National Senior Games generates gobs of older age-group records
National Masters News, which got a wonderful print redesign this month, offered a great summary of records set at Humble, Texas, at the National Senior Games last week. I haven’t checked the accuracy or completeness of this list, but it’s amazing what our elites did in the headwind conditions. With USATF partnering with NSGA for the first time, records set at Texas should be automatically accepted. But who knows? I’d love to USATF collate all American and world records set at Senior Olympics and send out a press release.
Here’s what NMN sent out in its email blast to subscribers:
Records Continue On National Senior Games Final Day
Friday was the final day for track and field competition at the 2011 National Senior Games in Humble, Texas. The last day wrapped up with finals in the 200, 800, pole vault and javelin for athletes 65 and older. The weather was still hot and humid and the sprinters battled headwinds.
In the 200 Kathy Bergen, W70, completed her 100/200 double winning the 200 final in a meet record 32.44 into a 1.3 meters per-second headwind. Bergen earlier won the 100 in a meet record 15.22. The W85 200 was a barnburner with three runners bettering the listed American record of 1:00.31. Winning was Partricia Peterson who blasted the old mark with a 51.73 into a 2.1 meters per-second headwind. Second was Lorma Bauer, who is 89, with a 57.04 and third was Dottie Gray in 1:00.07. Gray won the 800 in 5:33.71. In the W75 200 Jeanne Daprano won running 35.83 with Barbara Jordan next in 36.23.
In the M75 200 Bob Lida bettered Payton Jordan’s 28.14 American record running 28.11 into a 1.9 meters per-second head wind. In the M65 race 200 Bruce Covey battled a 4.2 meters per-second headwind to win in 26.74. Harry Brown got a meet record in the M80 furlong, running 32.19. The W80 800 saw the 200 meter winner take on the 1500 winner. as both smashed the meet record. Nessie Holicky who would also win the 200 ran 4:22.22 to edge 1500 winner Lois Gilmore who ran 4:22.84 as both were 19 seconds under the old mark. Hollicky won the 200 in 47.40. Gary Patton, M65, added to his 1500 win running 2:21.79. In the M70 800 Maurice McDonald the 400 champion came back and edged the 1500 champion, Sherwood Sagendahl, 2:40.43 to 2:41.14.
Johnnye Valien smashed the W85 meet record in the pole vault with a first attempt clearance of 1.20 (3′ 11 1/4″) and got a meet mark in the javelin with a 13.80 (45′ 3″). In the pole vault Joe Johnston, M65, equaled the meet record with a 3.35 (10′ 11 3/4″) leap. In the pole vault, Don Isett got a meet record jump of 2.95 (9′ 8″) that he cleared on his second attempt.
Trent Lane, M100, got another American record throwing the javelin 8.47 (27′ 9″), bettering John Whittemore’s 5.98 set in 2000. In the W70 javelin Madelaine Cazel bettered the meet record by nearly 2 meters with a 28.18 (92′ 5″) throw. Gloria Krug added the javelin title to her medal collection throwing 16.08 (52′ 9″). The M65 javelin was a good battle between Arthur Lawrence and Delmon McNabb. Mc Nabb took the lead in the first round with a 42.01 throw. Lawrence came up with a 43.67 (143′ 3″) on his third that took the lead for good. McNabb came close with a 43.46 (142′ 7″ on his fifth throw. In the M70 javelin Pete LaBarge bettered his own meet record of 44.78 with a 45.10 (147′ 11″). In the M75 javelin Stanley Koster beat the meet mark throwing 38.08 (124′ 11″).
10 Responses
Thank you for posting this, Ken. I note with interest your comment: “With USATF partnering with NSGA for the first time, records set at Texas should be automatically accepted.”
I do believe the meet in Texas was earlier this month. I point that out because there is still cleaning up to do for our March 2010 indoor nationals (Boston) and, especially, our March 2011 indoor nationals in Albuquerque.
With scads of records set at Albuquerque not listed at http://www.usatf.org (not “pending” for American and absent for world), should not work be done there first? Remember that by not recognizing records from Albuquerque a line has been crossed: It appears that records set at masters nationals are no longer automatic.
What does that mean for Berea (2011 outdoors), Bloomington (2012 indoors), and Lisle (2012 outdoors)? Are athletes owed some kind of promise that the pattern seen at Albuquerque will be reversed, or will it be simply caveat emptor?
I haven’t seen anything about the discus throwers from Texas. We had a fairly good meet at the National Senior games.
Nothing is “automatic” – indeed – there are many records to be “accepted” or “pending” – and those that are not accepted – one never hears about those. It is time to modernize the record keeping process. It is time to get away from the current “process” that gives the authority to accept or reject to one person. And for US records – we have the same person accepting or rejecting or refusing to act upon both AR and WR.
Given current technology it should be possible to devise a program that would set guidelines for record acceptance and remove 99% of the human element.
Will the WMA in SAC – there is no sure thing except that there is no sure thing.
Yes, Mary, I like your idea of bringing technology into the game. To give a medical parallel, when my father was 21, physicians had very little to go by other than listening to the heart and lungs, observing the patient, and reviewing the symptoms and history.
Today the physician might order a CT scan, MRI, Doppler ultrasound, even PET, any of thousands of blood studies, etc., etc. Why has masters stayed in the dark ages in terms of the technology of record approval?
One excuse would be that the traditional methods work, but with failure rates for records in the Albuquerque meet of 75% in the 200, 40% in the 400, 100% in the 800, etc., can anyone really say it is working?
How great to hear that Pat Peterson is back competing after her pelvic fractures in January! I’ve been wondering how she was doing. (http://masterstrack.com/2011/01/17183/)
Great results by these 70+ athletes!
To add to Peter and Mary’s discussion, it would be helpful to know what is wrong when a record is not accepted. I have a record application form signed by the meet officials in Albuquerque along with the line finish photo, and no explanation as to why my 60 metres World record in W55 has not been accepted. When I was given “no time” in my 400 metres race in Landover, I was given an explanation and an apology. Why has this not happened with the Albuquerque results? Or with any records that have not been accepted?
So, Peter, what is your prediction on who waits longer for a record to be acknowledged? Merlene Ottey, Joy, or all others? If Merlene has the least wait, then something is terribly wrong with the system and it sends a message (at least to me) that credentialled meet directors and officials are not regarded.
Well, Vance, somehow I can’t see Merlene Ottey, Bernard Lagat, and others of that level doing any work at all in getting their masters records accepted. As for the length of time they must wait, I would be speculating.
I’m on firmer ground when I speak about Joy Upshaw (denied 3 times already this year for her world record at Albuquerque in the 200), Barbara Jordan (also denied 3 times for her Albuquerque 200), Jeanne Daprano and Latrica Dendy (denied for their 400s at Albuquerque), and so forth and so on.
Or how about Stacey Nieder (denied for her Boston high jump in 2010 and her Albuquerque high jump in 2011), and a long line of other “regular” masters athletes who have broken records at nationals or in other prominent meets (Penn Relays, Mt. SAC Relays, etc.) and gotten nothing?
Somehow, that doesn’t seem right to me.
OK, I’ll stick my tongue in to my cheek. Lets look at some people who have been waiting. Harold Chapson has an M80 800m 2:49.4 set in 1983 and a M80 1500m 5:54.5 set in 1982. Jim O’Neill has a M60 5000m 16:52.0 set at WAVA in 1985. They’ve been waiting a while. Maybe its the quality of the meet, Jearl Miles Clark is waiting on her W35 record of 1:57.27, 2004 set in front of a small crowd at meet called the Olympics. I guess they had bad officiating there. Allen Johnson M35 ran 110 highs in 12.96(+0.4) at a meet called the IAAF World Cup back in 2006, maybe that record was disqualified because he ran over hurdles that were too high (though he did get recognized for a race he ran in 13.23 a year later–that was probably elite favoritism). Sandu Rebenciuc, M35 ran a 3000 steeplechase in 8:30.45 on the same track we are going to run in Sacramento back in 2004 at a thing called the U.S. Olympic Trials. You got it, still waiting. And we keep making note of how many times the W40 1500 and M35 100 has been broken. I could go on, but why?
Well, Andy, you could go on because it’s both amusing and sad (and as we all know, one person’s humor is another’s misfortune). Let me put you on hold right now. OK, I am back. Guess what, great progress has been made.
We now have “pending” next to a lot of marks that until yesterday had been ignored (from Albuquerque). Let me put you on hold again, because I am stunned. OK, I am back. There have been a lot of improvements to the list.
Perhaps the most notable is that after 15 MONTHS Stacey Nieder has made the list. Yes !!! I am going to e-mail her as soon as I get off this site. She broke the American mark in the W40 high jump 15 months ago at Boston nationals and then again almost 4 months ago at Albuquerque nationals.
Yes. Antwon Dussett has been saved, Jeanne Daprano and Latrica Dendy have been saved. The M75 shot put still needs work, as does the W85 800, but we are getting somewhere.
Still hope that when the world records are updated for the FOURTH time that our friends Joy Upshaw and Barbara Jordan are on it.
I am not going to look as I get heartburn easily! As I said before – time to bring technology into the equation. As Apple likes to say “there is an apt for that” – well there is not but there should be.
Think about it – FAT timing has much of the important data that could be downloaded into a data management program. Some of the other requirements could be scanned into the program – rather than rushing around getting all the paperwork together and mailing it off to a desk in a galaxy far far away. With most track folks having smart phones – or with a Ipad2 (my latest toy) – and with computers at track side – and with a scanner -all this information could be done onsite at the moment. If all the T’s were crossed and the I’s dotted – all the required data could be sent to that desk in that galaxy where a program could enter the record into the data base for uploading onto the WR web page or the AR page Much more complex tasks are handled this way – this is not the building of a space ship to go to Mars.
The system we have now is right up there with the use of popsicle sticks at the finish line and a couple of folks writing down bib numbers and trying to keep the order of finish straight.
Or – as I saw in a race awhile ago – using the tear-off tags from the bibs on a spindle. Then someone dropped a spindle and the tags fell off. That reminded me of the early days of IBM punch cards – drop the stack – your project was doomed. Ah such memories.
And I marvel that Helly Visser’s mile record was accepted at the World level so quickly – those Canadian cousins of ours are smart folks, they are not sending their records material to an ice flow off the north pole. But my mile record – set 2 months earlier is still not accepted as an AR. Really – good grief Charlie Brown.
Leave a Reply