EPelle wrote:This is an excellent question. And, I haven't the insight from the German federation as to how they accomplished conjuring up full 100m splits for each of the relay legs. I'd like to see/review their study.
I understand how they did it. I just don't understand why they did it this way.
It seems almost totally pointless, since it has little to do with how they broke the world record. The whole idea of getting splits in a relay is to time the baton as it passes the middle of the zone. The one odd thing about that is that the final leg of the baton will not be 100m, since at the finish it's the runner's torso that counts, whereas the baton could be ahead or behind the runner's torso. Cheers, Alan Shank
steve wrote:How would Carl Lewis in his prime have done on the anchor against Bolt. If memory serves (and as I get older it increasingly doesn't) he was arguably the best anchor leg runner and turned in some fast legs on the order of 8.8 seconds. It always seemed like the closer his opponent the faster he ran. Anyone have any real info to shed light on this imaginary scenario?
Carl Lewis 8.8 leg and Bob Hayes Olympic leg laid out side by side and Hayes beat Lewis by about 2 meters!! I saw the video on youtube but have not seen it since would love to get a copy of that.
Alan Shank wrote:...The one odd thing about that is that the final leg of the baton will not be 100m, since at the finish it's the runner's torso that counts, whereas the baton could be ahead or behind the runner's torso. Cheers, Alan Shank
I would guess that on average that the torso figure is pretty darned close to coincident with the baton. There's very much a human-nature thing to try to get the baton there first, methinks, and with a lean it's usually (yes or no?) tucked right up against the chest.
gh wrote:I would guess that on average that the torso figure is pretty darned close to coincident with the baton. There's very much a human-nature thing to try to get the baton there first, methinks, and with a lean it's usually (yes or no?) tucked right up against the chest.
steve wrote:How would Carl Lewis in his prime have done on the anchor against Bolt. If memory serves (and as I get older it increasingly doesn't) he was arguably the best anchor leg runner and turned in some fast legs on the order of 8.8 seconds. It always seemed like the closer his opponent the faster he ran. Anyone have any real info to shed light on this imaginary scenario?
Carl Lewis 8.8 leg and Bob Hayes Olympic leg laid out side by side and Hayes beat Lewis by about 2 meters!! I saw the video on youtube but have not seen it since would love to get a copy of that.
Trouble with those old films is that the frame rates are iffy. Not saying this one is, but if you go back to the 30's the people have quicker leg speed than Mel Pender, and they teleport themselves across roads.
Suppose the sprinter on the anchor leg leans for the line, with arms extended backwards. While swinging his arms backwards for the lean, the baton flies out of his hand, and never crosses the finish line. However, the photo finish shows the baton was still in his hand when his torso reached the line. DQ or no DQ?
18.99s wrote:Suppose the sprinter on the anchor leg leans for the line, with arms extended backwards. While swinging his arms backwards for the lean, the baton flies out of his hand, and never crosses the finish line. However, the photo finish shows the baton was still in his hand when his torso reached the line. DQ or no DQ?
DQ.
While they time from the torso, the baton must be moved around the track.
A guess. I suspect the Brits would protest either way depending on if it was them.
I guess I should correct my hypothetical to state that the video review showed that the baton was still in his hand when his torso reached the line, because if the baton never crossed the line it would not show up on the photo finish.
Gentlemen: I would like to thank everyone who participated in this discussion thread. I learned a great deal from some realy savy Tracksters. It was quite a race!
18.99s wrote:Suppose the sprinter on the anchor leg leans for the line, with arms extended backwards. While swinging his arms backwards for the lean, the baton flies out of his hand, and never crosses the finish line. However, the photo finish shows the baton was still in his hand when his torso reached the line. DQ or no DQ?
DQ.
While they time from the torso, the baton must be moved around the track.
A guess. I suspect the Brits would protest either way depending on if it was them.
The baton shall be carried by hand throughout the race. Athletes are not permitted to wear gloves or to place material (other than those permitted by Rule 144.2(f)) or substances on their hands in order to obtain a better grip of the baton. If dropped, it shall be recovered by the athlete who dropped it. He may leave his lane to retrieve the baton...
If (a) the race is complete when the runner's torso reaches the finish line, and (b) the baton is still in hand at that instant, then I'd argue that the baton has been carried by hand throughout the race, and anything that happens to the baton after that instant is irrelevant.
I can't find any other rule dictating that the runner must return the baton to an official, at least not in the IAAF rules.
There's also nothing in the rules that says an athlte can't walk off with any of the throwing implements, hurdles, the starting blocks or the plasticine boards. I'm guessing that's because it all falls under the rubric of "official meet equipment" provided by the organizers, who thus retain ownership thereof.
True, and I wasn't envisioning a scenario where a runner swipes the baton. However, is there any rule dictating the manner in which the baton must be returned? What if the anchor throws it in the air in celebration, rather than handing it to an official? Back to the original question, can actions after the conclusion of the race (not talking about unsportsmanlike conduct or the like) result in a DQ, and when is the race considered to be over?
