Radical new hurdles specs being mulled in WMA
Almost a year ago, I collated my correspondence on an Aussie proposal to rejigger barrier heights and distances between hurdles for the masters age groups. Now I see (belatedly) that the proposal will be discussed by WMA officials at indoor worlds in Austria this coming March. Among the suggestions: M45 to M60 age groups would run 300 hurdles (sted of 400). And M65 and over would run 200 hurdles. The short hurdle distance for men would be 100 (sted of 110) for ages 40-49 and then go to 90m (55-64) and 80m (65-74), finally ending up at 60m for all ages 75-plus.
The British masters Web site sayeth:
“Following a meeting of the WMA Stadia committee in San Sebastian, it was decided that there should be an international moratorium on the hurdles world wide before looking at any recommendation for changes.
“With this BMAF Chairman, Winston Thomas, has been asked to coordinate the information from as many affiliations of the regions, so that there can be a detailed outline of hurdle specification. Whilst he is awaiting all the information, he would be grateful for comments from BMAF members athletes and organizers as to their thoughts, as he is already aware of the general hurdles markings on our tracks. These are the same as several of our European Affiliates.â€
The Brits posted a chart of suggested changes in hurdle race specs, which includes this note:
A DISCUSSION DOCUMENT ON MASTERS HURDLES SPECIFICATIONS
The start base of any changes will be from the Australian Recommendation as below, this should be compared with our general hurdle set up, as it will be with other national set up. There are several outlined points from the Australian to justify the changes. Genuine responses and recommendations would be appreciated before the end of December (2005), when they will be coordinated and the results produced in February, for discussion at the Indoor championships in Linz in March.â€
Sorry about the delay in reporting this. It may have been mentioned in National Masters News (following San Seb), but I don’t recall having seen it.
In any case, the masterstf mailing list on Yahoo Groups (search for hurdles) had a big debate last year on whether to change the current hurdles. So some of those folks may want to weigh in with WMA authorities (or USATF’s reps to WMA) before long. Changes can’t be made official until 2007 (when the WMA General Assembly next meets), but when the WMA council gets a head of steam going, it’s hard to stop it.
You can email Winston Thomas in the UK straightaway.
6 Responses
Is this debate an individual one, or is it a national one? Is there going to be a USA opinion? I would presume so, or do our USA delegates just vote their own convictions? Why do you suppose people think hurdlers need shorter distances while our same age group runners run a full race? Why run a 200 hurdle race as a concession to age when it in the same meet they run a 400 and 800? Hurdlers can run 300m IH at 60 or 65. Why mess with it? Where is the evidence that it needs to be changed? Was there a death? Was some poor 60+ hurdler incapacitated after his race? (Well, that’s a possibility, for sure.) I have never heard one 60+ hurdler campaign for reducing the distance. Where is this coming from?
Courtland Gray M 61 hurdles
Ken and Courtland,
Months ago Jeff Brower’s posting started a very
good dialogue of what various hurdlers in the US
desired. I am open to what ever is decided.
However please note when I run all comers meets
vs high school and college kids . . . I am limited to 110 meters, 39″ tall, and 10 yards
apart.
Jeff Davison
California
M45-Bracket High Hurdles
$%&#@#$%!!!! This proposal would be an absolute nightmare!!!! The justification provided is negligible. Correlations between youth hurdlers and adults don’t exist. There is so much wrong with this that I don’t know hardly where to begin! If I had hair, I’d pull it out!
My ditto on Jeff Brower’s expletive. I can see no justification to shorten the long hurdles–when they have Senior athletes count 13.1 miles as a marathon, then we might consider shortening the distance.
The short hurdles and the steps between are a problem. The more we make adjustments, the more difficult it will make it for meet directors. We have to assume that the only people present at a meet who know where the hurdles go are hurdlers. Here in Southern California, I have not gotten a proper warm up for a short hurdle race yet, because I am always fixing the hurdles. Of course, I also have to check the long hurdles too. But short hurdles are more complex, above age 60, the CURRENT marks are not on a standard track. The more complex we make hurdle marks, the fewer meets will run them properly either through lack of knowledge or incompetence. More likely our events will go the way of Senior Olympics where hurdles are not even held. As a misunderstood event, we will become as marginalized as Racewalk.
I will say, on a personal note; shortening the distance between the hurdles at 50 has been a revelation of a new (old) event. I was unable to make 3 steps for a full flight starting in my early 40’s, by 45 I was unable to 3 step for more than half the race. 5 steps not only made the race slow, frustrating and uninteresting, but by the required change in cadence, it became injurious. So the change of spacing brought back a new event. I would not be against the change occurring at age 45. Now that I am back to 3 stepping the race, I’m happy and excited about the event. It took me half of the season to work out how to make the steps . At what age will the hurdles get too far to make the steps again? I’ll just have to stay tuned. But then, isn’t this the thought pattern of every hurdler before he goes to a race. Is it worth the effort to drive a hundred miles and pay $25 in order to 5 step a flight of hurdles?
I am very much in favor of reducing the interval spacing in my short hurdle race (female–45) from 8 meters to 7.5. It is a strain to 3 step the entire race and I find myself chopping to a 5 step pattern near the end of the race. Such a switch is dangerous and could lead to a fall and possibly a severe injury.
I’ve been watching this debate for years. The only spacing that makes any sense at all are those that are marked on a track: 110 and 100 (55, 60 inside). The onlt hurdle heights that make any sense are those that exist on the little fences: 30,33,36,39,42. Beyond that – there will be no opportunities to compete because there is no facility to compete at. Hard enough for a meet director to deal with setting up hurdles at all- let alone have to measure numerous unmarked spacings. When I’m not able to hurdle 42s..I’ll do 39s…then 36s then 33s…then 30s. When I’m not able to hurdle those, I’ll stop.
Leave a Reply