Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 67
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    62,025
    Tell that to all the people who can't run on such a facility and find they can't quality for the nationals.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogery- chwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch, Wales
    Posts
    12,073
    Quote Originally Posted by gh
    Tell that to all the people who can't run on such a facility and find they can't quality for the nationals.

    A multi-million dollar indoor track & field palace built with private dollars. Leave to the editor of T&FN to look for the cloud around a silver lining.

    So you would prefer the facility not be built at all, and all the kids in northeast ohio who benefit from such a wealth of outstanding venues spend their winters in their school hallways?

    We would KILL for a facility like that in southwest Ohio. I hope the folks in Greater Cleveland know how very lucky they are.
    There are no strings on me
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Bodymore, Murderland
    Posts
    2,274
    Quote Originally Posted by guru
    Quote Originally Posted by gh
    Tell that to all the people who can't run on such a facility and find they can't quality for the nationals.

    A multi-million dollar indoor track & field palace built with private dollars. Leave to the editor of T&FN to look for the cloud around a silver lining.

    So you would prefer the facility not be built at all, and all the kids in northeast ohio who benefit from such a wealth of outstanding venues spend their winters in their school hallways?

    We would KILL for a facility like that in southwest Ohio. I hope the folks in Greater Cleveland know how very lucky they are.
    The obvious counter to that is "well, they could've taken the money (or even less of it) and built an outstanding 200m facility."

    Just saying. Kinda straw-manning gh to suggest he's suggesting they do without any track.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,512
    Quote Originally Posted by gh
    Tell that to all the people who can't run on such a facility and find they can't quality for the nationals.
    Rather than get rid of great tracks use adjust qualifying marks like they do for altitude. Four categories: 1) unbanked 200m; 2) banked 200m; 3) unbanked oversized tracks; and 4) 10 or more laps per mile (might need banked and unbanked variants here.

    There is lots of data and once they used the criteria the comparison data would get better (right now, best efforts are saved for a big qualifying push).

    While you are not as close to the action, there are very good stands that are closer than for the best outdoor tracks and there is a lack of infield clutter getting in the way of seeing across the track. I am not sure if they have stands on both sides or not. Also note that they can run 100m races here without any wind, so it holds that variable 'constant' in a manner outdoor adjustments can only calculate about.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogery- chwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch, Wales
    Posts
    12,073
    Quote Originally Posted by BisonHurdler
    The obvious counter to that is "well, they could've taken the money (or even less of it) and built an outstanding 200m facility."

    Just saying. Kinda straw-manning gh to suggest he's suggesting they do without any track.

    Except you can't do much in the infield of a 200m track, and that facility pays the bills with alot more than just track meets.
    There are no strings on me
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Back on my 3-month hiatus!
    Posts
    21,729
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    Rather than get rid of great tracks use adjust qualifying marks like they do for altitude.
    Double zackly.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    20,406
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    Quote Originally Posted by gh
    Tell that to all the people who can't run on such a facility and find they can't quality for the nationals.
    Rather than get rid of great tracks use adjust qualifying marks like they do for altitude. Four categories: 1) unbanked 200m; 2) banked 200m; 3) unbanked oversized tracks; and 4) 10 or more laps per mile (might need banked and unbanked variants here.
    The NCAA does have track size adjustments, but they don't differentiate between banked 200m tracks and oversized tracks.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    A Temperate Island
    Posts
    7,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlow
    Quote Originally Posted by 26mi235
    Rather than get rid of great tracks use adjust qualifying marks like they do for altitude.
    Double zackly.
    The NCAA and NAIA already does this. Who doesn't?
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,819
    Quote Originally Posted by guru
    Quote Originally Posted by gh
    Tell that to all the people who can't run on such a facility and find they can't quality for the nationals.

    A multi-million dollar indoor track & field palace built with private dollars. Leave to the editor of T&FN to look for the cloud around a silver lining..
    gh speaks for a lot of people, including me, who care about these things.

    I think it's great that a new track was built, but why not make it 200-meters?
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    20,406
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt Murphy
    I think it's great that a new track was built, but why not make it 200-meters?
    Guru had one answer:
    you can't do much in the infield of a 200m track, and that facility pays the bills with alot more than just track meets.
    Another answer is that these folks may have seen how many top collegiate programs are attracted to oversized facilities like those at Notre Dame and Washington. And they may have just figured they'd be better off with building with an oversized track than with one that has just another standard 200m track.

    Of course the NCAA could fix that situation in a hurry by doing track adjustments differently.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •