escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,194
Grad Year: 1983
Member is Online
|
Post by escott58 on Jul 18, 2022 16:46:21 GMT -8
www.huffpost.com/entry/devon-allen-false-start-hurdles_n_62d4e4a5e4b0f69130316144Yes, you read that correctly. The World Athletics adjudication committee officials said Mr. Allen started 0.099 seconds after the starting gun and was thus disqualified. The limit is 0.10 seconds - I really don't know the significant digits on that rule. If it is officially 2 digits, his time should have been rounded to 0.10. Evidently, others started very close to the 0.1 seconds limit, and any differences were indistinguishable with the eye - even in slow motion. If they're really trying to catch cheaters, they should move that limit to something that is really impossible (my 2¢) judging by the number of participants approaching 0.1 seconds reaction time. Allen signed a 3-year undrafted rookie deal with the Philadelphia Eagles as a wide receiver. He played wide receiver for uo from 2014 to 2016. Yes, I do feel sorry for the *uck.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jul 18, 2022 18:42:40 GMT -8
www.huffpost.com/entry/devon-allen-false-start-hurdles_n_62d4e4a5e4b0f69130316144Yes, you read that correctly. The World Athletics adjudication committee officials said Mr. Allen started 0.099 seconds after the starting gun and was thus disqualified. The limit is 0.10 seconds - I really don't know the significant digits on that rule. If it is officially 2 digits, his time should have been rounded to 0.10. Evidently, others started very close to the 0.1 seconds limit, and any differences were indistinguishable with the eye - even in slow motion. If they're really trying to catch cheaters, they should move that limit to something that is really impossible (my 2¢) judging by the number of participants approaching 0.1 seconds reaction time. Allen signed a 3-year undrafted rookie deal with the Philadelphia Eagles as a wide receiver. He played wide receiver for uo from 2014 to 2016. Yes, I do feel sorry for the *uck. Other athletes were similarly disqualified but nobody took the least notice until it happened to the duck hurdler. Thoughts and prayers. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Jul 18, 2022 19:54:50 GMT -8
www.huffpost.com/entry/devon-allen-false-start-hurdles_n_62d4e4a5e4b0f69130316144Yes, you read that correctly. The World Athletics adjudication committee officials said Mr. Allen started 0.099 seconds after the starting gun and was thus disqualified. The limit is 0.10 seconds - I really don't know the significant digits on that rule. If it is officially 2 digits, his time should have been rounded to 0.10. Evidently, others started very close to the 0.1 seconds limit, and any differences were indistinguishable with the eye - even in slow motion. If they're really trying to catch cheaters, they should move that limit to something that is really impossible (my 2¢) judging by the number of participants approaching 0.1 seconds reaction time. Allen signed a 3-year undrafted rookie deal with the Philadelphia Eagles as a wide receiver. He played wide receiver for uo from 2014 to 2016. Yes, I do feel sorry for the *uck. In the semis his reaction time was 0.101 seconds. one-onethousandth legal. Looking at the reaction times, they were quicker than I usually see. I don't follow it much but a lot of them were within a few thousandths of a false start. My mostly ignorant opinion is that something was/is different with this setup. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Jul 18, 2022 20:00:19 GMT -8
|
|
escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,194
Grad Year: 1983
Member is Online
|
Post by escott58 on Jul 18, 2022 20:12:18 GMT -8
I appreciate your prayers, but I don't think there were any other starts that were too fast after the starting gun sounded  False starts are very common before the starting gun sounds, but they've been the rule for decades. Even Usain Bolt was recently disqualified at a big meet in Europe, and, even he, has probably never been disqualified for a FS that was too fast of a start after the starting gun. It would be interesting to see how long they've had this technology to measure their reaction time to the thousandths of a second. The false start (FS) rule is apparently under review for change. They're looking at allowing one and only one, thereafter, anyone with a FS is immediately DQed (even if it was someone else who FSed the first time). Sorry if I've explained this in a confusing manner. |
|
escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,194
Grad Year: 1983
Member is Online
|
Post by escott58 on Jul 18, 2022 20:27:46 GMT -8
Very interesting article with a lot of data to pore over. Were all the reaction times really that much faster than at the Tokyo Olympics? To me, it makes the Oregon22 timing subject to suspicion. |
|
escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,194
Grad Year: 1983
Member is Online
|
Post by escott58 on Jul 18, 2022 20:31:21 GMT -8
I appreciate your prayers, but I don't think there were any other starts that were too fast after the starting gun sounded False starts are very common before the starting gun sounds, but they've been the rule for decades. Even Usain Bolt was recently disqualified at a big meet in Europe, and, even he, has probably never been disqualified for a FS that was too fast of a start after the starting gun. It would be interesting to see how long they've had this technology to measure their reaction time to the thousandths of a second. The false start (FS) rule is apparently under review for change. They're looking at allowing one and only one, thereafter, anyone with a FS is immediately DQed (even if it was someone else who FSed the first time). Sorry if I've explained this in a confusing manner. My bad - there were a total of 4 sub 0.1 second reaction times at Oregon22, according to the article at LetsRun linked by ag87. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jul 18, 2022 21:09:10 GMT -8
I appreciate your prayers, but I don't think there were any other starts that were too fast after the starting gun sounded False starts are very common before the starting gun sounds, but they've been the rule for decades. Even Usain Bolt was recently disqualified at a big meet in Europe, and, even he, has probably never been disqualified for a FS that was too fast of a start after the starting gun. It would be interesting to see how long they've had this technology to measure their reaction time to the thousandths of a second. The false start (FS) rule is apparently under review for change. They're looking at allowing one and only one, thereafter, anyone with a FS is immediately DQed (even if it was someone else who FSed the first time). Sorry if I've explained this in a confusing manner. My bad - there were a total of 4 sub 0.1 second reaction times at Oregon22, according to the article at LetsRun linked by ag87 . The current "No False Starts" rule has been in place since 2010. The "First False Start Charged to the Field" rule was the previous rule. It was apparently unsatisfactory for the IAAF's broadcast partners (from what I've read). The 3 athletes in addition to Allen DQ'd for reaction times <0.10 were: M 100m heats Ratu Tabakaucoro. Fiji 0.096 W 100m Semifinals Julien Alfred. St Lucia. 0.095 TyNia Gathier. Bahamas 0.093. Women's 100m hurdles heats, semis and final still to be run. Would not be surprised to see one or 2 more such DQ's coming out of those races. I know it probably seems cold to say I have little sympathy for Allen but his reaction time in the semi's was 0.101, so he should have known that he was treading a very thin line. He's been racing internationally for years. None of this should have been a surprise to him. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Jul 19, 2022 21:25:04 GMT -8
Very interesting article with a lot of data to pore over. Were all the reaction times really that much faster than at the Tokyo Olympics? To me, it makes the Oregon22 timing subject to suspicion. Or the standards at the Olympics that much more rigid that they don’t attempt an illegal start. Sometimes the risk might be worth it; other times not. These are high caliber athletes who know very well what they are doing. |
|
escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,194
Grad Year: 1983
Member is Online
|
Post by escott58 on Jul 20, 2022 19:16:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Jul 20, 2022 19:24:03 GMT -8
My bad - there were a total of 4 sub 0.1 second reaction times at Oregon22, according to the article at LetsRun linked by ag87 . The current "No False Starts" rule has been in place since 2010. The "First False Start Charged to the Field" rule was the previous rule. It was apparently unsatisfactory for the IAAF's broadcast partners (from what I've read). The 3 athletes in addition to Allen DQ'd for reaction times <0.10 were: M 100m heats Ratu Tabakaucoro. Fiji 0.096 W 100m Semifinals Julien Alfred. St Lucia. 0.095 TyNia Gathier. Bahamas 0.093. Women's 100m hurdles heats, semis and final still to be run. Would not be surprised to see one or 2 more such DQ's coming out of those races. I know it probably seems cold to say I have little sympathy for Allen but his reaction time in the semi's was 0.101, so he should have known that he was treading a very thin line. He's been racing internationally for years. None of this should have been a surprise to him. Not to question a track aficionado like you, but you think Allen or any sprinter has a clock in their head that can measure thousands of seconds? Perhaps the rule is antiquated. Athletes get better, quicker, faster every year. Just maybe the old thinking that no one can react in under a tenth of a second is outdated. Maybe it should be eliminated, but go back to the one false start rule to keep competitors leery of jumping the gun. Linford Christie used to say you have to go on the “B” of Bang! |
|
escott58
Sophomore
Posts: 1,194
Grad Year: 1983
Member is Online
|
Post by escott58 on Jul 20, 2022 20:02:27 GMT -8
Not to question a track aficionado like you, but you think Allen or any sprinter has a clock in their head that can measure thousands of seconds? Perhaps the rule is antiquated. Athletes get better, quicker, faster every year. Just maybe the old thinking that no one can react in under a tenth of a second is outdated. Maybe it should be eliminated, but go back to the one false start rule to keep competitors leery of jumping the gun. Linford Christie used to say you have to go on the “B” of Bang! They're thinking the reaction time should be set to something even more unattainable like 90ms, or measure perceivable motion with high tech equipment. My link above to Track and Field News talks about possible solutions. Like you mention, an athlete shouldn't be asked to "slow down" by one or two milliseconds. Here's another link to another editorial. It's about revisiting the rules for false starts, and how they evolved since about 1975: trackandfieldnews.com/article/from-the-editor-06-22-false-start-rule-revisited/ |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jul 20, 2022 20:14:51 GMT -8
The current "No False Starts" rule has been in place since 2010. The "First False Start Charged to the Field" rule was the previous rule. It was apparently unsatisfactory for the IAAF's broadcast partners (from what I've read). The 3 athletes in addition to Allen DQ'd for reaction times <0.10 were: M 100m heats Ratu Tabakaucoro. Fiji 0.096 W 100m Semifinals Julien Alfred. St Lucia. 0.095 TyNia Gathier. Bahamas 0.093. Women's 100m hurdles heats, semis and final still to be run. Would not be surprised to see one or 2 more such DQ's coming out of those races. I know it probably seems cold to say I have little sympathy for Allen but his reaction time in the semi's was 0.101, so he should have known that he was treading a very thin line. He's been racing internationally for years. None of this should have been a surprise to him. Not to question a track aficionado like you, but you think Allen or any sprinter has a clock in their head that can measure thousands of seconds? Perhaps the rule is antiquated. Athletes get better, quicker, faster every year. Just maybe the old thinking that no one can react in under a tenth of a second is outdated. Maybe it should be eliminated, but go back to the one false start rule to keep competitors leery of jumping the gun. Linford Christie used to say you have to go on the “B” of Bang! Honestly, I don’t know how they landed on 0.1. It does seem that the global track and field opinion was pretty satisfied with its fairness until Devon Allen got himself DQ’d in front of his hometown crowd. It’ll be interesting to see whether this one DQ causes IAAF to recalibrate. But I wouldn’t overestimate the power of US track fans to bend the IAAF’s rules. |
|
rob85
Freshman
Posts: 286 
|
Post by rob85 on Jul 20, 2022 23:54:59 GMT -8
The governing body of the sport is known as World Athletics, no longer the IAAF. Name change came in 2019. www.worldathletics.comUS track fans have zero, absolutely zero, influence on the governing body's rule book. |
|
False starts are very common before the starting gun sounds, but they've been the rule for decades. Even Usain Bolt was recently disqualified at a big meet in Europe, and, even he, has probably never been disqualified for a FS that was too fast of a start after the starting gun. It would be interesting to see how long they've had this technology to measure their reaction time to the thousandths of a second. 
