USATF adds some masters records, streamlines records process
2010 annual meeting logo
And in addition to the 150 masters records previously submitted by Commitee-of-One Sandy Pashkin, these other American masters records have been ratified by the overall USATF Records Committee:
OUTDOOR – MEN
3000m 55-59 9:21.84 Richard Burns Claremont, CA 02/20/10
Weight Throw 55-59 18.91m Jim Wetenhall Stoutville, CAN 09/11/10
OUTDOOR – WOMEN
Ultra Wt Pent 35-39 2703 pts Jennifer Stevens Reading, PA 06/06/10
Ultra Wt Pent 55-39 4080 pts Kathy Wetenhall Reading, PA 06/06/10
400m Relay 55-59 56.69 Atlanta TC Atlanta, GA 06/22/10
See a list of other extra USATF ratified records here.
Many other questions are left from the Virginia annual meeting, including the fate of drug-testing at masters nationals. How will it be done? Resolution of other items on the masters committee agenda are also unknown to me.
Can anyone shed light on these topics (as mentioned in Nov. 17 conference call)?
The “Forever Fast” marketing film is finished. Now we enter Phase II. There will be a “Train the Trainer” session to help get this film rolled out. National is VERY happy with what they’ve seen. $12,000 has been awarded to help with the expenses related to this rollout.
Anti-Doping Criteria 2011 – Stephen will form a committee and they will work on defining their function. Testing will start at the 2011 National Masters Outdoor T&F Meet.
Permanent WMA Delegates – resolution will be discussed at the Annual Meeting.
MTF/MLDR Athlete of the Year Selection Process – The National management wants to allow just one Masters AOY, but obviously MTF & MLDR each have their own AOY. Not sure how this is going to get worked out. It will be discussed at the Annual Meeting.
Invitational Program Review – Mark Cleary will discuss this at the Annual Meeting.
Clinic Model – Robert Thomas will discuss this at the Annual Meeting.
New Business
Website – Jeff Brower will discuss this at the Annual Meeting.
Record Chair Response Review – Gary will discuss this at the Annual Meeting.
Team Hotel for World Meets – Discussed having a place where many USA athletes may stay and have a place for the team to gather. Gary has worked on this quite a bit. The Doubletree Hotel has responded. A shuttle will go to all the venues from many hotels during the WMA meet. Based on previous WMA meets in the USA, it is probable that the USA alone will have over 2000 athletes. The MTF Committee is also considering a team massage therapist.
National Meet Results – handling of foreigners – Games Committee will submit 2 proposals during the Annual Meeting.
7 Responses
Good news – Fewer empty lanes in Masters running finals!
Thanks to the USATF Rules Committee for passing Item 108, replacing Rule 332.2(b), which will now read as follows:
Item 108 –
When an individual or relay team, having originally qualified for a subsequent round, voluntarily withdraws
for any reason, the next ranked original non-qualifier if checked-in with the clerk of course, and
only that non-qualifier, shall be advanced to participate in that subsequent round. This procedure is
continued as required. The provisions of Rule 332.2(g) shall not apply. The referee may reform the heats.
When an individual or relay team, having qualified for a subsequent round, withdraws for any reason, the fastest non-qualifier may be advanced to fill the vacated position. When an individual or team is disqualified, Rule 166.7 applies.
Above is the existing rule. Not much difference.
“Fastest” vs “next ranked”, whatever difference that is. The 9th qualifier should alway hang around at the masters nationals. This hasn’t changed.
The rule on the books said “may be advanced.” The new rule says “shall be advanced.” That is the difference. The reason for the rule change is that masters championship meet directors/officials/clerks or whomever was in charge would not advance anyone from a semi-final to a final, even with several empty final lanes because the rule was advisory (“may”).
I cannot conceive of a situation where a world class athlete such as Courtland would need this rule, but there are lots of masters who would love to run in a final. They don’t understand why if they placed 9th in a semi-final, they can’t run in an empty lane in a final. Well, know they can.
I have seen several non-qualifiers advanced to finals when there were open lanes due to withdrawals. This dates back to San Jose, 1997, when I learned of this rule when a non-qualifier was advanced, finished third, and I was fourth in the 200m. (as best I can recall) Granted, the officials should know the masters’ special rules exceptions (this is an exception)and if they don’t, the masters runners should educate them. It is pretty arcane. But this is not new.
Granted I have not been doing this long (2006 was my first nationals) but I have NEVER seen a non-qualifier allowed to take an empty lane due to a qualifier scratching. And there have been plenty of opportunities for that to occur.
Kim,
I was the 9th qualifier in the M55 60M in Boston this yaer. I was advanced to the final because one of the other runner scratched.
Thad
I meant “year” vice “yaer”.
Leave a Reply