Professor Laurie
Only two women are listed as competing in the mile at the Mid-America Region Masters Championships (aka 33rd Annual Rocky Mountain Masters Games) Aug. 24-25 at 5,000-foot-elevation Colorado State University in Ft. Collins.
Laurie Rugenstein edged
Valerie Eipper, 6:13.00 to 6:16.41, according to
results sent me today. But look again. Laurie is 65 and Valerie is 53, and 6:13 represents a 3-second improvement on the listed world record of 6:16.28 by New York’s
Marie-Louise Michelsohn in 2007. Who is Laurie Rugenstein? A music therapy professor at
Naropa University in Boulder, she’s been national-class since at least 2008, when she won two golds and a silver
at Spokane nationals. In a Runnerspace.com video (below), she says started running track at 60 after being a road runner. In moving up to 65, she got All-American marks in the 100 and 200. But her best events are the 800 and 1500, she says. At Olathe, Laurie competed for
Ric Rojas Running and won the 4, 8 and 15 and took second in the 200. We’ll have to see if Laurie’s race is record eligible, however. Normally three entrants are needed for a record race. Maybe she ran the mile concurrent with another race. In any case, mega-kudos to Laurie and
Coach Rojas!
24 Responses
I’m told that Laurie was in a two-woman race, not run at same time as another event. Therefore, she isn’t eligible for a record.
According to USATF Rule 165.4: “At least three competitors, and in relays at least two teams, shall be bona fide and have participated in the event in which the record purportedly was established.”
http://www.usatf.org/usatf/files/2c/2cf4ef89-b3f9-43fe-82d8-66b94f21c546.pdf
Bummer.
Hope she can come down from the mountain and do it again!
As far as I know this isn’t the case for WMA-records. But I’m not sure.
I believe I first talked to Laurie at Spokane nationals in 2008. She is a lot of fun, very enthusiastic, and a terrific runner. Glad to see her get some recognition.
great record – hope she gets credit for it but given the history of attempts to get records here – probably some reason to not accept it – too few people in the race, too many people in the race, no rails around the track , not a certified track, too few cones around the track, too many cones around the track, too much wind, not enough wind, wrong color ink used to fill out the application, etc – until the suggested reforms are in place – it is a crap shoot trying to get records.
Good luck with the effort to get the record approved – and please do not say that “she can try again” – the older we get the more of a crap shoot is it trying to break a record, finding a venue, finding a race, finding a certified track, having a good break with the weather, having officials on hand ready to make sure everything is done properly etc.
Let’s say I am an M35 hurdler intent on breaking the American record in the 110 hurdles. I sign up for nationals to give myself the best chance for record ratification. I break the mark by 0.02 seconds, there is negligible wind, and everything is good.
Except, and this turns out to be the deciding issue, there was only one other guy in the race (even at nationals we often have very few hurdlers in the younger age groups).
Apparently I do not get the record. Just how I would be aided by having just one other hurdler in the race is unclear to me, but the record would be thrown out.
Here we have Laurie Rugenstein going to a real meet, a USATF regional masters championship no less, and she breaks the world and American mark in the mile. Where was the benefit that she received from having just one other runner? This issue really needs some examining.
Congrats Laurie! I was there that day competing and it was HOT too. Nice job by her.
Great performance.
Also notice that Quenton Torbert threw the 5k shot
16.67 in the M60 event. This beats the previous
listed AR to my knowledge.
WMA competition rules do not say anything about the number of participants. So go for the world record and leave the US record aside…
Thanks Weia, I thought the same way. Ken did show me the rule however, but if it only applies to American Masters,she won the battle. I am sure, it will work out.
I am the one who tries to get all the signatures, photofinish, recordform, FAT timing, making sure the officials are certified and putting their numbers down ( and I am also trying to compete!) etc. I really lost sleep over that one.
This is not the first time that I am witnessing a record and trying to get the papers into the “snail mail”
For future meets, I will re-read the rules, like I do for officiating – and I can promise, things will go wrong…. but until then, I am always glad when a meet is over and we get a Thank You from the athletes.
See the link for many photos I took at this meet, mostly of this race.
I don’t know if the record will make it, but I can say it really happened, and was really exciting to watch, especially the last 100 meters. Huge bummer if it is thrown out for this reason. Clearly record attempts allow rabbits, right? so to have one other person in the race serving as rabbit seems pretty much A.O.K. no matter what is going on behind the rabbit and the record attempter. Bannister had 2 rabbits! Therefore, kind of a silly rule as the action behind has no effect whatsoever. I am probably missing something obvious. The only thing that I can think of is the fact that our rabbit was someone from another age group, but that is not the rule cited here, or is it kind of a little bit of a part of the stated rule? (‘bona fide’??)
Thank you Christel Donley for your care and attention to this race, whether it ends up a record or not.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davealbo/sets/72157635229167767/
Thanks for that, Dave; the original story did not indicate that Valerie Eipper was a rabbit. I can’t speak with authority on that, although I have certainly seen records established in which there was a rabbit who did not even finish. Those races, however, had far more than 2 or 3 runners.
At this point I would say that my real concern would be records set in races at nationals (or regionals, for that matter) in which there are only 2 runners but a championship is being conducted. I am thinking of the M85 100, an M35 110 hurdles, a W70 hurdles, etc.
Those races produce no advantage for either competitor, and it seems hard to imagine that fairness would permit throwing out the record of the winner. But I will not address the issue of rabbits in such a small race, as I am not an authority in that area.
You have to have at least 3 entered in the event and they have to start it, but is there any rule that says at least 3 have to finish it? If not, recruit anyone to jump in and take off at the gun, or have a jump or a throw. Then either pass on the rest of your attempts or DNF. Will that pass the definition of “bona fide?”
I agree with Peter Taylor’s concern. A very real possibility that someone breaks a record, and every detail is attended to, but attendance is an uncontrollable factor for the athlete. Not so fair.
Also, I just can’t see any advantage whatsoever in having 2 or 1 competitors in a race compared to having 3 or more, which makes the rule seem strange. Again, what am I missing?
You know, Dave Albo, that I am older than dirt. Back in the day, masters T&F was a lot more informal than it is today. FAT, what’s that? Wind readings? Is that like astrology? Even nationals were hand-timed. Today we are a lot more sophisticated.
On its face, a race of 2 people seems like a throwback to the old days. Is this a real meet or is it just a couple of people having fun? Requiring 3 or more competitors gives the event a patina of respectability, and perhaps that was part of the rationale for creating the rule.
But with the plethora of different spacing and heights in the straight hurdles, combined with a paucity of hurdlers at the lower (30-39) and older (80+) ages of the spectrum, we could easily end up with 2-person races. Are they bad?
Similarly, in the dashes, the participation levels get smaller as we age. At a particular championship you may have 2 men in M80 and 1 in M85 entered in the 100. Being cognizant of the rule in question, the organizers say: OK, we’re combining them. Race no. 9 will have 3 runners: Barney T., Orville W., and Rutherford H. Good.
But overnight, Barney has indigestion, and he doesn’t go to the line. Rutherford, in M85, runs a sensational 16.21 with a very slight (and legal) breeze behind him. The great Rod Parker set the American M85 mark in Decatur 9 years ago of 16.22. As I understand it, Dave, our friend Rutherford would have his record tossed out, even if he ran it at nationals. Is that a good idea?
Well, color me “stupid.” I couldn’t find the 3-person requirement under rule l65.4, which is not surprising because the governing rule seems to be 262.3(a). I finally found the rule, but it is for all of USATF, not just for masters (I should have known that).
Thus, the rationale for the rule remains uncertain, and its suitability for masters is highly questionable, especially at nationals, where acceptance of records is supposed to be essentially automatic.
Think of the following: “You broke the 80 hurdles record for M80, but you are national champion only, not the new recordholder. The problem is that only two of you ran. No, that did not make the hurdles shorter or the distance any less, but you will not get the record.”
I think David Rudisha’s 800 record should be thrown away, he was running alone the whole race!
What about throwers and jumpers?
They always make their efforts alone, one by one.
I love the David Rusdisha analogy! This is a classic example of not all USATF elite level rules should apply to masters competition. If the track was accurate and they utilized FAT, then she should hold the record.
I’ll, of course, be disappointed if my mile time of 6:13.0 is not accepted as a WR. However, what’s really important to me is that I set a goal of running a mile faster than the W65-69 WR set by Marie-Louise Michelson (an outstanding runner), and I achieved that goal. I ran 3.28 seconds faster, even running at 5,000 ft. altitude. I executed my race plan well, and had a “killer” finishing kick. (That was kind of fun!)
Jim Weed, Christel Donley, and all of the other officials at the USATF Mid-America Region Masters Championships meet in Ft. Collins were wonderful. Christel was a real champ. She ran around gathering all of the signatures and the other required information for the “Application for USATF Masters Record” form. Lots of information is required, and she got it all. She even noticed that I spelled my name wrong on the form! (I guess I was kind of out of it after the race.) This crew runs a great track and field meet, and I want to express my appreciation for their hard work. I’ll be there next year!
Again we revist the travesty of great performances going unrecognized by the “record gods”. Why are we groveling at their feet for ratification??? Why?
Will someone with gravitas (Ken Stone, Peter Taylor, Pete Magill, Nolan Shaheed….many more could be listed here)please make a list of current records and update it going forward with the F.A.T, meet location, and date and post it on the web. I personally do not care if the record was seet with x, y or z number of competitors.
This will be lengthy, but it’s been two weeks since we have been on this topic, rule or not. As I mentioned before, I lost a lot of sleep over the “rejection” of Laurie’s record and I am still rehearsing the fact.
I was not involved in the race or any decision, but I did not know the rule either. Ken’s comment made me
say: this is ridiculous, it stinks” but even that did not help. Getting the rule book out, reading the rule 165.4 clearly states :at least 3 competitors…
I tried to find :Masters exeption…. not true.
Believe me, I would have jumped into the race and dragged other people with me (which would not have been that “legal” either.)
Reading all the comments does help to the point: we need a rule change. But that does not happen over night, we all know that. Nothing will be decided – after it has been submitted – to the rules committee. And there might be votes against it!!
I finally called Sandy, first of all wanting to know if my letter with all the submitted forms had arrived, it did. She then calmly explained the stated rule, actually it also counts for WMA – World records, that I could not find in our rule book, but I will inquire again.
I know, Sandy does not make the rules, she just follows them, not a very thankful job, when so much
is in stake!
If any meet director is familiar with all the rules,
I draw my hat
. Being involved – for 21 yrs now! in the Pasadena Senior Games, which has become one of the premier
Masters Track and Field meets, I have to constantly answer questions why are records not accepted, if the athlete competes in a certain age group. The answer is: we have some USATF rules, but not all:
Senior Games count the age at the end of the year,
which means, a 49 yr old athlete can compete as a 50 yr. old if his/her birthday is before the end of the yr.
YET RECORDS ONLY COUNT, IF HE/SHE IS 50 AT FIRST DAY OF THE MEET,. ETC. This might be common knowledge to the regular Senior athletes, it is NOT for the just Senior Games participants.
Summa summarum, please submit suggestions for rule changes – reasonable, please! to Gary Snyder, who will forward them to the forces.
Oh, one more thing, it is great to at least read about records that are broken, as” john” mentioned,
so there is a little recognition.
Thank you for that, Christel. And now, to be a terrible quibbler, this rule for 3+ athletes comes under Rule 262 (“Rules Applicable to All Records”). Under that rule it comes under section 3, which is “Credit for Records.”
Those looking for rule 165.4 will not find the rule in question. Rule 165 has a 1-word title — Timing — and thus Rule 165.4 has to do with timing races. I say this not to be a smart guy but rather to aid those people who are trying to find the 3-person rule.
More to the point, throwing out a masters record because there were not enough competitors is so egregious that someone should ask for a waiver. In the absence of evidence that having 2 competitors instead of 3+ assists the runner in some way it is clearly just a “nuisance rule” and should be considered as such.
Show me where WMA states that three competitors are needed for a record… In European masterships in the high age classes there have been several races with only two competitors, even with both in another age group. I have never heard that records in such a race are immediately rejected.
Leave a Reply