QUESTION - Rule for finish line (part of the body)

Torso- end of debate. The retired track coach was wrong.

It's not even the shoulder- it's the torso.

We had a state qualifier reversed once when the runner who was originally given first was ruled to have had their shoulder cross the line before the other person's torso (chest).

Also tell that "coach" that you round up in hand timing no matter what:

12.11 becomes 12.2

12.19 becomes 12.2

Back to the torso rule- that's why chips now come in numbers. When they were on the feet (shoes, ankles) they disregarded the torso crossing the line.

I suppose she thinks they should eliminate tackling in football because kids are toppling over. = )

Newly retired track coach lied to you. The race is over when the "torso, as distinguished from the head, neck, arms, legs, feet, or hands." This is from the 2012 NFHS Rules Book.

So why do the mcroad races always have D-tags for your feets?

redux wrote:

So why do the mcroad races always have D-tags for your feets?

In my area most have switched to B-tags (probably more for convienence than any other reason, you will be pinning on a bib anyway).

I have always believed that in a close race (at least for the places that matter), they would override the computer results for a d-tag and use visual evidence/video tape to identify the correct winner or a race.

runn wrote:

Torso- end of debate. The retired track coach was wrong.

It's not even the shoulder- it's the torso.

We had a state qualifier reversed once when the runner who was originally given first was ruled to have had their shoulder cross the line before the other person's torso (chest).

Also tell that "coach" that you round up in hand timing no matter what:

12.11 becomes 12.2

12.19 becomes 12.2

Back to the torso rule- that's why chips now come in numbers. When they were on the feet (shoes, ankles) they disregarded the torso crossing the line.

I suppose she thinks they should eliminate tackling in football because kids are toppling over. = )

Perfect response.

Good reason for the newer chips that are placed in the numbers/bibs that are placed on the chest.

Having a chip on one shoe could easily place one finisher ahead of another if their front foot crossing the line had the chip finishing ahead of his competitor whose chest crossed first but had his chip on his back foot that crossed the line on the follow through.

Look at this photo from the 2007 WC's

If it was chip timing (play along) and Tyson Gay had his chip on his right shoe and Atkins had his chip on his left shoe, Atkins would have been World Champ.

Asafa Powell would almost move up from third to first depending if the shoe was on the other foot so to speak.

Chip timing systems, whether on the foot or on the chest, are proximity devices. There is no guarentee that two chips crossing the sensor mat at nearly the same time will correctly resolve finish order.

That's why I said "play along."

But...can one chip in reality cross a mat slightly before another while the computer results list the second ship ahead of the first?

Is that what you are saying?

I think the B-tag (on the number) technology is newer than the chip/D-tag on the shoe and that just for convenience B-tags would be preferred. There was an issue of whether there would be proper recording for something several feet above a timing-mat.

But I also thought the "official" results would be determined the old-fashioned way without regard to any device, i.e., a judge ruling (incl. via a photo) whose torso crossed first. Yet in races now a runner finishes and immediately her time, to 100s, is posted and that ends up being the official time. Can anyone explain that? What is triggering the time we see for splits or the finish?

Wow. So now "runners toppling over" is a safety issue? I'm all for measures to keep student athletes safe in regards to head injuries and dehydration, but this one is a little ridiculous if you ask me. Slow down! You might fall over!

Thanks for the responses. I certainly had never heard what she was saying, but I couldn't correct her because she's well-respected and had been the coach there for 20+ years...some of the other parents there had had children running for her for years, so they weren't going to listen to me.

Oh well, she said something about probably coming to fewer and fewer meets, so I'll set the record straight when she's not around.

See if you can get ahold of that rule book before you call her out on it. Although it seems like a dumb rule, it's certainly possible that it's the rule nonetheless...ie. the collective letsrun.com genius could be wrong here.

JoeGarland wrote:

Yet in races now a runner finishes and immediately her time, to 100s, is posted and that ends up being the official time. Can anyone explain that? What is triggering the time we see for splits or the finish?

Great question! The time displayed instantly for first place is caused by the runner crossing photoeyes at the finish line. By using three photoeyes stacked on top of each other, a small object (like an arm) is unlikely to trigger all three at once. A torso will break all three, and when all three are broken simultaneously, the clock stops. Sometimes the photoeye time will differ from the photofinish time by 0.01. When this happens the times are probably only one or two thousandths different, but show as 0.01 different because of rounding. Usually the times agree as you observed when a good photoeye setup is used.

Thanks for the explanation.

My quote from above is a direct quote from the 2012 NFHS Rules Book.

nawsir wrote:

Newly retired track coach lied to you. The race is over when the "torso, as distinguished from the head, neck, arms, legs, feet, or hands." This is from the 2012 NFHS Rules Book.

Big John wrote:

See if you can get ahold of that rule book before you call her out on it. Although it seems like a dumb rule, it's certainly possible that it's the rule nonetheless...ie. the collective letsrun.com genius could be wrong here.

Yep. I'll do that.

IAAF Rule 164.2:

The athletes shall be placed in the order in which any part of their bodies (i.e. torso, as distinguished from the head, neck, arms, legs, hand or feet) reaches the vertical plane of the nearer edge of the finish line as defined above.

I suppose a high school association or other group might come up with their own different rule, but torso is the normal rule. It could be the lower torso if the runner was leaning back instead of forward while crossing the line.

marksman wrote:

JoeGarland wrote:

Yet in races now a runner finishes and immediately her time, to 100s, is posted and that ends up being the official time. Can anyone explain that? What is triggering the time we see for splits or the finish?

Great question! The time displayed instantly for first place is caused by the runner crossing photoeyes at the finish line. By using three photoeyes stacked on top of each other, a small object (like an arm) is unlikely to trigger all three at once. A torso will break all three, and when all three are broken simultaneously, the clock stops. Sometimes the photoeye time will differ from the photofinish time by 0.01. When this happens the times are probably only one or two thousandths different, but show as 0.01 different because of rounding. Usually the times agree as you observed when a good photoeye setup is used.

__

How does the system know who was in first, second third, etc? Does a person have to decide that? It seems to go on teh board instantaneously, but how can the FAT system know the finishing order?

Where/how does one get a copy of that book? I see "rule changes" online, but no book in its entirety. I have noticed the referees implementing the new rule of having distance runners step back three steps and then approach the line when he says "on your marks".Anyway, where to get that book?Thanks!

nawsir wrote:

My quote from above is a direct quote from the 2012 NFHS Rules Book.

nawsir wrote:

Newly retired track coach lied to you. The race is over when the "torso, as distinguished from the head, neck, arms, legs, feet, or hands." This is from the 2012 NFHS Rules Book.

Some photofinish/finishlynx timers are good enough to get competely accurate results posted within 1-2 seconds of a runner finishing, which will almost be instanteous, if you're watching.

However, some timing systems have photoeyes/beams incorporated which can stop the clock at a certain time. Depending on the placement of the beam, this may bea relatively reliable way of stopping the clock.

Even further, FinishLynx can offset this time, so that it can add additional time to the time when the beam breaks, in order to not display a time faster than what was actually run. You can set this time to whatever you want to, but .02-.04 seconds is rather common.

Finishlynx can also incorporate chip systems, which are more frequently being built into tracks. Basically, the chips can be used for unofficial splits, but their formal time is still based on their torso.

Lynx developed something called IsoLynx that has a similar function, it debuted a year or two ago.

Finally, the reason chips are used at big road races? The distance is often fairly arbitrary, and formal results don't matter as much. It's a lot easier to time a race of 1000 people with chips than torsos...

In NCAA meets with chips, a digital video system has to be used in conjunction, in order to break "ties" where athlete finish within .4 of a second of one another (by chip time). Different states have different rules about this, some of which are pretty daft. There was a case in Alaska a few seasons ago where a kids foot beat the other kids foot to the mat, and registered a faster time, but their torso did not. The kid who technically won was then second because their state rules were poorly written.