Silly season turns serious: Seed times at Sacramento under scrutiny

Rex Harvey (right) knows his stuff.

A lady entering Sacramento worlds had a serious question: What’s with the bogus seed times? She drew a long reply from former WMA stadia VP Rex Harvey and a shorter reply from an IAAF gent who will officiate at worlds. The athlete wrote Rex: “In the printed booklet that is downloadable from the USATF website regarding World’s registration, it says seed times must have been from races after January 2009. However, when you sign up to register online, which is the preferred method, there is no comment or rule stating what and from when seed times can be entered. So for instance, a competitor in my age group has entered a seed time that was listed as a race result from 2007. I can’t verify that she didn’t run what she put as a seed time after Jan 2009, but it seems unlikely based on her past performances and races since Jan 2009. How do you plan to enforce this?”

She continued her query:

In fact, it’s probably not even a fact of enforcing it, if the statement regarding times and when they occurred, is not stated as you register. No one would know unless they read the booklet – which is less likely if you are from the US, since it takes place in our home country. In the end, I realize it is the day you race and your result that counts, but it could give someone a lane advantage. Just thought I would bring this to your attention.

Rex replied, and CC’d his note to a bunch of WMA execs:

I will give you some background and my opinion, but I am no longer the person responsible for this sort of thing.  That would be WMA Vice-president Stadia; Serge Beckers sergebeckers@live.com   Maybe you can get in touch with him.

When I took the VP Stadia job in 2001, seed marks were used very sporadically and usually  not used at all even if they were known. Through the years I was able to introduce the use of seed times for championships to insure that the right people get into the right heats per the IAAF rules that we operate under. I was able to convince LOC’s to require seed marks on entry blanks although some athletes still leave it blank and end up in the fastest sprint heats and the slowest distance heats.  This, in a big hurry,  made a lot of people aware of the need for submitting seed times.    

And the requirement  for these  seed marks is to be the best within the past two years or lessor marks as stated by the WMA rule 166.2.1.  However, individual entry blanks have encouraged those that did not have a performance in that two year period were encouraged to submit their best estimate and they were further encouraged to update the seed mark as often as need be even up to the last minute by submitting updates to the Technical Information Center (TIC) at the Championships themselves.

 I believe the same procedure is still in effect, but Mr. Beckers can give you a definitive  answer on that.  I do have to warn you that WMA has no way to check those seed marks, or more accurately, no time and personnel to check all  those seed marks.  An IAAF World Championship has 600 or so seed marks to check and most of the people are very well known.  WMA World Championships has 16,000 or so marks to check and it is quite impractical.  

As with doping, sportsmanlike competition and many other factors, we are dependent  on the integrity of the entrants.  And if that is lacking than we depend upon peers of the entrants to emphasize  that integrity.  Some people are shamed into doing it correctly if it is pointed out.  Peer pressure is more effective here than any other practical approach.    The goal is as stated in the IAAF Competition Rules: “…the performances of all athletes should be considered and the heats drawn so that, normally, the best performers reach the final.”

In your specific example, perhaps the person you are referring to does not have a performance in the past two years and is honestly estimating that they are going to be able to duplicate their 2007 performance because of good health, hard training, or whatever.  You will have to admit that we are all optimists when it comes to estimating our future performances.

Good luck in pursuing your question and, more importantly,  good luck in your competition.


Alan Bell, who will be head starter at the London 2012 Olympics, added his $.02:

I can concur with the test that Rex has put forward. Having been comp director for 5 WMA World events, the idea of using performances submitted by athletes has always been the required system— BUT the reality is that such info is not consistently submitted and the process is undermined.

My advice? Run each heat like it’s the final.

Print Friendly

February 25, 2011

7 Responses

  1. Jimson Lee - February 25, 2011

    When you have 4 rounds in the sprints, bogus seed times don’t make a difference, as a good time (like Ken said) will guarantee you a better lane draw for the next round.

    But my problem with bogus seed times are with timed finals, like the indoor 400m. The person who crosses the line first should be declared the winner, in a properly drawn heat sheet.

  2. Matthew - February 25, 2011

    Good reply by Rex! Good of him to take the time to answer.

  3. keith McQuitter - February 25, 2011

    may be you should get someone to check the times posted,most people dont beleave,most of the times posted,I myself have been questioned on my last weeks hurdle time,but usatf ill web site will be posted soon,first heat will tell the truth she will go to next round or on the way home sooner then regular.

  4. al cestero - February 26, 2011

    that’s right keith…the proof’s in the pudding…that’s why i love this sport so much… all the bs in the world can’t survive for very long. it is what it is…

  5. Don Young - February 26, 2011

    My seed time for the 10k will be highly accurate, as I melted on the track in Sac this summer. High predictability for a repeat!! 🙂
    The secret to exceeding expectations is to have reasonable expectations ;p
    Should be fun regardless 🙂

  6. Matt B. - February 26, 2011

    Verified marks; give first round bye to the top 8 seeded competitors. If the marks are verified than why run the first heat. Aren’t they making this a new policy for elite outdoor world track championships?

  7. peter taylor - February 26, 2011

    Interesting concept, Matt, making a connection between (a) what competitors have done elsewhere and (b) their status at the national championships.

    Whether you are Bill Collins, arguably the greatest male sprinter in the history of the US masters program, or Albert Gore, our 45th Vice President and also in M60 (although not entered in Albuquerque), theoretically it does not matter who you are or what your accomplishments have been when drawing up the trials for our sprints. Or does it?
    Is it random or based on past performances?

    My best guess is that both approaches have been tried in past championships. Regardless, would it be a good idea to tie results from other meets to our championships? Responding to Jimson Lee (comment no. 1), might it be wise to announce that the seeded 400s at indoor nationals will be composed of those athletes with the 6 fastest CONFIRMED times?

    One benefit, of course, would be an incentive to attend regional or association championships in order to get a qualifying time. Those meets have often had disappointing attendance levels. Another benefit might be greater equitablity.

Leave a Reply