, 3 or 4 simpultaneous Long Jump events. And having to get more jury members for each of those locations would mean that even more clubs won't be able to hold a competition each year …
So changing this would effectively kill the long jump event.
False start rules have changed dramatically over the years. There is hardly a problem anymore. When I ran track in the late 60s, early 70s it was a huge problem.
I was at the Paris Olympics stadium on the pole vault final night. It commenced well before any other event and finished long after the other events (and great to see that everybody stuck around for the Duplantis WR). That's too long. Limiting the event to 6 jumps each (like other jump events) would take at least 30 minutes off the duration of that the pole vault final. There were 85 vaults taken so that could come down to 72 or fewer.
Another one I don't think is being discussed is the time and resource intensive decathlon. How about a pentathlon? A sprint (200m), a hurdles (110m), a jump (high), a throw (shot?) and a 1500m. It could be done in one day, or two evenings. Perhaps some of the athletes would like it?
And nobody talking about these pacemaker lights? As if modern runners don't have enough advantages over their predecessors!
They need some sort of automatic/modernised measuring system for the discus and the shot put in particular. The current situation is kind of embarrassing with championship titles potentially being determined by some senior citizen having to judge the landing from up to 20 meters away, not seldom blatantly in the wrong spot.
My opinion as a former jumper with 10 years of experience: -Teams: sounds interesting, maybe once or twice a year only -False start: Terrible idea, current system of 0.100 is better than 0.000, they should do a new study and find the actual time, probably in 0.070-0.085 zone -Pole vault: Terrible idea, I guess they are too tired of Mondo breaking record by 1cm every time -Long jump: Terrible idea, yes, it's frustrating to jump good but not hit the board properly, but this is what makes the event technical and challenging -Javelin: Ok I guess, but they should measure every throw, athlete will false start on purpose if the throw is very bad anyway. -Mile Steeple: Sounds interesting -Camera angles: Sounds great, lots of potential
Team event a good idea for say once a season ( I especially like the idea off top level athletes pick their names out off a hat to decide the teams can be nice and random like a fa cup draw) Maybe …but let’s not forget that world athletics themselves killed the original World Cup team format (8/9 teams and then the second format for good measure a decade later (4 teams normally 2 runners per race each) 🤦♂️…… that original format off having the host nation ( sometimes)the usa national team / team Americas/team Oceania/team Asia/team Africa and then finally European cups top 2 nations representing themselves with a team Europe for the rest off countries as 8-9 separate teams at an athletics meet i.m.o gave the World Cup a good balance and more importantly gave a bit off edge to the European cup beforehand especially the top nations who were trying to win it and/or get the second qualifying berth for entering their own national team at the World Cup… ok maybe they felt that the four regional teams 2nd format made it more equal overall and interesting competition but it only seems to have killed both team competitions World Cup and European cup 🤷♂️
Man the pole vault innovation as proposed here is terrible. I'm all for innovation (and trying this out is definitely encouraged!) but my honest feedback is hell no. The immediacy of clearing (or hitting) a height bar is crucial for the enjoyment of both the athletes and the spectators. Why make it some convoluted electronic system that will end up making people skeptical of their accuracy? Sometimes low technology solutions are all we need
Love the videography experimentation btw, obviously needs some ironing out but some shots are sick when used properly!
I think this with the jumping zone in long and triple jump is an excellent idea. It does not have to eradicate all the earlier results, because they were made under tougher conditions. I also think the strict rules about the relay races are unnecessary. If you have a 1600 m relay and four runners, you should be allowed to use them in the way you like. Your team might have someone run 600 m and someone else 200 m, for instance, depending on team tactics and capacity. That could create extremely exciting races.
I'm not/never was a track and field athlete (I did compete in a different sport for the U.S.) so my opinions are purely from an outsider. IMO the reaction time should be 0.000. Disqualifying someone for REACTING too quickly is absurd. I get that there is a physical threshold but for all intents and purposes is just assumed to be the human limit. If the time starts at 0.000 you can't false start at 0.001. This is probably going to set a lot of people off but I think the start of any race should be a countdown. A reaction time might make the race more exciting as you have an extra variable but aren't we trying to prove who is the fastest runner?
I do not like the pole vault change, it is bad for the spectators, it is bad for competitors and is bad for grassroots programs. Imagine knowing that you are training to get to an elite level and that when you get there the rules are different.
I go back and forth on the long jump, on one side you don't get an exact measurement of the long jump immediately anyways. I think if you have 6" of play and measure from where ever they jump, you will get a better idea of who the actual best jumper is. IMO you should be reducing the amount of disqualification barriers. That or just make the jump platform have a small void on the other side and you can toe over the void as much as you like but you risk rolling an ankle. Then you don't need a line judge.
the take–off "zone" has been used by blind long jumpers for a long time (by the way, blind long jump is incredible and absolutely worth a watch) so there is already precedent for its use. however, the board adds a level of skill to the event: it reduces the level to which it is a test of pure physical prowess.
all this being said, i am but a wheelchair racer with an interest in para-athletics as a whole, and i do not know enough to be able to say if this is a positive change or not. i do like the team event idea – finds a way to turn our very individual sport into a team affair.
I would have thought they could put a sensor in the tip of the javelin that automatically records the distance thrown, and it could be shown on a big screen immediately. The current method is time consuming involving measuring the distance and there's a health and safety issue too as in some rare cases an official has been injured by the javelin.
Having a false start rule be set at 0 means if any athlete starts before this time then they have definitely false started. If they try to anticipate the start they would risk disqualification, which I think is enough of a deterrent in a major championship.
Probs going back to documentaries after this. Maybe I'll do a deep dive on Grand Slam, but idk yet lol.
Quick edit: Meant to say 0.085-0.09 for the false start changes. Missed a decimal oops
Does anything need to be done about false starts? There weren't any false starts at any of the sprinting event finals this olympics. In the 90s, when everyone got 1 free false start before DQing, it would take 2-4 attempts before the 100m would actually happen. Then it was 1 free false start for the whole field, now it's any false start is automatically DQ. Ever since that change, hardly anyone false starts anymore. Seems like athletes know how to not false start and use to test the limits of what use to be allowed.
I hate the false start rule having no chill. Like, it's probably possible for a trained sprinter to react 0.09 after the gunshot, without it being a false start. The 0.1 rule is not really scientifically accurate.
– False start rule: Absolutely against changing it.
One of the reasons we have that 0.100 period is to make sure that the athletes wait until they hear the gun, in stead of anticipating and gambling.
If the 0.100 would be replaced by 0.000, we would surely see quite a lot of athletes trying to anticipate the gun …
And the best gembler would become champion, in stead of the fastets runner.
So changing this would effectively kill the sprint events.
– Pole vault, height detected by camera: Absolutely against it.
It would be a quite expensive setup. And as most countries (more or less) follow the World Athletic Technical Rules for T&F events on all levels, that would mean that there would be virtually no Pole Vault events, except for in the richest countries …
So changing this would effectively kill the pole vault event.
– Long Jump, removing the take-of board: Absolutely against it.
It would complicate the procedure for measuring the result, and we would need more volunteers (jury members) for this event.
In low-level competitions, we often have 2, 3 or 4 simpultaneous Long Jump events. And having to get more jury members for each of those locations would mean that even more clubs won't be able to hold a competition each year …
So changing this would effectively kill the long jump event.
False start rules have changed dramatically over the years. There is hardly a problem anymore. When I ran track in the late 60s, early 70s it was a huge problem.
I was at the Paris Olympics stadium on the pole vault final night. It commenced well before any other event and finished long after the other events (and great to see that everybody stuck around for the Duplantis WR). That's too long. Limiting the event to 6 jumps each (like other jump events) would take at least 30 minutes off the duration of that the pole vault final. There were 85 vaults taken so that could come down to 72 or fewer.
Another one I don't think is being discussed is the time and resource intensive decathlon. How about a pentathlon? A sprint (200m), a hurdles (110m), a jump (high), a throw (shot?) and a 1500m. It could be done in one day, or two evenings. Perhaps some of the athletes would like it?
And nobody talking about these pacemaker lights? As if modern runners don't have enough advantages over their predecessors!
Can you do a vid on Justin Knight
what needs to happen is for the women's hurdles height to be increased.
Honestly I say that the false start should stay but the .1 of the second dq that needs to go
They need some sort of automatic/modernised measuring system for the discus and the shot put in particular. The current situation is kind of embarrassing with championship titles potentially being determined by some senior citizen having to judge the landing from up to 20 meters away, not seldom blatantly in the wrong spot.
My opinion as a former jumper with 10 years of experience:
-Teams: sounds interesting, maybe once or twice a year only
-False start: Terrible idea, current system of 0.100 is better than 0.000, they should do a new study and find the actual time, probably in 0.070-0.085 zone
-Pole vault: Terrible idea, I guess they are too tired of Mondo breaking record by 1cm every time
-Long jump: Terrible idea, yes, it's frustrating to jump good but not hit the board properly, but this is what makes the event technical and challenging
-Javelin: Ok I guess, but they should measure every throw, athlete will false start on purpose if the throw is very bad anyway.
-Mile Steeple: Sounds interesting
-Camera angles: Sounds great, lots of potential
Team event a good idea for say once a season
( I especially like the idea off top level athletes pick their names out off a hat to decide the teams can be nice and random like a fa cup draw)
Maybe …but let’s not forget that world athletics themselves killed the original World Cup team format (8/9 teams and then the second format for good measure a decade later (4 teams normally 2 runners per race each) 🤦♂️…… that original format off having the host nation ( sometimes)the usa national team / team Americas/team Oceania/team Asia/team Africa and then finally European cups top 2 nations representing themselves with a team Europe for the rest off countries as 8-9 separate teams at an athletics meet i.m.o gave the World Cup a good balance and more importantly gave a bit off edge to the European cup beforehand especially the top nations who were trying to win it and/or get the second qualifying berth for entering their own national team at the World Cup… ok maybe they felt that the four regional teams 2nd format made it more equal overall and interesting competition but it only seems to have killed both team competitions World Cup and European cup 🤷♂️
False start needs a little fine tuning.
New LJ and PV are complete garbage.
Really like the teams idea.
Everything else seems fine.
Man the pole vault innovation as proposed here is terrible. I'm all for innovation (and trying this out is definitely encouraged!) but my honest feedback is hell no. The immediacy of clearing (or hitting) a height bar is crucial for the enjoyment of both the athletes and the spectators. Why make it some convoluted electronic system that will end up making people skeptical of their accuracy? Sometimes low technology solutions are all we need
Love the videography experimentation btw, obviously needs some ironing out but some shots are sick when used properly!
I like the idea of having a drone follow the javelin through the air, that looks very cool
I think this with the jumping zone in long and triple jump is an excellent idea. It does not have to eradicate all the earlier results, because they were made under tougher conditions.
I also think the strict rules about the relay races are unnecessary. If you have a 1600 m relay and four runners, you should be allowed to use them in the way you like. Your team might have someone run 600 m and someone else 200 m, for instance, depending on team tactics and capacity. That could create extremely exciting races.
I'm not/never was a track and field athlete (I did compete in a different sport for the U.S.) so my opinions are purely from an outsider. IMO the reaction time should be 0.000. Disqualifying someone for REACTING too quickly is absurd. I get that there is a physical threshold but for all intents and purposes is just assumed to be the human limit. If the time starts at 0.000 you can't false start at 0.001. This is probably going to set a lot of people off but I think the start of any race should be a countdown. A reaction time might make the race more exciting as you have an extra variable but aren't we trying to prove who is the fastest runner?
I do not like the pole vault change, it is bad for the spectators, it is bad for competitors and is bad for grassroots programs. Imagine knowing that you are training to get to an elite level and that when you get there the rules are different.
I go back and forth on the long jump, on one side you don't get an exact measurement of the long jump immediately anyways. I think if you have 6" of play and measure from where ever they jump, you will get a better idea of who the actual best jumper is. IMO you should be reducing the amount of disqualification barriers. That or just make the jump platform have a small void on the other side and you can toe over the void as much as you like but you risk rolling an ankle. Then you don't need a line judge.
Why no mixed 4×100
the take–off "zone" has been used by blind long jumpers for a long time (by the way, blind long jump is incredible and absolutely worth a watch) so there is already precedent for its use. however, the board adds a level of skill to the event: it reduces the level to which it is a test of pure physical prowess.
all this being said, i am but a wheelchair racer with an interest in para-athletics as a whole, and i do not know enough to be able to say if this is a positive change or not. i do like the team event idea – finds a way to turn our very individual sport into a team affair.
If there's one thing I could change, I would give them back the one free false start.
By far the most annoying rule change for me.
I would have thought they could put a sensor in the tip of the javelin that automatically records the distance thrown, and it could be shown on a big screen immediately. The current method is time consuming involving measuring the distance and there's a health and safety issue too as in some rare cases an official has been injured by the javelin.
Having a false start rule be set at 0 means if any athlete starts before this time then they have definitely false started. If they try to anticipate the start they would risk disqualification, which I think is enough of a deterrent in a major championship.
In germany they have a 1500m sc for youth and a 2000m sc for all ages
I really don’t see the need to change any rules regarding the technicalities of each event.
As much as VAR has improved some decision making in Football, but it has killed some aspect of the game with excessive delays.
Rules should only be changed to eliminate unfairness between competitors. That’s it.