How Bill Collins won his latest 100 at nationals (Peyton DQ’d)
The posted results from Oshkosh show Bill Collins clocking 11.56 today and winning his latest 100-meter final at nationals. Spectators, though, saw him take second in the M55 race to Oscar Peyton, the lanky Maryland sprinter who beat Bill in the Landover 200 last March. Say what? It turns out Oscar was DQ’d at the start after false-starting twice but was allowed to run because he issued an immediate verbal protest. Oscar, out in lane 9 on the clay-colored Mondo track, jumped the gun with a gent in lane 8 — and both were carded for a false start. Later, he and the Lane 8 entrant false-started separately. Both were DQ’d and both were left out of the final, official results. There were five or six false starts in the final (a misnomer, since there were no M55 prelims, partly because I scratched due to my head injury). The plethora of false starts angered Bill Collins, who was nursing a tender lower leg, icing it after every race.
Oscar was photographed finishing
the 100 by the Oshkosh newspaper.
Oscar told me an hour later that he shouldn’t have been given his first false start, since Lane 8’s jump had pulled him out of the blocks. But Games Committee leader Jim Flanik told me that the referee in charge of recalls had the authority to finger one, two or even three false-starters at a time.
And since pressure-sensitive blocks weren’t being used, no challenge could be made.
But that didn’t stop Oscar from appealing the DQ. At the urging of a member of the USATF Masters T&F Executive Committee, Oscar sought to make an appeal in writing, suggesting that the video crew atop the press box of Titan Stadium had taped his race and documented his being drawn out of the blocks by Lane 8. He insisted that officials review the tapes.
Lane 8 (whose name I don’t have at the moment) took a cue from Oscar and also raced the final “under protest.” His name was left out of the results as well.
Oscar’s appeal came way too late, however. The official results had been posted, and he hadn’t filed a written appeal in the half-hour after the race. That appeal likely would have been rejected anyway, since this was a “field of play” judgment call — like an umpire calling balls and strikes — and isn’t subject to reconsideration.
Too bad Oscar’s name was stricken from the race results. Traditionally, he should have been listed as seventh or eighth — with a DQ by his name. When people no-height or fail to finish a race, they are listed as NH or DNF. So why not here as well?
Incidentally, the wind reading on the race — NWI for “no wind indicated” — might be some foul-up on the wind gauge. The prevailing wind was very brisk during the 100s, an aiding gale after the previous day’s headwinds. A storm blew into Oshkosh the previous night and left the area cooler and less humid today. Just gorgeous, in fact.
I’ll post photos of the M55 final and a gazillion other races, when I have time.
Here’s what USATF posted tonight:
M55 100 Meter Dash
================================================================
Name Age Team Finals
================================================================
Section 1 Finals Wind: NWI
1 Collins, Bill M58 Houston Elit 11.56
2 Riddle, Richard M57 Houston Elit 12.39
3 Sanders, Leo M58 Pony Express 12.42
4 Schoffman, Jim M56 Mass Velocit 12.51
5 Murray, William M55 unattached 12.95
6 Imrie, Donn M59 Golden West 13.34
These were the entrants in the event:
| William Murray | unattached | NT | accepted |
| John O’Brien | unattached | NT | accepted |
| Patrick Theut | unattached | NT | accepted |
| Bill Collins | Houston Elite | 11.44 | accepted |
| Oscar Peyton | unattached | 11.60 | accepted |
| James Ross | unattached | 11.99 | accepted |
| Kenrick Smith | Central Park Track Club | 12.30 | accepted |
| Richard Riddle | Houston Elite | 12.31 | accepted |
| Ernie Snodgrass | unattached | 12.56 | accepted |
| Donn Imrie | Golden West Athletics Club | 12.68 | accepted |
| Leo Sanders | Pony Express Track Club | 12.68 | accepted |
| N Z Bryant | unattached | 12.70 | accepted |
| Roderick Lehman | Florida Athletic Club | 12.75 | accepted |
| Zbigy Zlobicki | unattached | 12.76 | accepted |
| Jim Schoffman | Mass Velocity TC | 12.85 | accepted |
| Kenneth Stone | unattached | 14.47 | accepted |
23 Responses
It’s time we changed the rules. There were way too many false starts at the Indoor Nationals as well. I like the rule where the 1st false start is on the field and the next person who false starts is eliminated. Two (2) false starts per person before elimination is too many.
Gary
When I ran the hurdles (M60) it seemed like we were in “take your mark” and “set” for way too long. I couldn’t see if anyone was moving around and that was why, but holding us that long makes us very prone to false starts. I mentioned it to my team mates (TNT International) and they had the same experience.
As a former Collegiate and Scholastic “official” starter at track meets in New England (also was the starter for the ill fated Pro Track Tour in the early 80s when it came to Boston) for many years before I decided to compete again as a Masters sprinter, I feel the pain of a false start from both sides of the situation.
I have mixed feelings on all the new false start rules.. I’m not sure I like the first false start on the field rule at all. I do not like the no false start rule because there are too many things that can happen on the sprint line…but that is where the Head starter and the Recall Starter earn their money.
As a sprinter myself, I always felt that no one in the race I was starting would do anything that I hadn’t done or tried to do myself at one time or the other.
My philosophy as a starter was this:
I was in charge of starting not to catch people in false starts and disqualify them, but rather make certain no one gained an unfair advantage out of the blocks at the start.
If the field was shaky after the set command and there was movement….I called them up and let them shake it out. If one sprinter “beat” the gun and pulled others out with him (or her), the false start was charged to the first person out!!!
If there was a technical malfunction (slipped blocks) I called it back…period!
I did not “hold” sprinters in the set position for two second or more…but rather waited til they were up and steady and then fired the gun.
Starters and officials sometimes forget that they are there to facilitate the functioning of the meet and enforce order to what can be extremely chaotic events. Because we are dealing with highly strung individuals, sprint races where the slightest mistake means a loss in their event, it is important to enforce rules with some compassion for the competitors so that they know everyone is on a level playing field and no one wins because of an unfair advantage at the start.
That’s my thoughts on that
well said Roger – they should put you in charge of the sprint starters at National Meets – but I know you will be busy going for gold!
Sorry you will not be in Lahti as I always enjoy watching you sprint and I am always in need of your shouting at me – RELAX.
Enjoy Australia and the WMG in Sydney – no doubt it has changed since the time of your birth there!
Does anyone know Oscar official time in that race?
Dear Mr. Pierce,
I would love to have you as the starter for any and all of my races, whether I am competing, coaching, or just watching based on your philosophy.
– Dan
A wonderful meet except for the admission and parking fees. The sprinters were fantastic, including Renee Henderson, Karla Del Grande, Michael Waller, Antwon Dussett, and many others. Unbelievably, Antwon Dussett’s 47.17 broke the university record in the 400 (Univ of Wisconsin – Oshkosh).
Weather could not have been better. Per http://www.weather.com, these were temps for first three days:
Thursday 49 to 81
Friday 62 to 84
Saturday 59 to 78
Right now it’s 76 degrees (3:45 pm on Sunday).
Let’s go back to Oshkosh in 2012.
Nolan, I missed your comment above. I believe he (Oscar) ran 11.50 FAT.
Peter,
I commend you for making the event so enjoyable for us spectators. Your announcing provided us with priceless information on the participants and
laid the foundation for what I thought was an enthusiastic response from the crowd for the excellent performances.
After the 400 Bill was still able 4×1 relay (instead of the 200). After indoors (and getting beaten in the 100) is anybody surprised Bill did not run against Peyton in the 200?
Gremlins messed up that post. I meant to say that after the 400 Bill was still able to run the 200 trials. And planned to run the 4×1 relay instead of the 200 finals. After indoors and getting beaten in the 100 is anyone surprised that Bill did not run against Peyton in the 200 finals?
Bill is a champion. Oscar is a champion. I’m sure that the dissapointment of not being able to run each other will pass. Whether it’s Bill’s perceived fear to run Oscar or Oscar’s perceived injustice at the starting line, it really does not matter when they go back to the their daily lives. What a blessing to just still run at their ages. I’m sure these two gentlemen will go back and work hard to stay injury free, work on their starts and have a great race on another day. As some of us say “that’s just track & field”!
Michael Waller, Congrats on winning the mens 50 100m! Your a great competetor and a fine christian man!
Good luck in the 2!
Tim Graf
Has anybody thought about using a “starting gate” for all the running events like at a race track. No need for a restart or call back.
Having witnessed the entire M55 mens 100m final, it was obvious that there was a lot of movement by a number of starters at the line. We are given the privilege of a second false start, one should be able to avoid a second false start, if one already has one counted against them. Not everyone is capable of holding still doing a standing start as Bill has so perfectly mastered. Blocks will help stabilize a wobbly individuals body and make them less likely to move and false start. I have issues with anonymous posters making ridiculous claims about Bill’s” FEARS” what does the most accomplished male masters sprinter of all time have to fear?
Very interesting comments guys. The first and foremost reason for all the false starts was the fact that they repeatedly held us in the SET position to long (more than 2 1/2 seconds). It was as if they were attempting to hold us in SET position until someone false starts.
If you would have noticed, after my second false start (my first false start was charged to me and lane 8 simultaneously), I grabbed the blocks and used them. Secondly, the starter told me I was DQed and voluntarily said that I could stay in the race and run under protest; so that’s what I did.
By rule, the starter was supposed to escort me off the track and not let me compete after that second false start but he did not and he admitted that was his mistake. The question is: What happens when an official makes a mistake like that and allow runners to compete when we should have not been allowed to compete? Should the consequences of that mistake count or not?
Thirdly, about Bill; I truly believe that he has no fear. He’s not 100 percent healty and I am close to 100 percent. He is simply doing what a lot of us do, gauge your health and compete accordingly. Those races that he chose to run does not require the physical demand that it will take on his injury if he was in a race against me. As soon as he feels that he is well enough, it will be on.
Lastly, If starters would conduct there job duties in a fashion like Roger’s comments, we would not have problems of this nature at all.
I agree with Oscar that we were held entirely too long in the blocks. In my 400 I think only two of use used blocks and it was ridiculous to hold us as long as they did. I also had difficulty hearing the starter because of the wind (or maybe due old age). We were talking on the plane about exactly what Roger said. In big meets in college a good started would not have any false starts. He/she would have the runners stand up if anyone was getting squirrelly. I do not like the first false start to the field because someone will false start on purpose to keep a good starter sitting in the blocks the second time.
I’m not making excuses for meet officials who keep runners too long in the blocks. “Set” position is stressful both physically and mentally and should not be held longer than absolutely necessary. However an athlete who is a “good starter” will practice starts with different cadences for “set” and gun in order to be prepared for whatever rhythm the starting official may have. I know that I am very quick out of the blocks yet I rarely false-start because our coach drills us on reacting to the gun and not anticipating it. I personally didn’t have any problem with the starting official’s cadence or hold time in my three events where I used blocks.
I find myself in agreement with Ms. Palmer’s comments. I am also appreciative of Oscar’s very gracious, mature and accurate comment regarding the circumstances of our 100 meter final.
I believe Ms.Palmer has perfectly stated what many of us practice. Listening for and reacting to the gun is an approach that will result in better reaction times, and leaves no room to involve a starter in weak excuse making about our ability to respond to an elementary Pavlovian style command. That is, run when the gun sounds. Do not begin running to the sound of silence. Sometimes I react well, and then sometimes I’m still just sitting there watching people run away. Nevertheless, my opinion is it beats trying to guess the gun before it is actually fired, which creates unnecessary delay and frustration.
I am willing to wait 4 or 5 seconds if the starter wishes, since I am actively listening for the gun rather than guessing.
I like the suggestion of moving false starters back 2 meters at a time, sans blocks, to reduce block set up time.
Finally, for those of our brothers and sisters that insist on playing the “I will false start once on purpose game”, so I can keep the good starters in the blocks on the second try; do not be fooled. We all know who you are, and it isn’t a pretty or flattering portrait you paint. It only weakens the respect we need to hold for one another.
I don’t think everyone who false starts is guessing the gun. I am sure there are some. If I do false start it is probable because I fell out of the blocks, literally. Maybe others are just full of nervous energy. We had a false start in the 800 and I still can not even figure out who or why. Maybe it was the wind. There may be more games in the 100 where every tenth counts. PS thanks Ocean
Funny, I talked to Oscar at breakfast on race day. We even talked about ‘false start once on purpose’. It might work in the open races, not in the masters. While in the open races the field get charged with the first false start leading to the automatic DQ in the second false start, this is not the way it is handled in the masters races. Only the false starter gets charged, not the field. This strategy does not keep the good starters in the blocks the second time around. It only slows down everyone who foul starts with a purpose. We both agreed that intentionally false starting is one stupid strategy in the masters sprints. Rick is correct when discussing the open races, incorrect for the masters. (Rule 332, 2 (c) “No penalty shall be imposed for the first false start, but the Starter shall disqualify the offender or offenders on the second false start. False starts are called on individuals, not on the field.”
Stefan,
Its a good point and I readily accept the clarification. There are occasions when I have raced in open races and even masters races where officials are using IAAF 162. In those cases the practice of accruing one false start by willful intent is often practiced by masters sprinters.
An interesting point here is that I asked a start official on Thursday, in Oshkosh, which rule would be enforced and he said he needed to go read the rules because he wasn’t sure. This isn’t the fault of the official since he works at all levels of track meets, and after all they did get it right. But it illustrates that the applicable rules are different between levels of athletes and often confused, even by the official starter. This leads to a logical extension that a masters sprinter could also be uninformed, leading to a fake false start in a masters meet from those that engage in this practice, though it has no practical affect apart from nuisance creation.
Personally, I like the collegiate rule, though it can be an impractical application for the older runners that have legitimate difficulty holding the set position.
In 2008, in the Penn Relays 100 open race for M50, the starter, weary from the false start nonsense, laid down a dictum that the collegiate rule would be used for every masters race thereafter. The new ruling included my race in M55. Interestingly, no one false started the rest of the way through the age groups. Go figure.
As a masters sprinter and former college sprinter I always practice my starts as part of prep for a meet. This way it becomes automatic and no need to false start as your confidence level reaction skill is uniform for the first part of the race.
Leave a Reply