The International Track and Field Annual is not dead (yet)

The title of the blog needs some explanation. The publication in question is produced by the Association of Track and Field Statisticians. In case you are wondering what is this association  I cannot do better than repeating verbatim what is written in the ATFS history page

On the 26th of August 1950, eleven “track nuts” met in Brussels, Belgium, during the 4th European Athletics Championships, and founded the Association of Track and Field Statisticians with the dual aim of of documenting the present and recovering the past, in order to commit to future memory the efforts of thousands of athletes, men and women, who have given lustre to the sport all over the World. Their aim was to promote such a work at both national and international levels. And these aims continue today.

The person behind that movement was the famous Roberto Quercetani (1922-2019). He is the most prominent Athletics historian. He was a founding member and president of the ATFS from 1950 until 1968. If you haven't read his History of Modern Track and Field athletics I urge you to track it down and read it. It's a must for all Athletics fans.

Under Quercetani's guidance the ATFS started publishing and "Annual" containing an as complete as possible collection of the results of the year as well as all-time classifications. Quercetani was the general editor of the ATFS Annual from 1951 to 1969. After that date the Annual continued under various editors up to 1984. 

In 1985, the british statistician and broadcaster Peter Matthews (1945-2023) took over the editing and assumed management of the publication from the ATFS. The name was changed to International Track and Field Annual that appears in the title of this post. In fact just two years later the label "Athletics 1987" was introduced along the Annual title and the publication became best known as the Athletics book. The yearly edition appeared by early May, and in 2022 the publication switched to print-on-demand. The very first year a pdf version was also offered (which would have been precious in the current all-digital era) but was discontinued the next year. And then Matthews passed away in 2023 and I was convinced that the International Track and Field Annual would disappear. In fact May had come and gone without any news about Athletics 2024. 

But sompe time back I was visiting, by chance, the ATFS page and I discovered an announcement that the 2024 edition was available (as the past years, in a print-on-demand form). It is published by R. Hymans and S. Mazdon, two well known athletics statisticians. So for the time being the yearly "Athletics" book is still alive.

To be honest I didn't know if I was going to buy this year's edition. I have noticed that for some years now I am just riffling through the book when it arrives and then I just add it to my collection (which goes back to the 70s). Whenever I need some information I look for it on the web and the last time I used the data from Athletics in some research work was ten years ago when I published the paper "Comparing the best athletic performances of the two sexes" together with my colleague Y. Charon. But then Athletics 2024 is dirt cheap (around 25 euros) so I decided to order it just as a tribute to Matthews (and because I am a Grouser fan 🙂). It arrived a few days later.

The European 2025 Indoors

I was not expecting a high-quality championship as it was held just two weeks before the World Indoors one. Well, I was rather pessimistic on this. It was really a most enjoyable competition and given that European Athletics were streaming the event without restrictions I could really follow it from beginning to end.

And the event I most enjoyed was the men's heptathlon. In the end of the second day we had a European record (in fact the second finisher's score was also better than the previous record), five national records for the first five and personal bests up to the 8th position. S. Skotheim who had broken Mayer's European record one month before the Indoors was the favourite and in the end he did prevail. But that had not been simple. S. Ehammer had a great first day and the only reason Skotheim could take command was due to his superb 2.19 m high jump combined with a below-par 1.98 m of Ehammer. But after the 60 m hurdles Ehammer took again command and, what is more impressive, he could conserve it after the pole vault. In fact by jumping 5.10 m (25 cm under his personal best) Skotheim lost his chance for a world record. (A 5.35 m would have brought him at just a handful of points from Eaton's record of 6645. They entered the 1000 m with Ehammer having a 50 points advantage. But although he finished in a personal best of 2:41.76, Skotheim's 2:32.72 gave him a 100 point advantage and the title. T. Steinforth was third with 6388 points (resisting to the attack of, European 2024 outdoors champion, J. Erm who covered a handicap of 41 points but was still 8 points short. My friends at Décapassion point out that if Steinforth manages to improve his "long" throws (discus and javelin) he will be among the protagonists of the decathlon. I guess I'l have to keep and eye open for him this summer.

The women's pentathlon was not of the same level due to the absence of the stars of the discipline (Thiam, Vidts, Johnson-Thompson, Vetter, Sulek). Still it led to a European U23 record, two national records and personal bests for the first four finishers. My favourite for the event was S. Dokter but S. Vanninen was in great shape: with three personal bests and knowing that she excels at the 800 m she was sure for the title even before the last event. Dokter and Vanninen upgraded last year's  bronze and silver medals at the World Indoors to silver and gold respectively. K. O'Connor shined at the 800 m, beating J. O'Dowda for the bronze medal. Since she is an excellent javelin thrower I guess I'll have to keep an eye open for her during this summer's heptathlon. And speaking about javelin throwers, I was somewhat disappointed by the performance of E. Oosterwegel who could not finish better than 9th. I just hope that she'll manage to get back in shape for Tokyo.

Since I would like this post to be published before the World Indoors (there just a few days away) I will not give a full report, as I am usually doing, but just a few comments on what I found particularly interesting. 

In the horizontal jumps the gold medals went to the outsiders (with the exception of women's triple jump won by A. Peleteiro. And even in this case she managed to win by just 6 cm, when D. Ion had a last jump at 14.31 m). M. Furlani, took command of the men's long jump with 8.12 m, the same performance as L. Lescay, but backed by a 8.10 m. But then B. Saraboyukov jumped 8.13 m securing gold. (As for Montler who had jumped 8.23 m prior to the championship he could not finish better than 7th). M. Hess was the favourite for the men's triple jump, having the world leading performance with 17.41 m. And he did improve it with 17.43 m on his first attempt. But on the 5th jump Andy Díaz (do not confuse him with Olympic and European champion Jordan Díaz) soared to 17.71 m and the game was over. M. Mihambo who went to Apeldoorn as the only woman in the world having jumped 7 m this year, went home with a bronze medal obtained at her very last jump, edging out M. Gardasevic, 6.88 m to 6.75 m, but still not enough for silver (A. Kälin, 6.90 m) or gold (L. Iapichino, 6.98 m). What was curious in the horizontal jumps was the great number fouls. Had it something to do with the runway? (But then this may be just my impression and when the fouls are carefully counted they may well turn out to be close to the expected 30 %).

I really like the photo of Karalis celebrating with Topic

The vertical jumps were less surprising, although Karalis had to share his gold medal in men's pole vault. Going into the competition with two performances over 6 m this year he could do no better than 5.90 m, the same height as M. Vloon and S. Gutormsen. (And I did hugely appreciate the fact that Karalis and Vloon, having tied, decided to share gold, quite unlike what happened in the olympic high jump this summer). What was somewhat surprising was the 4th, 9th and 11th places of the three french jumpers, Collet, Thiery and Lavillenie, who arrived at Apeldoorn all three with a recent 5.91 m performance. On the other hand the women's pole vault was a consolation for the french team with M.J. Bonin obtaining her first major medal, a bronze, with 4.70 m, in an event won by A. Moser with 4.80 m. Y. Mahuchikh won the women's high jump with an underwhelming 1.99 m, and A. Topic, who did not attempt 1.97 m, was second with 1.95 m, but had an excellent jump at 1.99 m. If she does not injure herself I believe that she will end the season as a 2+ m jumper. Ukraine obtained another gold in men's high jump where O. Doroshchuk jumped a world-leading 2.34 m.

J. Ingebrigtsen won his two races, 1500 m and 3000 m, with particular ease. His task will be much harder in Nanjing. A. Guillemot offered the unique gold to France, winning the women's 1500 m, while S. Healy did the same for Ireland in the 3000 m race. With F. Bol participating only in the relays, L. Klaver was the favourite for the women's 400 m and she did confirm. She won with 50.38 s but she had to battle all the way to the finish line with E. Jaeger, who was second with 50.48. L.G. Manuel is a runner I am keeping an eye on since last year when she shined in the Europeans and the Olympics and won the U20 world title. She finished 4th in the 400 m but then took her revenge in the 4x400 m relay. Anchoring the Czech team, she managed to catch up with the leading teams and, with a 49.80 s split, offered to her country a bronze medal.

Just look at the handicap Manuel had to overcome

The Kambundji sisters went home with a gold, Ditaji winning the 60 m hurdles, and silver, Mujinga in the 60 m. Double European champion of 60 m hurdles, N. Visser had to content herself with silver this time. The women's 60 m race was one of the most spectacular of the championships. Kambundji arrived to Apeldoorn as the favourite by Z. Dosso announced her intentions from the outset. In the end she won in 7.01 s (a time initially announced as 6.99 s) with Kambundji second in 7.02 s. P. van der Weken won her first major medal finishing third in 7.06 s. I believe that baring injuries, she will be an 11- runner at the end of the season. (Being tall she is more at ease in a distance like 100 m. The same applies to A. Hunt who is still taller and managed to make it to the final with a personal best of 7.09 s). 

There is only one throw in the European Indoors, the shot put. L. Fabbri, the number one favourite of the men's event, with a world-leading performance of 21.95 m, could not make it to the final, and it was sad to see him weeping at the end of the qualifiers. On the other hand, double European champion and world bronze medalist J. Schilder dominated her event in the most absolute way. All her six throws were better than the best of the silver medalist who is none other but the reigning olympic champion Y. Ogunleye. With her performance of 20.69 m, Schilder is second only to V. Adams, when one counts performances of the last 20 years.

I just hope that World Athletics will imitate European athletics and stream the championships in Nanjing without ridiculous geo-blocking constraints. Be that as it may I will report on them next month. 

Another interesting greek site

Influenced by my discussion with my friend K. Tsagkarakis, I decided to published an article on two interesting athletics-related greek sites. And then I realised that there was a greek site that I have been following over the years, in  quest of greek news, but I never wrote about it. I know that most readers of my blog do not care much about greek news, and the fact that the site is in greek makes things more difficult, but I feel that it is only fair to mention a site that has been really active for many years. I am talking about Stivoz.gr.

Contrary to the two other sites I mentioned in that previous post of mine, StivoZ is rather understated. One is greeted by a mostly black page (does this ring a bell?) and one has to scroll to the bottom of the page in order to find the most recent international news accompanied by photos. 

There is also one thing I like in the StivoZ site. They have an entry for records and there under the "jumps" submenu they are presenting the disciplines in the order: long jump, triple jump, high jump, pole vault. This is the order I learned when I started interesting myself in athletics and only much later I discovered that the commonly accepted order places the vertical jumps before the horizontal. Perhaps the traditional greek order has to do with the fact that the long jump was the only traditionally greek jump. But, the other hand, if this were true why do we adopt the order shot put, discus throw, javelin throw and hammer throw instead of starting with the two "greek" disciplines discus and javelin? Be that as it may, discovering that StivoZ is still using what I consider the greek order was a moment of nostalgia.

Stop the presses: go visit Décapassion

My friends Frédéric and Pierre Gousset did it again. They just published a fabulous article that anyone who is interested in combined events must read. 

The title of the article says that the article compares the decathlon records of each event to the corresponding world records since 1911.

But the title does not do justice to the article. Instead of a drab comparison, we are treated to a mini-history of the decathlon extending over more than a century.  (And the pure data are there, for the purists, and can be freely downloaded for future reference).

Only the Gousset could have produced such a gem. So, do not hesitate. If you do not speak french, ask Google to translate the page for you. And you will understand why I am so enthusiastic about it.

Where we talk, once more, about innovation

A few months back I published an article entitled "The future of Athletics?". The motivation for this was the pretentious mail received by World Athletics, entitled "Help shape the future of Athletics" announcing a competition to be held in Fribourg and which turned to be a real disaster. If you are interested in the details you can read my article, but you can take my word concerning the competition which was totally botched, both in the "innovations" tried out and in the video coverage. If World Athletics approach to innovation is even remotely resembling the one of Fribourg we must brace for the worst.

The word innovation appeared again in an article, published recently in the WA website which prompted me to revisit last year's article "Sport and event innovation central pillar in World Athletics’ four-year business strategy". Five points (if we discard the intentionally vague, strategy-oriented and of dubious value statements) were highlighted in that article:

New events such as a mixed 4x100m relay and a steeplechase mile

A take-off zone for horizontal jumps

Improved efficiency of measurements

New ways to decide tie-breakers in jumps using new technology

Reviewing the weights of women’s shot put and javelin

In the article mentioned at the beginning of this post I went through these proposals and made extensive comments. In the light of the recent publication, it is time for an update.

The most important "innovation" is the take-off zone for horizontal jumps, something I have been advocating for years. More than ten years ago I wrote an article entitled "Longer jumps" where I proposed a 60 cm wide take-off board. Unfortunately, the ever-hesitant World Athletics, are orienting themselves towards a 40 cm board. Still, the effect of a wider board is visible. Based on data from two competitions in Düsseldorf and in Berlin, there were just 13 % fouls, while the statistical foul probability is 32 %. And, what is more, counting the potential fouls, if the jumps were judged with the traditional rules, the percentage rose to 66 %, meaning that the athletes are taking greater risks in order to profit from the wider board. Although there are not enough results yet, allowing to draw solid conclusions, it appears that the new system is bringing a 10+ cm improvement to the athletes' performances. (I am convinced that a 60 cm board would allow a practically zero-foul event, leading to an even greater gain in the jump length).

The mixed 4x100 m relay will be tested at the 2025 World Relays. (I just hope that they will not botch the event like they did with the shuttle relay, which is the only race not lending itself to a mixed configuration). Having proposed this event in this blog I am totally in favour of its introduction. 

The steeplechase mile is also a good addition, although I would have favoured a 5000 m race instead. On the other hand, given that a 800 m hurdles looks very difficult to set up, from a practical point of view, I guess that the steeple mile is the best we can hope for. 

One thing that was not mentioned this time was the point concerning the weight of women's implements, in particular shot put and javelin. I guess that people at WA decided to use their heads and concluded that disrupting the shot put for a small gain was not justified, while for javelin there is nothing you can do in order to reach parity (unless you decide to make men's javelin substantially heavier).

There are few other points mentioned in the recent WA article (predictions, timetable design, instant results) but what attracted my attention was the entry "combined events", that I reproduce verbatim.

"As part of our data sampling, we have gathered multiple data sets related to combined events; not only from the international top level, but also across all levels of the sport, including grassroots participation. The intention is to share this information with the wider community later this year and provide insights for discussion of the status of combined events".

I don't know how to parse this. Is this cryptic statement allowing some hope for a women's decathlon to enter the official World Athletics program? Time will tell (or, knowing World Athletics, perhaps not).

Finally among the future plans one finds interesting items like the return of the 200 m hurdles and false start rules. (I just hope that the latter will be a replacement of the 100 ms rule by something more realistic and not the rigmarole we saw in Fribourg). Street and off-road running will profit from new formats. And the article concludes with a vague reference to vertical jumps where there is question of "height progression protocols", whatever that is. Unless there is question of allowing for a limited number of attempts to distribute as the athlete wishes.

I don't trust World Athletics: they are timorous when it comes to change and I will believe their commitment to innovation when I see it. But, rest assured, I am going to follow the matter closely, reporting regularly here. 

Two interesting greek sites

Those who follow my blog may remember the interview with my friend, Marathoner-extraordinaire (he has completed 46 marathons on the classical, sorry, "authentic", course) K. Tsagkarakis. We met recently, as we always do when I am in Athens, and we talked about various things. Among other, Kostas mentioned two greek websites devoted to running. 

Up to now, I have almost never published links to non-english sites. (With the notable exception of the fabulous Décapassion, which is in French, maintained by my friends Frédéric and Pierre Gousset. In case you wonder why, well just visit the site and you'll understand why. Those guys have a real passion for combined events and if the latter are of any interest to you I suggest that you immediately bookmark their site). With the progress of automatic translation I feel that we have now reached a point where Google's translation does not betray the spirit of the original text and one can enjoy the information of a website written originally in a language that he does not speak.

The first site is Running News. It's a very complete site with news, results, race calendar, interviews, technical articles. It has also a forum. Graphically it is, well, overburdened, and the animations make it hard to follow, at least for someone who is visiting the site for the first time. 

The second site is iRun. (Being an Apple fan I like the prefix "i", although I am sure that it does not have the same meaning here). The site is also graphically overloaded but at least there are no animations. Compared to Running News, iRun has a broader scope since there are sections for triathlon, cycling, ultra-running and even swimming. 

All in all I was impressed by the quality of the two sites and the work that is going into them, my critiques on the graphical part notwithstanding. I suggest that you visit them and, unless you speak greek, ask Google to translate it for you. (I found the translation to english quite satisfactory, but the one to french somewhat less so). 

As far as I am concerned, I plan from time to time to return to these two sites, be it only for news concerning the greek T&F athletes.

Light men throwing

Four years ago I published an article entitled "Heavy men running". At that time I had a subscription to D. Harder's "Speed and Strength" newsletter and I had stumbled upon an interesting list of records by bodyweight. I analysed Dale's data and presented my conclusions. A surprising (at least to me) fact was that even overweight men could complete a marathon. If you are intrigued by this I recommend that you go back to that post of mine and get the details.

Since Harder is presenting data not only for track but also for field events I was planning to write an article on them but I was holding back because of the imperial measures. Harder, as most Americans, is working with inches, feet, yards, and pounds, things that are so 19th century. And while I understand that the US do not wish to spend the money and energy in order to switch to the metric system I do not get the use of imperial units in sport. I was dispirited by the idea of having to do the conversions but recently, while tidying up my files, I found the newsletter and decided to stop procrastinating.

I opted to focus on the shot put where the range of thrower weights was substantial: over a factor of 2 between the heavier and the lighter. The results are shown in the figure below. 

The continuous line corresponds to an exponential fit. From the values of the fit parameters one can infer that the gains in the throw length with increasing body mass are minimal for the elite throwers, the longest estimated throw being around 24 m. At the other end of the spectrum, one finds that the throw length goes to zero for a body mass around 35 kg. I don't know if there are adult men, of normal stature, with such a light weight (some women do exist though, weighing even below 30 kg). But situating the zero-throw capability at around that low a body mass is not unreasonable. 

There was one list that kindled my interest, that of the decathlon. Here is the figure of performance versus body mass obtained from Harder's data. 

In the upper part of the graph one finds the various elite decathletes with performances over 8000 points. However there exist also three points, spanning the domain of 6000-4000 points. They are due to L. Riedel, B. Oldfield and O. Buder, respectively olympic and world discus throw champion, shot put world record thrower (whose records were, alas, not homologated) and european shot put silver medalist. If one tries to extrapolate from these three last points one obtains a maximum body mass of around 160-170 kg. This is really absurd since there are shot putters in that weight range who can definitely score some points in the decathlon. The name I have in mind is that of I. Ivanov from Kazachstan, medalist at the Asian games and a 20+ m thrower who weighs upwards to 160 kg. He should definitely be able to obtain some score in the decathlon even scoring a zero in the hurdles and pole vault. 

Speaking of which, reminds me of something I read in the 50s. As I have explained I was already interested in the decatlhon and was not missing even the most trifling news. So I remember having seen in a greek sports' newspaper a short paragraph on S. Meconi (European shot put record holder) who had completed a decathlon and obtained something around 2500 points.

Of course it might have been a decathlon disputed as a joke, but still I found it rather shocking that he could not do better than that. Meconi was a 120 kg athlete and it is most probable that at that time the throwers were not working on their speed but just tried to capitalise on their strength. Things have changed since then.

The scabrous story of Sebastian Coe's wild card

This is a story I had somehow missed when it happened (many years ago). I discovered it recently in an article in Inside the Games. Since the story is not quite flattering for Lord Sebastian, I suspect that the publication was encouraged by one of the other candidates for the IOC presidency. 

But let's start at the beginning. Coe, who at that time was simply Sebastian Coe and not a Lord, went to the Moscow, 1980, Olympics as the big favourite in the 800 m (he was already world recordman with 1:42.33) and then, to the surprise of everybody,  was beaten by Ovett. But he took his revenge in the 1500 m adding gold to his silver. 

Coe had broken Bayi's World record wit 3:32.1 (in fact, 3:32.03), but in 1980 Ovett had equalled it just before the Games, with 3:32.1 (slightly slower than Coe's at 3:32.09).  In case you wonder, the current timing rules, stipulating a hundredth of a second precision, were introduced in 1981. Ovett broke the tie with 3:31.36 just after the Olympics (and further improved that with  3:30.77 in 1983).

In 1981 Coe improved the 800 m world record, with 1:41.73, a record that stood for 16 years. He went to the Los Angeles, 1984, Olympics again as the 800 m favourite. And again he lost, this time to Joaquim Cruz. And again he went on to win the 1500 m. In fact Coe's only victory over 800 m in a major championship was his European title, won in Stuttgart in 1986.

In 1988 Coe tried to obtain a third olympic selection. Up to 1984, the selection was done by a panel of selectors but in 1988 the system had changed. The first two slots were given to the winners of trials and only the third was discretionary. Coe, hoping to obtain the discretionary slot in the 800 m, participated in the 1500 m of the UK trials, but did not manage to qualify for the final. And then the third position in the 800 m was given, by the British Amateur Athletic Board in a tight 11 to 10 vote, to P. Elliott (he was the only briton who in the end made the final in Seoul, finishing fourth). Coe responded graciously, but his father and coach called the decision political. 

Coe on the right with Samaranch in the middle

The then IOC president, Marqués Juan Antonio Samaranch, tried to have the decision reconsidered, claiming that many people would like to see Coe running in Seoul. (It is also rumoured that India was willing to include Coe in its national team, given that his mother was of indian origin, her father being punjabi). The answer of the British Amateur Athletic Board to Samaranch was that if he wished to give a wild card to Coe, violating the three-person limit per nation fixed by the Olympic Charter, he could to do so himself. The reactions did not take long to arrive. Everybody knew that Coe was a personal favourite of Samaranch, groomed for a position in the IOC. And S. Cram, a miler rival of Coe, did not mince his words: "it is wrong for the IOC to be playing the old pals act". So Samaranch back-pedalled and telephoned Coe to announce him that he could not be seen breaking the rules. The olympic adventure of S. Coe was over.

He put an end to his competitive carreer in 1990, after having finished 6th in the 800 m of the Auckland,1990, Commonwealth Games. He went on to become a Life Peer, as Baron Coe of Ranmore, in 2000 (hence my referring to him a Lord Sebastian). He retired from the House of Lords in 2022. He now hopes to follow in the steps of another Olympic Baron and all the olympic nobility, acceding to the presidency of the IOC. 

And, to be fair, despite myself often criticising Coe's actions, I am in favour of his candidacy given his unambiguous pro-women stance. If Coe is elected at the presidency of the IOC, all those men who declare themselves to be women will not be allowed to poison our sports. 

PS. While I am invoking a possible conspiracy concerning the publication of the article of Inside the Games, the article may be motivated by something  totally different. Ukrainian sabre fencer O. Kharlan was disqualified when, at the world championships that were the qualifiers for the Paris Olympics, she did not shake hands with her russian opponent. And the IOC president T. Bach took action immediately promising Kharlan that she was being guaranteed a spot in the Olympics. Kharlan competed in Paris, winning an individual bronze and a team gold. And Bach has thus created a precedent where his predecessor, Samaranch, had not dared take the plunge.

The best sports photos of 2024

In my article on the athletes of the year 2024 I was commenting on the paucity of the athletics photos shortlisted buy World Athletics. Being rather tolerant I was writing that "there is nothing exceptional about this year's photos". Well, calling a spade a spade, this year's photos (with one of two exceptions) suck.

So, I was impressed when, while visiting P.J. Vazel's X page, I stumbled upon this great photo, a composite of the olympic men's 100 m final. (Those who follow my blog may remember that in May 2024 I had published another composite photo, based on a women's 100 m hurdles race). There are just 8 rows of the runners, but, given te perspective, they do suffice in order to give a vivid representation of the race. 

I followed the link and I ended up on a page of BBC-Sport that gives a collection of the best sports photos of 2024 together with some explanations by the photograph. Some of the photos are absolutely breathtaking. You have most certainly seen the photo of the levitating surfer, Gabriel Medina, but there are many more that are worth the visit to the BBC page. 

And a few days later I happened upon another collection of sports photos. There were not exclusively Athletics photos but there was a hefty collection of the latter. Among them there were two photos of Yavi celebrating her victory in the 3000 m steeplechase, the sprint of Hassan with Assefa and the photo of Barega with Aregawi that I did like among the World Athletics selection. But one photo attracted my attention. 

(In 2018 I had published a similar photo of the greek hurdler E. Pesiridou, who fell during the 60 m hurdles of the World Indoors). There was no caption to the BBC photo so I set out to find who was the unfortunate hurdler. That was quite easy since the fall was during the Rome Europeans and the athlete was running in lane 8. It turned out that only one athlete did not finish her race: A. Toth, during the 100 m hurdles semi-final. She stumbled on the ninth hurdle, was unable to recover, hit the tenth hurdle, losing her balance and falling on the track. She did not sustain any injuries but of course she was out of the final (although, to tell the truth, she was not in a qualifying position even before the incident).

Seeing those excellent photos one wonders why the ones of the World Athletics selection are so mediocre. I believe that this is due to the fact that nobody cares about World Athletics. Having a photo selected by BBC is precious for every photographer's resumé. Having taken the n-th photo of Lyles in order to appeal to Lord Sebastian's taste is not. It's as simple as that.  

The Hurdles First site

While working on the Moses "13 steps" article I happened upon a site I haven't seen before. It's called "Hurdles First". 

It has been created in 2004 by S. McGill a hurdles' coach who wished to share his hurdles passion with a larger audience. The site was revamped in 2013, and found a way to monetisation through the publication of a monthly magazine "The Hurdles Mag". The site gives a very detailed description of the contents of each issue of the Magazine, which includes five full-length articles, one workout and one instructional video. Here is a typical breakdown of the articles 

• A full-length biographical profile of a well-known collegiate or professional hurdler or hurdle coach that discusses the entirety of his or her career and includes many insightful quotes.

• An article that provides advice regarding training, injury prevention, weight training, or diet. This article will always include insights from a professional in the appropriate field.

• An article that provides a hurdler-specific viewpoint on a debatable issue or thought-provoking topic in Track & Field.

• A personal hurdling-related story, written by a hurdler for hurdlers.

• An article discussing one or more high-level hurdle races that occurred within the past month. In months when there are no big meets, we will double up on one of the above categories.

Perusing the contents of the recent issues I found them really interesting. I liked the quote from R. Nehemiah. The first man under 13 seconds in the 110 hurdles said that "if you want to excel in the hurdles, you have to learn how to hurdle”. For those who do not remember, Nehemiah had two careers in the hurdles interrupted by a foray in american football from 1982 to 1985. His annus mirabilis was 1979, when he won the Pan American Games and the IAAF World Cup, broke twice the world record with 13.16 and 13.00 s and ran a wind-aided 12.91 s. He missed out on an olympic medal in 1980 due to Carter's stupid boycott of the Moscow Olympics. He improved the world record under regular conditions with 12.93 s in 1981. Timed 19.4 on a 4x200 m relay split and 44.3 on a 4x400 m relay anchor, Nehemiah could have gone after the 400 m hurdles world record as well. He missed out on the olympic US team in 1988, finishing fourth in the Trials but he made the team for the 1991 Worlds'. Unfortunately, an injury kept him from competing. But I liked even more the quote from A. Campbell (bronze medalist in Seoul, 1988, and world indoor champion in 1987): “The first thing a hurdler learns is how to fall”. How true!

I urge you to visit the site and have a look at the content of the recent Hurdles Mags. But (yes, there is always a "but"), there is a downside. The yearly subscription to the magazine is a hefty 90 dollars. So, unless someone is a hurdles aficionado I don't think that anybody would put that kind of money in an, all things considered, amateur publication. (But then it's perhaps my poor-man european vision of things, and people in the US, who are paying of the order of 100 dollars per month for a broadband internet connection, could think otherwise). 

And if you decide to have a go at the free articles of the site where one can find top-ten lists and lists of "all-time greats", you are in for a time travel to the past. There is nothing more recent than 2013. Probably the content was carried over from the then existing site, during the 2013 overhaul, and nobody cared to update it. But overall the site is interesting and I thought that I should share its existence with you.

The Moses story and the 13 steps saga

Those who follow my blog know that I like a lot the 400 m hurdles event. All the more so, since the decathletes have a fascination for this gruelling event. I have posted on several occasions articles on the low hurdles and there are frequent references to the ones I call the musketeers of the 400 m hurdles. This article is inspired by a post on the World Athletics site announcing a documentary on Edwin Moses entitled, "Moses  - 13 steps". 

Unfortunately the documentary does not appear to be available in Europe (but there is a trailer on youtube). Anyhow, interesting as it certainly is, the documentary is more biographical than technical (although it certainly contains most interesting clips from Moses' races). For me, it was the motivation to revisit the question of the number of steps between hurdles, where Moses did indeed revolutionise the discipline. 

In the 400 m the first hurdle is at 45 m from the start and the subsequent distance between hurdles is 35 m (and there remain 40 m after the last hurdle to the finish line). For many years, the graal was for the elite men hurdlers to be able to run in 13 strides between hurdles from the second to the tenth. The advantage of an odd number of steps is that every hurdle is passed with the same leading foot (and, clearly, everybody has a dominant one). 

The podium at the Helsinki Olympics

The first to attempt a 13-step race was Ch. Moore who won the 400 m hurdle title at the 1952, Helsinki, Olympics but only up to the fifth hurdle, switching to a 15-step rhythm afterwards. Moore ran in an Olympic record of 50.8 s, the 50.6 s world record of G. Hardin dating back to 1934. Second behind Moore was the soviet hurdler Y. Lituyev who noticed Moore's technique and decided to adopt it. He was the first to try 13 steps all the way to the last hurdle. And with this technique Lituyev broke in 1953 G. Hardin's world record with 50.4 s. However Lituyev's technique was not flawless and he could not avoid an occasional stumble. In fact, this is how he lost the European title in 1954, stumbling between the 7th and 8th hurdles, in a race won by A. Yulin with 50.5 s, Lituyev being second with 50.8 s. Had he not stumbled he might have been the first man below 50 s in the low hurdles.

It was Moses who mastered the technique of 13 steps and used it throughout his races. The problem is that one has to keep a 2.7 m stride, something quite difficult over the bends and towards the end of the race when tiredness sets in. Still, Moses, with his 1.88 m stature did not have trouble with this. He dominated the event, winning 122 consecutive victories. He won the 1976 and 1984 Olympics and would have won the 1980 ones were it not for the ridiculous boycott of the Moscow Olympics by the US. (But since he finished only third in Seoul in 1988, he would not have equalled Oerter's feat. In fact, he wouldn't have even surpassed Saneyev who obtained silver after three golds). 

Moses was prophetic in his predictions for the discipline. On one occasion he stated that a 12-step rhythm might be necessary in order to break the 47 s and perhaps 46 s barrier. Moses would have been perfectly capable to switch his style to 12-strides. In fact he had to do it in 1981, while racing in Zurich, over two successive hurdles in order to avoid falling. But his dominance of the event was such that he did not need to change anything. 

It was K. Young, who broke Moses' record and the 47 s barrier who tried a 12-step rhythm. His pattern was 20 strides to the first hurdle, 13 strides to hurdles 2 and 3, then 12 strides to hurdles 4 and 5 and finally 13 strides from the 6th hurdle to the end. (But let's not forget that Young, with 1.93 m, was even taller than Moses). 

In my article "Revisiting the 400 m hurdles..." I discuss the technique of Young along with that of double olympic champion F. Sanchez, who, being rather short (just 1.75 m), could maintain a 13-stride rhythm only over the very first hurdles. What is curious is that J. Culsón (olympic and world medalist), who is the tallest of the elite hurdlers with 2.01 m, was running with 13 steps up to the eighth hurdle and then switched to 14. 

World record holder K. Warholm is the shortest among todays' hurdling elite, but with 1.87 m he is just one cm shorter than Moses. Still, we see him often having trouble at the last hurdles either switching to 15 steps (Warholm is not equally at ease hurdling with either leg), or, if he tries to maintain the 13 rhythm, hitting the last hurdle and losing time. (In fact he switched from 13 to 15 for the last three hurdles during the Paris Olympics). A. Samba (1.92 m) and K. McMaster (1.91 m) both opt for 13 strides up to the 6th hurdle and then switch to 14. The one who seems to have mastered the 13-stride technique is R. Benjamin, who is of the same stature as the previous two (1.91 m). However, from time to time, he passes a few hurdles in 12 steps, but it seems as if he is "overstriding" rather than having planned that. The one who is really implementing the 12 steps is A. Dos Santos. Being 2 m tall and at ease with both legs, he has no trouble maintaining 12 steps up to hurdle five and then continuing with 13. (And he passes the first hurdle with 19 steps while most high-level athletes need 20). 

And how about women? They use typically 15 steps between hurdles. But S. McLaughlin (1.75 m) is changing this. She is hurdling with 14 steps up to the seventh hurdle and then switches to 15, and she is experimenting with a 14-stride pace throughout. It goes without saying that she is perfectly at ease with both legs. Her greatest rival F. Bol, somewhat taller at 1.80 m, but slightly less at ease with both legs, has also adopted the 14-step technique.  

So, the way to astral performances passes through a reduction of the number of steps between hurdles. And Moses was the one who traced this way.

"Eleven wretched women" or how misogyny is still reigning

On January 2020 I wrote an article entitled "Eleven wretched women, or how fake news almost killed women athletics". It's one of the best articles I have written in this blog. Unfortunately it has gone almost unnoticed, with just over 300 views, while my article on the javelin controversy has more than 12 thousand. 

For those of you who have not read it (although I urge you to follow the link and read it in detail) here is a summary. 

In 1928, at the Amsterdam Olympics, after de Coubertin had retired, women events were admitted in the athletics program. The women's 800 m race was held on August 1 and 2. Twenty-five athletes in all presented themselves in the heats and 9 were qualified for the final. (It is most probable that E. Weber dropped out after one lap, but there is nothing about this in the official report. In any case we can see her on the right, smiling together with the winner L. Radke and 7th place finisher M. Dollinger, who had set an olympic record in the heats). 

Dollinger, Radke and Weber

The final was won by L. Radke in a new world record. She was followed by K. Hitomi and I. Gentzel. At the finish line F. McDonald, leaning in order to beat B. Rosenfeld, tripped and fell. She was helped to her feet by the judges and that was that. 

And then the opprobrious articles started raining. It started with the article of W. Shirer in the Chicago Tribune where he reported that 5 women collapsed on the track, F. McDonald needed to be "worked over" after her fall, and Hitomi needed a 15 min revival after suffering from complete exhaustion. Shirer was probably enjoying a drink at some Amsterdam bar instead of being at the stadium and, fearing for his career at the newspaper (he was just 24 at the time), he invented a sensational story. (It is really a shame that Shirer, who became a renowned historian, author of the famous "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", had started his career as a misogynist liar). The lies of Shirer were surpassed by those of J. Tunis, who, according to the Wikipedia, is the "inventor of the modern sports story". Well, his article in the N.Y. Evening Post is a perfect example of a sports horror story.

The consequence of these lies was that the IAAF banned the 800 m from the women's program. To tell the truth the IAAF Areopagus were itching to eradicate women events from the olympic program. And women had to wait till 1960 in order to see the 800 m reinstated.

But this is the story I have written already and telling it again would be an overkill. The only reason I decided to write again on this subject was a recent article on the World Athletics site. The article was an interesting one. It was comparing the women's 2024 performances to those of their male counterparts of a century ago, in the Paris 1924 Olympics. (In case you have not followed my series on the long and arduous road of women to the Olympics, there were no women's athletics events in Paris, 1924). A. Milliat had appealed to the IOC but met with de Coubertin's refusal who declared that he did not approve of the participation of women in public competitions. "At the Olympic Games, their role should above all be to crown the winners”). The WA article points out that many of the current women's world records are better than the men's ones of a century back. The ones I find most impressive is F. Kipyegon's 3:49.04 in the 1500 m, beating the one P. Nurmi set in 1924, 3:52.6, by a full three seconds and B. Chebet's 28:54.14 beating the 28:54.2 of E. Zatopek established in 1954(!).

I was enjoying the article and then I arrived at the following paragraph.

I was flabbergasted. That was an article published in the official page of the World Athletics federation. And it was perpetuating the calumny. I did not know if it was bad journalism or misogyny (or an unhealthy mixture of both) but I was really shocked. I wrote immediately to World Athletics pointing out that the article was based on century-old fake news. (It goes without saying that I never received an answer and the article was never amended). To my eyes the things are clear. While the people who are managing sports are pretending to favour women-men parity, deep in their hearts they do not give a damn about women. 

There is a great article in Women's Running entitled "The 1928 olympics scandal", talking about what happened in the women's 800 m in Amsterdam. (It's written by R. Robinson, author, among others, of what is considered as the reference book 'Running through time").

(Robinson's article is so good that, had it appeared before I wrote my own, I might have decided not to write on the subject). One thing I learned in that article was that H. Abraham, the 1924 gold medallist over 100 m, who worked as a journalist in 1928, wrote: "I do not consider that women are built for really violent exercise”. Clearly he was going along with the current prevailing in that era. But 30 years later, when women had started making a headway into athletics, he revised his position, writing: “The sensational descriptions of the terrible exhaustion which overcame the runners in this race, much exaggerated I can assure you, led to the abandonment of this event from the Games”. 

And of course, the worse enemies of women happen to be women (in case you are wondering, the main reason there is no official women's decathlon is because of the opposition of women heptathletes). B. Robinson, who won the 100 m race confided that “I believe the 220 yard dash is long enough for any girl to run. Imagine girls falling down before they hit the finish line or collapsing when the race is over! The laws of nature never provided a girl with the physical equipment to withstand the gruelling pace of such a grind”. Amazing!

Robinson (the author, not the sprinter) does not hesitate to allude to something that sounds like a conspiracy theory, namely that the IOC somehow made it known that they would welcome attention to the negative aspects in reporting the race. But the sad fact is that, at that time, (almost) everybody believed that women would be harmed by any endurance effort and they interpreted or twisted the facts accordingly. Sometimes that was cast in a (pseudo)scientific jargon, like the one of a woman doctor, correspondent of the London Times, who wrote: “Nature made woman to bear children, and she cannot rid herself of the fat to the extent necessary for feats of extreme endurance”.

Journalistic slopiness, conspiracy, unfounded scientific beliefs, one can more or less interpret what happened in 1928. But understanding what happened does not mean that one can forgive it. And, seeing that World Athletics is willing to repeat a blatant lie, one starts wondering whether flagrant jeering sexism (Robinson's expression) isn't still dominating the sports world.