What I am saying would not be a curb on the infield. On a track with a
curb, the curb is placed 30 cm inside the 400 metre trace. On a track
without a curb, the inner line is (or should be) placed 20 cm inside the
400 metre trace. Therefore, if you want to add a curb to a correctly
marked curbless track, 10 cm inside the inner line is where it should be.
David Dallman
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Mcewen, Brian T wrote:
> A curb on the infield would not really serve the purpose of a curb at all.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Dallman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 11:09 AM
> To: Mcewen, Brian T
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: t-and-f: Curbless Tracks
>
>
> I don't think you have to reline the track, you just have to put the
> curb 10 cm inside the inner line so that the measuremnt 30 cm out from
> there is just the same place as 20 cm out was when there was no curb. I
> think lane 1 IS 10 cm wider than the other lanes on tracks with curbs.
> I just didn't want someone to install a curb around the inner line and
> think they had got it right.
> David Dallman
>
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Mcewen, Brian T wrote:
>
> > David Dallman said:
> >
> > <<< Although tracks with and without a curb (kerb in England) are both
> > allowed, the distance away from the inside at which the 400 metre distance
> > is measured is different in the two cases. >>>
> >
> > Here is the method of measurement (as told to me by Wayne Armbrust):
> >
> > <<<
> > The "measure line" is 30 cm out from the curb if there is one and 20 cm
> > outside
> > the outer edge of the painted line if there is no curb. Yes, it may be
> > possible to run less than 400 meters if one runs as close to the curb as
> > possible, but you risk stepping on the curb and being injured or
> > disqualified.
> > >>>
> >
> > Therefore, you could not just lay down a permanent curb now that the
> Arcadia
> > track has been lined. The circumferences of the inner line in lane one
> are
> > different on a curbed track vs. a curbless one. The track would have to
> be
> > RE-LINED if a curb was to be added NOW.
> >
> >
> >
> > Question: Since all races in lanes (relays, 200m, 400m, races with
> > staggered starts in lanes) are essentially a race on a track without a
> curb,
> > when a track has a curb in the innermost lane the width of Lane 1 would
> have
> > to be different from the other outer lanes, right?
> >
> > The circumference of Lane 1 (with curb) would be slightly less because it
> is
> > measured at 30 cm "inside" the theoretical 400m path. The other lanes
> have
> > no curb so the circumference is different ( measured at 20 cm "inside").
> >
> > I know that all lanes are the same width, so I am betting that the start
> > lines take this into consideration, and "adjust" the theoretical distance
> > traveled in Lanes 2-7 appropriately.
> >
> > Starting to get the feeling that only the 100m is reasonably certain of
> > being the distance it purports to be?
> >
> >
> >
> > NOTE: the difference in circumference of the innermost lane line between
> > the two track-types would be:
> >
> > 2 x 3.14159 x 10 cm (change in radius) = 62.8318 cm
> >
> >
> > ... if you assume a 100m straight and a 100m turn, which I believe is NOT
> > the IAAF spec, but is close enough for a ballpark approx. of the
> > circumference difference.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Dallman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 8:17 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: t-and-f: Curbless Tracks
> >
> >
> > I hope I have got this right, Wayne will certainly correct me if not.
> > Although tracks with and without a curb (kerb in England) are both
> > allowed, the distance away from the inside at which the 400 metre distance
> > is measured is different in the two cases. This is precisely because it is
> > easier to run right on the inside line if there is no curb than if there
> > is one. Therefore it's not just a question of saving up to buy a curb and
> > laying it down on the inside line. In fact it would have to be laid down
> > slightly further in, by the amount specified in the IAAF rules.
> > I imagine the rules consider a track marked with cones to be a track
> > without a curb. However, while putting down cones might stop runners
> > running even inside the inner line, putting them along the inside line
> > would actually penalise the runners somewhat by making them run too far.
> > How much is difficult to judge, it would depend on how close the cones
> > were to each other. If they were touching, it would be like a real curb,
> > if they were only every 50 metres it would be like having no curb.
> >
> > David Dallman
> >
> > On Fri, 6 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Keith Conning brings up the subject of curbless tracks in the public
> > arena,
> > > so let's talk about them:
> > >
> > > Keith seems to indicate to the group that because Wayne Armburst says
> some
> >
> > > tracks are mismeasured so then, a track without a curb has to be
> > mismeasured.
> > > I will pass that information on to the engineer gentleman we paid
> $20,000
> > to
> > > supervise construction on our track and field facility. Further I will
> > pass
> > > on the word to Jeb Burgess and the group at Southwest Recreation who
> > charged
> > > us over $200,000 to re-do the track this past summer that our facility
> > must
> > > be short (or long or ???).
> > >
> > > Why do we have a track without a curb? Our track was built with
> $269,000
> > of
> > > money that did not include any from our school district. With the
> > > configuration of the old curb and the laying down of the all-weather
> > facility
> > > the track surface came level with the old cement curb. We did not have
> > the
> > > money to build a track and buy a curb, and it is legal to have a track
> > > without a curb (and be a measured 400 meters), so for financial concerns
> > we
> > > did that. Our Principal has indicated he will start a fund with Mr.
> > Conning
> > > the first donor to build our new track curb, since they did help us
> > refurbish
> > > the facility last year at a total cost of $210,000, with the money for
> the
> >
> > > curb again falling short.
> > >
> > > As for wear on the inner lane line of the track. Our Head Turn Judge at
> > our
> > > final Invitational meeting this evening indicated that he would like to
> > > apologize to Mr. Conning for the mistakes of his crew in officiating our
>
> > > affair. We do have turn judges and they would like specific instances
> of
> > > violations Mr. Conning has observed. He will consider replacing those
> > > officials who make constant errors, as is intimated. In reality, we are
> a
> >
> > > high school of 3500 students, with 2000 students in physical education
> > each
> > > day (it is a two -year requirement in California) with most of the PE
> and
> > > athletic classes having the kids run at least a couple of laps per day
> on
> > the
> > > facility. On top of that the facility is open 24 hours a day to
> joggers,
> > and
> > > is a nice option with lights and all as opposed to the street scene
> after
> > > hours. Today, as I left school we had six elementary schools and three
> > > middle schools in a meet on the track at a meet. I am inclined to think
> > some
> > > of these people may run on the lane line and leave it a bit worn.
> > >
> > > Mr. Conning cheapens the efforts of the fine athletes who have graced
> our
> > > facility through the years, as well as the officials who keep track of
> > such
> > > matters with his inference that (and I quote him) "it is easy to cut off
>
> > > distance around the turns." He indicated in e-mail to me that we
> should
> > > take steps so that the runners will run the full 400 meters each lap in
> > our
> > > competition this year. I do not know, and he does not seem to be able
> to
> > > indicate, when this has not happened. There are reasons why there is
> not
> > a
> > > curb, summarized above, with the facility quite legal and officials
> > available
> > > to observe lane violations.
> > >
> > > A simple suggestion among friends like, "Hey, did you ever consider
> cones
> > > around the turn to deal with possible cricitism that people might sneak
> in
> > a
> > > step or two inside the line, " would have been nice. Instead Mr.
> Conning
> > > last year went to some of the record keepers in the sport and suggested
> > that
> > > no marks from our site should be considered for record purposes because
> of
> >
> > > the "no curb" situation. He never came to me until today with a
> > suggestion
> > > about any cones. We all make choices on our style of
> > > communication-----------------------
> > >
> > > And, oh yes, by the way, Mr. Conning--if you try to find Arcadia HS in
> > > Glendora, California you might be a half an hour late for our April 14th
>
> > > competition. Our School is Arcadia HS in Arcadia 15 minutes back on the
>
> > > freeway, with the first Invitational Event Nik Arrhenius of Utah, who
> has
> > > thrown 218 feet this year in the Discus, going after Kamy Keshmiri's
> > National
> > > Federation and Meet Record in the event at 224-03, set on our facility
> in
> > > 1987 in the Arcadia Invitational. Despite our problems require some
> good
> > > athletes still come to our meet.
> > >
> > > Yes, we will have cones around the turn at this year's meet, with the
> > > inference that the failure to provide these in the past somehow making
> the
> >
> > > efforts of athletes cheaper, strongly objected to. Some 500 schools and
> > 2000
> > > athletes will grace our facility in two weekends, with our staff willing
> > to
> > > accept any and all suggestions to make the situation tops for those
> great
> > > student/athletes.
> > >
> > > If anyone else would like to help donations for a curb we will add to
> the
> > > fund.
> > >
> > > Doug Speck
> > > Athletic Director - Arcadia HS
> > > Former Meet Director - Arcadia Invitational
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > David Dallman
> > CERN - SIS
> >
> >
>
> David Dallman
> CERN - SIS
>
>
