Peter Taylor waxes philosophical (and a bit nostalgic) in the final installment of reports looking back on the 2007 masters indoor nationals. His first report mentioned his announcing ordeal, and his second filing focused on many of the stars of the meet. Peter begins his third report with the question: Did we “have ourselves a track meet”? He answers: Yes, I think we did.

Peter Taylor’s parting thoughts “on issues of some importance”:

1. Did we “have ourselves a track meet”? Yes, I think we did. When I first came into masters track I felt it wasn’t real track because people came to the meet, did their event(s), and went home. I won my very first race in masters track (1:31.8 for 600 yards, you could look it up), but I didn’t feel this was the real deal.
To “have yourself a track meet” means that people who are not even competing are enjoying the event, and it means that the competitors will look back at it as a memorable occasion. I believe we succeeded.
2. Does the masters track and field program have a future? I believe it does, as evidenced by the many talented and enthusiastic competitors in the 35, 40, and 45 groups. M30 and W30 were rather thin, as they always are, but I think we have a solid foundation.
From Antwon Dussett (M30 from Illinois) to Joy Upshaw-Margerum (W45 from California), our younger performers are enthusiastic and anxious to do great things (and they succeed so often).
3. Field events. I was charged with paying much more attention to the field events this year, and while I did do that I failed in several ways. I totally ignored Milan Jamrich’s American mark in the high jump; he is completely right and I was absolutely at fault.
I believe there were two high jumps going on at once, and he was surely in the one farther away from me. Even so, I should have been on his record. In fact, someone handed me a sheet showing that he had broken the record, and I remember contemplating the pronunciation (I usually go with ME – Lahn YAHM – rick).
Regardless, I blew that, as I am almost sure that I did not announce it. I don’t know what else to say. It was no accident that I gave Trish Porter, Kimiko Nakatake, Pamela Swan, and other high jumpers more attention – they were jumping right next to me (on two occasions I thought that I might have interfered with Kimiko’s run-up, I was that close).
4. Counting laps. I was somewhat taken aback at the notion that it is the runner’s responsibility to count her/his laps. I remember a woman at Decatur (2004) who took that responsibility; she simply stopped at the finish line after completing the distance and refused to run any more (I believe she had a personal counter).
I don’t recall the officials being all that happy with her assumption of responsibility. In addition, if it’s the runner’s responsibility, then she/he must surely keep going until the distance has been completed, regardless of what the officials say.
Thus, if outdoors you have run only 11.5 laps and they tell you that you’re through (the 5000), it must certainly be your responsibility to run 1 more lap. But if you do, and someone tries to throw you off the track while you are running it (because officially you have finished), what are you supposed to do, stop running?
Thus, regardless of what the “book” says, I cannot imagine that in a meet of any standing, much less a nationals, that it is solely the responsibility of the runner to count her/his laps (with the officials there only for assistance). That said, the lap counters at Boston have done a terrific job in the 10 years it has been at the Reggie Lewis.