Track and Field (and Road) Athletics

[Gavin Chipper]

I think Warholm ain't too shabby at the 400 flat Gevin

But would he be an Olympic gold medal contender?

[JimBentley]

I think Warholm ain't too shabby at the 400 flat Gevin

But would he be an Olympic gold medal contender?

No, his best time for 400m flat is 44.87 so he'd be unlikely to even make the Olympic final.

Before I shut up about the US Olympic Trials, another athlete to watch in Tokyo will definitely be JuVaughn Harrison, who was trying for the unusual long jump/high jump double. I've occasionally seen heptathletes enter both events at one-off meetings as a way of getting in some practice before a championships, but never someone trying to qualify for both as main events.

Anyway, both events were held on the same day at the trials and he won both of them, long jump with 8.47m and high jump with a more modest 2.33m (although his PB set earlier in the season is 2.36). It's the first time anyone has qualified for both events at the Olympics since legendary decathlete Jim Thorpe did so in 1912. Thorpe finished 4th in the high jump and 7th in the long jump at those Olympics and barring catastrophes, Harrison should comfortably outdo that and possibly get medals in both.

[Paul Anderson]

Stockholm Diamond League BBC2 at 3pm

[Gavin Chipper]

Before I shut up about the US Olympic Trials, another athlete to watch in Tokyo will definitely be JuVaughn Harrison, who was trying for the unusual long jump/high jump double. I've occasionally seen heptathletes enter both events at one-off meetings as a way of getting in some practice before a championships, but never someone trying to qualify for both as main events.

Anyway, both events were held on the same day at the trials and he won both of them, long jump with 8.47m and high jump with a more modest 2.33m (although his PB set earlier in the season is 2.36). It's the first time anyone has qualified for both events at the Olympics since legendary decathlete Jim Thorpe did so in 1912. Thorpe finished 4th in the high jump and 7th in the long jump at those Olympics and barring catastrophes, Harrison should comfortably outdo that and possibly get medals in both.

This sounds pretty insane. It's the sort of thing you'd imagine someone doubling up with in the "olden days" (like 1912), but not today.

[Ian Volante]

Stockholm Diamond League BBC2 at 3pm

Ooh. Oh.

[Gavin Chipper]

I was wondering what you lot might make of this case of a teenager (he would have been 13 at the start of this period and 14 by the end) who used to come to my parkrun. He was a member of a local boxing club (quite a few of them come to the parkrun) and his dad (I assume it was his dad) is a massive geezer type bloke to look at him.

Anyway, he had been a similar level to me and on 11th March 2017 he set a new PB of 19:02. And we'll use that as our starting point. He pulled that down quite quickly, culminating in a time of 18:23 on 3rd June 2017. This was a decent improvement in that time, but nothing massively strange I thought at the time. But he then started to struggle over the next few months and was unable to match his previous form. I spoke to him about it and he said it might be that he'd been overtraining. Anyway, then this run of results happened:

2nd September - 19:57
9th September - 19:24
16th September - 19:05
30th September - 18:44
7th October - 18:01 (PB)
14th October - 18:22
4th November - 17:31 (PB)
11th November - 17:56

And that's all there is. He did come a few times after that, but never registered his time - he often didn't if he got a poor time. And that's the thing. Something happened and he was suddenly unable to run quickly again - a little bit like what happened in the middle of the year but more noticeable this time because he'd been so fast. Bear in mind also that this is a slow course so his PB of 17:31 could be worth 17:00 or even just under on a track or other fast course. Anyway, he then disappeared off the running scene completely, and was rumoured to be doing weightlifting.

Is there anything in that to be worthy of discussion?

[Paul Anderson]

Sounds like a sporting family...maybe he had other options?

[Phil H]

I'm still 50:50 on whether the suggestion is that this dude took a course of steroids just for a seventh-place finish in Braintree parkrun.

[Jon O'Neill]

I'm still 50:50 on whether the suggestion is that this dude took a course of steroids just for a seventh-place finish in Braintree parkrun.

This is how I read it as well. Perhaps he is serving a ban.

[Gavin Chipper]

I'm still 50:50 on whether the suggestion is that this dude took a course of steroids just for a seventh-place finish in Braintree parkrun.

This is how I read it as well. Perhaps he is serving a ban.

I'm surprised you're only 50:50, Phil.

I think if you just look at the figures in the abstract, they might not mean much to you. But having watched this guy's progress (and also the slumps) and having seen the improvement curve of other promising young runners, the whole thing just doesn't ring true. It doesn't seem realistic. And while I used to sometimes suggest to people as a joke that he must have been on drugs (as if a 13/14-year-old would take drugs to improve his running), the more I think about it, the more I think that it's actually the most realistic explanation. And I think maybe the idea was that if he got to a certain level and then came off the drugs, he'd be able to keep the standard and go up from there. But this failed to work and because he didn't want to just be on drugs the whole time, he gave up instead.

And it's not that he did it to come 7th at the parkrun. He actually came first a few times as it happens, but he probably had his sights set higher. That sort of time at 14 predicts a very fast adult.

[Jon O'Neill]

Definitely on testosterone. Either juicing for the local parkrun, or going through puberty. Absolutely impossible to say which given the facts.

[Gavin Chipper]

The testosterone of puberty doesn't explain the performance/time graph. Not even close. Geezer was on drugs, mate.

[Phil H]

I don't know enough either way to know how big a difference drugs make. Obviously enough to be worth it at a certain level, but I assume a clean Ben Johnson would still have been comfortably sub-11, at least.

[Jon O'Neill]

The testosterone of puberty doesn't explain the performance/time graph. Not even close.

Source?

[Gavin Chipper]

The testosterone of puberty doesn't explain the performance/time graph. Not even close.

Source?

My analysis is the source. As I say, it's not just the improvement. Some runners are obscenely talented or maybe find the optimum training plan and will improve a lot in a short space of time. But they don't normally suddenly stop being able to run in such a short time afterwards. And then, having reached the level they did, just give up on the sport completely so quickly. It's a look at the totality of the evidence, not just how quickly he improved.

[Gavin Chipper]

Yeah, that was what I was alluding to in my post above about the guy in the Swansea bus crash. Maybe I was being too oblique.

Genuinely missed that, sorry!

In other athletics news, it's a shame that the new sprint sensation, Sha'Carri Richardson, will miss the Olympics 100m due to (of all things) a positive cannabis test. She's only 21 and has already gone 10.72 this season and was widely expected to better this. Even if she had been there though, she'd still only have been second favourite behind Shelley-Ann Fraser-Price, who recently became the second fastest woman ever behind Flo-Jo, with a 10.63 at the Jamaican trials. The 200m could be fast too, with Gabi Thomas recently becoming the second fastest woman in that event (behind Flo-Jo again of course) with a 21.61 at the US trials. It's all been happening this season!

There's a BBC article about Richardson and the bannedness of cannabis here. We also had a bit of a discusion on the subject here.

[Fred Mumford]

Question for the older members - Michael Johnson first entered my consciousness in 1990, when he ran a 200m in Edinburgh in 19.85 despite an enormous headwind. I thought that he would have easily smashed the world record in better conditions, and he later told Brendan Foster that he'd have gone under 19 seconds if it hadn't been windy (which he obviously wouldn't, but still...).

In trying to find out the actual wind reading I went onto the IAAF website, and to my confusion it's listed as +0.4m/s.

I'm not having a Mandela Effect moment, the website is definitely wrong. Isn't it??

[JimBentley]

I'm not having a Mandela Effect moment, the website is definitely wrong. Isn't it??

I must admit I don't remember that race, but handily it's on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQVySlkOqfQ

Wind reading is given in commentary as +0.5, must have been slightly revised down for the official record, but either way it seems your recollection of an enormous headwind must have come from somewhere else!

[Fred Mumford]

Thank you. More confused than ever now, that looks like a totally different race to the one I remember, not least the time of day.

Hmm, more digging required. I will report back.

Edit - Yep, I'm obviously mixing up two memories - the windy one was his Tokyo 1991 run of 20.01 into a 3.4 headwind.

I could have sworn.......oh well, that's Mandela in action I guess.

[Marc Meakin]

I'm being flippant, but what if someone built a 100 metre track that goes downhill.
Would it be legal?

[David Williams]

I've always thought that athletics short-changes itself compared to other sports. If swimming was done the same way, you'd only have one 100 metre event. But if you can have backstroke and butterfly, why doesn't athletics have running backwards and bunny-hop events? My rule of thumb has always been that anyone who can win two gold medals has to be truly exceptional. If it's commonplace (with all due respect to the Kennys), then basically it's just doing more of the same thing.

One event that I have invented however, borrowing from cycling, would be a 10,000 metre event with, say, 10 points for winning (down to 1 point for 10th) but also, say, 5 points for the leader at the end of each lap (down to 1 point for 5th). Could get very interesting tactically. A lone breakaway that's bound to blow up could still garner enough points to win. If a group of 1500 metre runners up the pace, what do the 10,000 metre guys do about it? How long could a sprinter stay with the pack, winning every intermediate sprint?

[Gavin Chipper]

I've always thought that athletics short-changes itself compared to other sports. If swimming was done the same way, you'd only have one 100 metre event. But if you can have backstroke and butterfly, why doesn't athletics have running backwards and bunny-hop events? My rule of thumb has always been that anyone who can win two gold medals has to be truly exceptional. If it's commonplace (with all due respect to the Kennys), then basically it's just doing more of the same thing.

One event that I have invented however, borrowing from cycling, would be a 10,000 metre event with, say, 10 points for winning (down to 1 point for 10th) but also, say, 5 points for the leader at the end of each lap (down to 1 point for 5th). Could get very interesting tactically. A lone breakaway that's bound to blow up could still garner enough points to win. If a group of 1500 metre runners up the pace, what do the 10,000 metre guys do about it? How long could a sprinter stay with the pack, winning every intermediate sprint?

I think it's ridiculous how many medals are on offer for some of the sports. I think the Olympics just allow these sports to bring all their baggage wholesale, which is the wrong way of doing it. It shouldn't have to be "We'll allow x sport and therefore everything they normally do" or "We won't have this sport at the Olympics". They should be able to say "We'll have your sport, but we're limiting the medals to y".

A track and field medal is worth more than a medal in another area anyway. Even if they have way too many throwing events and joke events like the triple jump, decathlon and heptathlon. And relays. As said before, track and field is the true Olympics.

[Fred Mumford]

As said before, track and field is the true Olympics.

Yes. The Summer Olympics are only about athletics.

And as a huge winter sports fan I should take offence at your dismissal of the Winter Olympics, but you're actually right. Too many fluke champions.

[Ian Volante]

I'm being flippant, but what if someone built a 100 metre track that goes downhill.
Would it be legal?

No, there's a tolerance limit for gradient.

[Matt Morrison]

It shouldn't have to be "We'll allow x sport and therefore everything they normally do" or "We won't have this sport at the Olympics". They should be able to say "We'll have your sport, but we're limiting the medals to y".

Agree or not, there is clearly a limit to how far they should go with this. What you describe is what they did with climbing, but I think the consensus from anyone who knows anything about the sport (I didn't beforehand I should say) is that they went too far. They distilled three distinctly different disciplines (speed, bouldering, lead) into a single medal and then had to use what seemed to be an unfairly punishing points scoring system to determine the single 'best' climber.

[Gavin Chipper]

It shouldn't have to be "We'll allow x sport and therefore everything they normally do" or "We won't have this sport at the Olympics". They should be able to say "We'll have your sport, but we're limiting the medals to y".

Agree or not, there is clearly a limit to how far they should go with this. What you describe is what they did with climbing, but I think the consensus from anyone who knows anything about the sport (I didn't beforehand I should say) is that they went too far. They distilled three distinctly different disciplines (speed, bouldering, lead) into a single medal and then had to use what seemed to be an unfairly punishing points scoring system to determine the single 'best' climber.

Fair enough. Cycling and swimming have definitely got too big for their boots though.

[Marc Meakin]

Thompson-Herah second fastest time ever in 100 metres 10.54 exceptional

[Gavin Chipper]

Thompson-Herah second fastest time ever in 100 metres 10.54 exceptional

One might say the real world record.

[Marc Meakin]

Thompson-Herah second fastest time ever in 100 metres 10.54 exceptional

One might say the real world record.

Totally agree but the best way of removing any doubt is for her to beat the 10.49 .
I am surprised she hasn't got the same status as Bolt yet

[Gavin Chipper]

Thompson-Herah second fastest time ever in 100 metres 10.54 exceptional

One might say the real world record.

Totally agree but the best way of removing any doubt is for her to beat the 10.49 .
I am surprised she hasn't got the same status as Bolt yet

I suppose there are a few possible reasons. I think the lack of the world record does stand in the way of the Bolt status, even if it's a bit unfair with the doubts about Flo-Jo. Also her dominance is fairly new. Although she won the 100m and 200m at the 2016 Olympics as well, she didn't win either event at the 2017 or 2019 world championships. And it was only at the Olympics this year that she became the fastest non-Flo-Jo runner, at both distances.

Also, Usain Bolt has the advantage of being the fastest human in history rather than just the fastest man, and while it may seem unfair, it does count.

And being covered in all those tattoos, she could come across as a bit of a mentalist, and might not fit so well the "clean living" role model.

[Marc Meakin]

Speaking of fasted 100 metres, has anybody timed the fastest flying 100 metres (from a 200m or 400m runner)?

[Gavin Chipper]

Speaking of fasted 100 metres, has anybody timed the fastest flying 100 metres (from a 200m or 400m runner)?

Well, according to this, Asafa Powell did 8.70s in a relay, and according to this, Usain Bolt also did 8.70s but during a 150m race.

[JimBentley]

Remember I posted about Sha'Carri Richardson after her 10.72 100m time last month (and then tested positive for cannabis, which meant she missed the Olympics)? Well, she made her 100m return at the Eugene Diamond League on Saturday and looked like a completely different athlete, trailing in last in 11.14. Elaine Thompson-Herah consolidated her double Olympic victory, winning in 10.54 (as already mentioned by Marc, the second fastest time in history, behind only you-know-who).

Anyway, the rumour is that the positive cannabis test was a deliberate front, and she was allowed to take the more lenient ban to cover for the real reason, i.e. she actually got caught for steroid use. She's off any sauce now, hence the slow time in Eugene. I'm not sure how much credence to give this, as it would require the co-operation of WADA. However, if the testing was administered by the US anti-doping authorities, then it becomes a lot more plausible (after all, they routinely covered up all the positive tests for US athletes in the run-up to the 1988 Olympics). And with all the buzz around Richardson, there's a lot of money involved that could conceivably have changed hands.

Probably nothing to it, but I love a conspiracy theory.

[Gavin Chipper]

Sounds good. But what is the source of your rumours?

[JimBentley]

You should know that I can never reveal my sources.

No, it was just some randomers on one of the running forums. Certainly nobody authoritative. I just thought it was interesting.

[Gavin Chipper]

Thinking about it further, I think it's insane that a clean athlete, who had run 10.72s in the run-up to the Olympics, would then jeopardise it all by smoking a joint. From my perspective, it just doesn't seem realistic. Apparently it was something to do with mourning the death of her mother, but that still doesn't cut it. She would still know it would be such a high risk and I don't think her reasoning capacity would just go away like that. Also, you wouldn't just turn to cannabis as a crutch unless it was something you were used to taking. And as an athlete for a number of years where cannabis would be a complete no-no, I would say it seems an unrealistic action.

So your conspiracy theory has legs. In any case, let's see how her career develops. If she's actually any good, we'll presumably see the times again. She's 21.

[Matt Morrison]

Is there something about the different testing processes that means you could force cannabis to come up quicker than the steroid usage would show? i.e. without WADA having to be complicit in the cover-up?

[JimBentley]

Dunno really. I've had a look around the USADA website (turns out that it was the US Anti-Doping Agency that announced the ban and so I'm assuming administered the test) but they don't give any information about the testing procedures (possibly for good reason!)

[Marc Meakin]

Fraser-Price beats Thopson- Herah in Diamond league 10.6 secs

[Phil H]

Fraser-Price beats Thopson- Herah in Diamond league 10.6 secs

Personal best for SAFP, and Thompson-Herah's 10.64 comfortably inside the previous best time ever for a second place finish (10.73, twice.)

[Phil H]

[Double post}

[Phil H]

[Triple post - drunk]

[Marc Meakin]

Has there been some sort of revolution in footwear recently?

[Paul Anderson]

Some strange results alright in Lausanne, particularly Warholm who looked tired for once.

[Gavin Chipper]

Some strange results alright in Lausanne, particularly Warholm who looked tired for once.

One could say his running was a bit flat.

I'll let myself out.

[Adam Gillard]

Incredible news story about Mo Farah. Shines a light on trafficking and modern slavery, which are all too present in the UK and around the world.

[Gavin Chipper]

Incredible news story about Mo Farah. Shines a light on trafficking and modern slavery, which are all too present in the UK and around the world.

I was just reading that actually. Let's just hope Priti Patel doesn't find out.

[Paul Anderson]

Excited about the Worlds starting in Friday...hope I'm not missing too much by going to Brighton

[Gavin Chipper]

Incredible news story about Mo Farah. Shines a light on trafficking and modern slavery, which are all too present in the UK and around the world.

I was just reading that actually. Let's just hope Priti Patel doesn't find out.

We had Kelly Holmes come out as gay, Mo Farah decided to one-up her by coming out as trafficked, so where can we go from here? Kriss Akabusi coming out as having been sent to space by NASA as a child to test out the safety of their rockets? Never intended to be a return mission, his rocket was hit by an asteroid which changed its trajectory, causing it to land safely on an athletics track and knocking over just one hurdle in the process.

[Gavin Chipper]

Anyway, having watched some of the world athletics championships, a few things spring to mind.

The camera position for the sprints seems to be in the wrong place (ahead of the finish line) so the end seems to come as a surprise and it's hard to see the positions. Normally it's dead on with the finish line isn't it? I mean, it's not something I've ever really thought about before but something just seems wrong about it this time.

Also, all in the same night we had two false starts in the women's 100m semi-finals, and one in the men's 110m hurdles final. Nothing too weird about that, but the "reaction times" were I think 0.095s, 0.093s and 0.099s. (Anything under a tenth of a second is deemed a false start because it's considered to be faster than any human can react.) I've seen times of 0.09x previously and had suspicions but obviously not compiled any statistics. But this is one heck of a coincidence. Unless you have psychic powers, then if you anticipate the gun, you're no more likely to start within a hundredth of a second of the legal time than you are a whole second before. The chances of getting three in that minuscule range on the same night (and none of any other time) must be tiny and makes me wonder about the legitimacy of this. Is 0.1 seconds really some magic reaction speed that no-one can be faster than? Or is their reaction measurement system really that accurate? I don't have confidence that these were legitimate disqualifications. The commentators were just saying that these are the rules, without discussing this coincidence or any wider issues.

By the way Devon Allen was the 0.099 guy and one of the favourites in the 110m hurdles. And with Olympic champion Hansle Parchment injuring himself warming up, this event became a lot less interesting very quickly.

[Gavin Chipper]

There was some discussion of the false start rules in this thread. By the way, I think the time between the "set" and the gun generally seems too short to me. The guns seems to go quite quickly after they've all risen. That does leave quite a small window of available start times, making it more likely someone might anticipate the start.

[Adam Gillard]

There was some discussion of the false start rules in this thread. By the way, I think the time between the "set" and the gun generally seems too short to me. The guns seems to go quite quickly after they've all risen. That does leave quite a small window of available start times, making it more likely someone might anticipate the start.

I was thinking about that last bit too - there is a delicate balance but I think a slightly longer / less consistent wait between the "set" and the gun would make anticipation more difficult.

Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce has further cemented her legend - what an absolute hero of athletics!

[Graeme Cole]

There may be something important I've not considered, otherwise they'd have done this by now, but why not simply allow the athletes to anticipate the gun? Scrap the 0.1 second rule and also scrap the random delay before the bang. Just have an audible 3-2-1-bang countdown to start the race. Then there's no excuse for starting too early or too late.

[Marc Meakin]

There may be something important I've not considered, otherwise they'd have done this by now, but why not simply allow the athletes to anticipate the gun? Scrap the 0.1 second rule and also scrap the random delay before the bang. Just have an audible 3-2-1-bang countdown to start the race. Then there's no excuse for starting too early or too late.

The same as swimming

[Fred Mumford]

There may be something important I've not considered,

I suppose one concern is that reaction times would immediately be vastly improved across the board, which for sprint races in particular would mean a huge improvement in everyone's times, making comparisons to past performances impossible. Obviously this issue goes away over time - they should have implemented it 40 years ago.

I don't know if some people consider reaction time to be an integral skill of being a successful sprinter, and would therefore argue that things should stay as they are.

[Gavin Chipper]

There may be something important I've not considered, otherwise they'd have done this by now, but why not simply allow the athletes to anticipate the gun? Scrap the 0.1 second rule and also scrap the random delay before the bang. Just have an audible 3-2-1-bang countdown to start the race. Then there's no excuse for starting too early or too late.

I don't really like this because it would make timing too important a skill. I imagine some people would be much better than others at perfecting a pretty much zero-second start.

Obviously you could counter by saying that at the moment reaction times are important, but being slightly slower at reacting isn't as bad as messing up your timing and risking a false start. I imagine runners who have less chance of winning might go riskier on the start and you'd probably have more false starts overall. It would add a whole new non-running dimension to it and I don't think it would be a good thing.

I think random starts are better.

[Gavin Chipper]

Also I mentioned in the other thread I linked to that arguably 0.1 seconds should be taken off all times since the race hasn't really started until 0.1 seconds in as you're not allowed to move.

But at the start it seems to be your fingers that have to be behind the line, whereas at the end they measure it by your torso. So if you have a long enough body, you could still get a time of 0.0 seconds now, which would become -0.1 seconds under this new proposal. It's a minefield.

[Marc Meakin]

Well done to Wight man winning what used to be the blue riband event, the 1500 metres.
With the unique bonus of having his dad as the stadium commentator and also the last British winner, Steve Cram commentating on the BBC

[Gavin Chipper]

Well done to Wight man winning what used to be the blue riband event, the 1500 metres.
With the unique bonus of having his dad as the stadium commentator and also the last British winner, Steve Cram commentating on the BBC

Yeah, that was a good race. I thought maybe Josh Kerr had a better chance. He looked very good in the heats, but I think maybe he lacks a bit in a full speed race, and looks better in a slower race with his good sprint finish.

[Gavin Chipper]

Race walking is a joke event.