False starts made worse

This little tidbit appeared in the New York Times today. It seems the IAAF is proposing to do away with “do over” false starts. For the unitiated, here’s a basic primer:

A false start happens when a runner literally “jumps the gun” at the start of a race. Imagine six 400m sprinters lined up in their blocks. They’re crouched down with one knee on the ground. The starter (the person holding the gun) says, “On your marks.”  Next, the starter says, “Set” and all the runners’ butts go up in the air, knees off the ground.  Then there is a short pause, after which the gun fires, and the runners start running. In a false start, a runner — let’s say the runner in lane 2 — starts running after the starter has said “set” but before the gun has been fired. When this happens, the gun is fired again to signal to the runners that a false start has occurred and everyone makes their way back to the start to try again.

The accepted rule today is that first false starter is forgiven. However, if in the same race there is another false start — let’s say that this time it’s the runner in lane 5 — that second false starter is eliminated from the race. The first offender, runner in lane 2, suffers no penalty.

There are obvious problems with this. For one, it can be abused by a savvy runner. A runner is free to commit a false start on purpose, with no repercussions, increasing the chances of eliminating a competitor in a second false start. Also, false starts tend to rattle runners. If you watch track races, you’ll see the racers going through all kinds of exercises to focus on the task at hand. Some of the rituals (slapping themselves seems to be the newest trend) seem ridiculous, but I believe they serve a purpose and that a break in concentration in the miliseconds before the racer is ready to perform has got to take its toll.

The proposed change would drop the “first time forgiven” approach, immediately eliminating the first person who false starts. On its face, it sounds like a good change. But it fails to take into consideration the vagaries of race starts. By this I mean the variations in the time between “set” being called and the gun being fired. Watch enough track and field meets and you’ll notice that some are rife with false starts. Why? Usually because the starter “holds” the runners too long. Imagine being lined up in your blocks, then told to (get) “set,” and then being held for two or three seconds. Every muscle is twitching to get started, but the gun doesn’t fire.

I’ve watched meets where there are multiple “two false start” races, which is truly tragic. And it’s usually because there’s some geriatric standing there with a gun, holding runners way beyond what could be considered a reasonable pause. For awhile, I began to develop a conspiracy theory that this trend was a deliberate attempt to add drama and tension to televised coverage. In fact, for me it had the opposite effect, as I was forced to sit through many wasted minutes of false start coverage at the expense of more expansive coverage of longer events (“Wow. Watching Carmelita Jeter walk slowly back to the blocks and spend three minutes slapping herself is great, especially when it means I only get to see the last three minutes of the men’s 5000m race.”)

But I don’t really think these things are deliberate. I think it’s simple ineptitude. Worse, no one at these meets seems to notice that there’s a connection between delayed gun firing times and recurrent false start problems. The long hold times continue, and so do the false starts.

I think it’s fine to change the false start rules, but only if a standard “hold” time is adopted. That might mean automating starters, replacing humans with slow trigger fingers with a machine that will always fire a gun, say, exactly one second after “set.” But it need not even come to that. If you can find a starter who can say “a thousand one” and pull a trigger, you’ll probably reduce an enormous number of false starts with that action alone. Failing to address the common cause of false starts  just puts more pressure (and punishment) on athletes, and will likely go one of two ways: either we’ll see the same number of false starts or they’ll drop off — right along with race times, as runners hesitate to get out of the blocks quickly for fear of being booted out of the race.

USA Track & Field: Extreme Makeover Edition

Doug Logan and Carl Lewis make waves in the wake of the numerous 2008 Olympic disasters.

New list category: Elites with good blogs

It’s hard enough to find a good running blog from a regular Jane or Joe Jogger. But it’s even harder to find a good blog written by an actual elite. I hope to expand this list over time, but for now I’ll start with Shannon Rowbury’s blog, which is well written and endlessly entertaining. I am a big fan of Rowbury’s not only for her ability to burn up the tracks and roads, but also because in every interview (and now, her blog) she comes off as a smart, witty, mature and articulate person.

For running wonks: An excellent analysis of Olympic lap times

How fast is Tirunesh Dibaba? Other-fucking-worldly fast, that’s how fast. Read about her spectatular last lap in the 10K final and more from the BBC.

Reading: “A Cold Clear Day: The Athletic Biography of Buddy Edelen”

Who was Buddy Edelen? Only one of the greatest American runners that most people have never heard of, but should have for a variety of reasons. That’s author Frank Murphy’s thesis.

Edelen’s story and personality are interesting and engaging enough that it’s tempting to say that this is a book that practically writes itself. But that would be shortchanging Murphy’s skill and creativity as a biographer. Edelen was emerging as a middle-to-long distance runner in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when American distance running was in the toilet in terms of development and competitive standing. So he set off for England, living like a monk in Essex, and training like a fiend under the long-distance direction of his coach, Fred Wilt. There, he charted a steady course toward American- and world-record-breaking times in the 10K and marathon, recognized and respected in Europe (and even loved in his temporarily adopted host country), yet totally unknown in The States.

In telling Edelen’s story, Murphy presents his subject as an immensely appealing man who combined intense focus with geniality and modesty. You can’t help but like — and root for — the guy. Expertly researched, the book doesn’t just present a coherent picture of how Edelen fit into the marathoning scene during this time period, but also presents some real gems, such as this passage. In it, we learn how one clever race promoter got around the AAU’s (Amateur Athletic Union) requirement that in order to retain “amateur” status (and thus eligibility to compete in the Olympics), an athlete must not accept remuneration of any kind (even for assistance with travel and accommodations for participating in races)  in an athletic competition:

“After the greeting, Billy [promoter Billy Morton] got to the point. “Buddy, me lad,” he said, “are ya a betting man?” Buddy said that he was, so Billy explained the way things were.

“Buddy,” he said, “I can’t pay you anything for this race because you’re an amateur. But seein’ as how you’re a betting man,” and he paused for effect before pointing to Buddy’s suitcase on the floor. “I bet you a hundred quid you can’t jump over that suitcase.”

As the meaning of Billy’s wager struck home, Buddy quickly hopped over the suitcase. Morton exclaimed loudly at such a thing, “My God, Tommy, look at that, Buddy just took me for 100 quid!” but being a man of his word, he paid and left. Buddy was 100 quid richer, but he was still an amateur.

Edelen also charmed his host country and managed to get away with behavior that would have labeled others lacking in his personal qualities as “ugly American.” One example is his greeting of Queen Elizabeth before the start of the 1962 Polytechnic Harriers Marathon: “Hi, Queen!”

As in another of his running-related histories, The Silence of Great Distance, Murphy takes considerable creative license when writing about his subject. In this case, he creates pages of speculative internal dialog during Edelen’s bid for a spot on the US men’s Olympic marathon team during a dreadfully hot and humid marathon in Yonkers, NY. This device — peppering non-fiction biography with what is most certainly a fictional stream of consciousness passage — will either work for readers or it won’t. For me, it worked. Murphy either has tremendous insight into and empathy for long distance runners, or he’s run a few awful, long races himself, because the mental crazy quilt that he constructs of what Edelen might have been thinking during that run is spot on: the jokes we tell ourselves, the pep talks, the moments of despair, the internal siren song to stop, the pure intake and recording of all sensory input…it’s all there.

I have no idea if this book would appeal to a non-runner. Probably not. But for students of the sport, it’s a wonderful read.

More about Edelen on Wikipedia.

Interview with Stephanie Herbst-Lucke

I stumbled across this fairly recent interview with former collegiate elite (and masters comeback) Stephanie Herbst-Lucke by Scott Douglas. In it she provides some interesting perspectives on running in one’s twenties vs. forties.

Herbst-Lucke was a central figure in The Silence of Great Distance, Frank Murphy’s excellent history of the development of women’s distance running in the US in the pre- and post-Title IX era. The book provides a biographical survey of key runners and NCAA teams during that era, placing them into a coherent timeline of how the sport was shaped by Title IX, feminism and the earlier rise in stature of male US distance runners on the world stage. The book also provides a nuanced, compelling treatment of the unique psychological and social pressures experienced by those early female competitors and how they impacted — or, in some cases, ended — their competitive careers.

Herbst-Lucke apparently started showing up at local road races a few years back, where she was occasionally recognized by knowledgeable (and shocked) fellow racers. Despite not having focused on the marathon in her earlier running life, she was among the entrants in Boston earlier this year for the women’s Olympic marathon trials, in which she finished in a respectable 59th place.

Sammy Wanjiru interview

Nice interview with the young Olympic phenom from Kenya. Also, this piece in the Times, which I can’t see the point of — a race recap four months after the race? Must be a slow news day…

Mormons, pole dancing, and the Olympics. What you need to know.

I suppose if they can let in the people who twirl ribbons on sticks, they can let these people in too.

Easing back into running

I ran every day this week except for Tuesday. I just couldn’t help myself. The weather is wonderfully cool (or even cold) in the morning and the leaves were so colorful this year; they burst into color over the last weekend and now they’re all falling, which is very dramatic on windy days.

I did a wonderful 10 miler this morning. The weather was gorgeous and perfect: sunny with temps around 52 and windy. I ran an average 8:40 pace at 78% heart rate and enjoyed myself immensely. I was truly sorry when the run was over. But it tired me out enough to nap for two hours on the couch after getting through the first few essays in the newish David Sedaris book When You Are Engulfed in Flames.

When I looked at my mileage this week, I could hardly believe it: I ran 39 miles. I hadn’t expected to get back up so quickly, but my legs have felt great and I wasn’t really paying attention to the cumulative mileage as the week wore on. I’ll probably keep it under 55 for the next couple of weeks, then start gradually working the mileage base back up into the 100+mpw range in preparation for starting up training again sometime around mid-January.

It’s nice to have such a long spell between races. The next one isn’t until very late May (that’s assuming we go through with our plans to run Newport, OR next year). I’m not going to do so much hard running during the base period again. Probably just one or two moderate-pace runs a week and the rest very easy. And I’ll probably do some racing for fun and training too, as there are some good ones coming up in the next few months: the Nyack Hospital 10K, the Hot Chocolate 15K, the Manhattan Half Marathon and the Boston Buildup series in CT.

Speaking of running 100+ miles a week, former champion Ingrid Kristiansen and 2008 gold medalist Constantina Tomescu-Dita had some training advice for Paula Radcliffe, who will be 38 when the 2012 Olympics roll around. Paula does not agree. I do, though, at least for myself. I’ll be cutting down on the mileage to average around 75 per week during training. I won’t, however, be having a baby.

Anyway, as for the next week, I have no plan. I will probably run almost every day again, once per day, with quicker running days determined by how I feel.

Chasing Bolt

Great series on Usain Bolt from blogumentarian Matt Taylor, the brains behind Chasing Tradition, Chasing Kimbia and Chasing Glory.