On the forbidden cartwheel

I have written, on several occasions, on the "spanish style" for javelin throw. It is in fact a permanent regret of mine that this style was banned and it is not used even for demonstrations. A commenter on my article "The javelin controversy" wrote:

The barra vasca [the throwing style of which led to the spanish one for javelin] was the same for javelin as Fosbury flop was for high jump. The javelin community was appalled: "That's not how you are supposed to throw it!".

With the spinners dominating the shot put, it is now clear that the rotational style is the most efficient one for all throws. So why prohibit it in the case of javelin? But this article is not about javelin. Those who are interested in the latter can read my article on the "javelin puzzle" and track my other articles on the same subject from there.

World Athletics is known for their over-conservative attitude. They only allow something revolutionary (like the fibreglass poles) when they are caught unawares by the evolution of styles or implements and cannot preempt it. 

At the beginning on the 00s, Veronika Watzek, an austrian thrower, invented a new rotational throwing technique, the cartwheel. 

(The thrower in the gif above is not V. Watzek)

Nicky Watzek was more of a discus thrower with a 58+ m personal best (and a 15 m shot put record). Googling for photos of her one finds plenty where she is throwing the discus and in fact the logo of her current enterprise "Athletic Academy" depicts a discus thrower.

It has been impossible to find out whether Watzek's shot put personal best was obtained with the cartwheel style. But I did find an article on a young german thrower who decided to try out the cartwheel style. Certainly his past as a gymnast (which by the way was true also for Nicky Watzek) was helping. Starting with a personal best of 10.98 with the 6 kg shot he had a series of shots culminating to to 13.49 m. Does this suffice in order to conclude that the cartwheel technique presents an advantage over the more conventional ones? Certainly not, but it is a clear indication that exploring different techniques, in particular ones that appear revolutionary, may lead to a progress in performances.

When Watzek introduced the cartwheel the latter obeyed perfectly the rules which stated:

The shot shall be put from the shoulder with one hand only. At the time an athlete takes a stance in the circle to commence a put, the shot shall touch or be in close proximity to the neck or the chin and the hand shall not be dropped below this position during the action of putting. The shot shall not be taken behind the line of the shoulders.

And then the codicil appeared:

Cartwheeling techniques are not permitted.

The official reason: cartwheeling is not safe enough. Of course this is pure hogwash. The real reason is that, were the cartwheel method to be proven more effective, there would have been a monstrous push-back by the existing elite who are throwing in one of the "classical", glide or spin, styles. So WA banned the cartwheel style and that's that. 

End credits for Grand Slam Track

The Grand Slam Track adventure is officially over. On December 18th, GST filed for bankruptcy, acknowledging a debt that can reach 50 million dollars. A part of this debt corresponds to payments to elite athletes, payments that have not been honoured. Big track stars like Sydney McLaughlin, Gabby Thomas or Kenny Bednarek are awaiting payments in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. And I don't think that the collaterals of GST will suffice to pay them one day. 

Created by Michael Johnson the project was launched with big fanfare and the support of the World Athletic president, S. Coe. It had attracted some of the bigger names of Athletics, like the ones I cited above but also M. Jefferson-Wooden, A. Hall. M. Arop, J. Hull, S. Eid Naser, A. Dos Santos, M. Paulino, O. Seville, to name but a few. (You can find the full list at the GST website that is still online, for the time being). 

The GST circuit staged its inaugural event in Kingston (Jamaica) and it was a financial flop. Despite the participation of big stars it attracted little interest and did not manage to create a buzz. It was followed by events in Miami and Philadelphia but then the final, scheduled for Los Angeles in June, was cancelled. At that point everybody, both suppliers and athletes, became aware of the crisis. GST tried to find an arrangement with suppliers, proposing that they accept a payment of 50% of what they were due, and a rumour circulated that sponsors, injecting an emergency funding, were secured and that at least half of the athletes' outstanding payments would be covered. Well, that turned out to be wishful thinking.

So, what happens now? Well, Lord Sebastian who had welcomed the project is now more circumspect. He stated that Grand Slam Track might not be allowed to return in 2026, stressing that events must have a "sustainable, solid financial model". 

I really like this photo of Coe 

The InsidetheGames site concluded their article on the GST bankruptcy with the phrase: "The toxic mix of heavy liabilities, fractured creditors and an absence of immediate capital leaves Grand Slam Track facing one of the starkest viability crises seen in professional athletics in recent years". But every cloud has a silver lining: thanks to the disaster of GST, we will be getting rid of M. Johnson.

Carles Baronet re-launches a newsletter

If you are a regular reader of my blog you have certainly met the name of Carles Baronet. He is a renowned Catalan Athletics statistician and for many years he was publishing the blog Trackinsun. Then he switched from the blog to a newsletter. From 2023 his newsletter became subscription-only, but after two years he decided that having subscribers was too much of a stress and decided to go back to the previous, free, formula.

So, from January 2026, the newsletter is completely free, allowing Carles to work on the statistics without pressure and with a lower depth of marks. Having more time he plans to compile the year's top 300 marks (well, up to) in each event, as well as a thorough selection of European athletes who are in the United States.

The name Trackinsun is always present. And the first newsletter of 2026 is just out. It's a very detailed one, with results from all over the World. It comes in two versions, pdf and docx. The author believes that the pictures are best viewed in the docx version, but, frankly, those of the pdf are perfectly viewable.

If you are interested in Athletics (otherwise, why are you reading this blog?) I suggest that you send a mail to C. Baronet (just click here) and subscribe to his newsletter. You will discover a whole world of Athletics that you haven't suspected till that moment. People are competing in Athletics all over the world. And not all of them are (or hope to become) big stars who figure (or hope to) in the World Athletics website. I find that really uplifting and thanks to Carles Baronet this information is coming to your mailbox every month. Subscribe!

The 4x100 women's 2000 olympic relay, or how France's medal was stolen

The reason I decided to write this article was this superb photo.

Some time ago World athletics published an article entitled "Saluting the Bahamian Golden Girls 25 years on". It was celebrating the victory of the Bahamas' women team in the 4x100 m relay of the 2000, Sydney, Olympics. It's a very nice article and I highly recommend it (all the more so, if you are of the generation who has experienced the Sydney Olympics live). And if you wish to revisit the race, the video is on YouTube. (If you are younger, you will be surprised by the bad quality of the video. This was the era of the crappy NTSC, an analog system with 480 lines and 4:3 aspect ratio. We have made an incredible progress since that time).

The team of Bahamas were the logical favourite, having won the world title the previous year in Sevilla. France was second on that occasion with Jamaica third and the US fourth. But the Sydney final was a totally different matter. The US team had as anchor none other than Marion Jones who had dominated the 100 m race (and 200 m and had won bronze in the long jump). 

The regular readers of my blog know that there are athletes that I like and others that I don't. M. Jones was part of the second group from the very first day. The media were ecstatic when speaking about her, something I could not stand. (Just as I could not stand the total absence of style in her long jump. You know my feelings about King Carl. But I have always granted that he was the best stylist ever in the long jump. Jones was one of the worst). 

M. Jones went to Sydney announcing that she intended to win five gold medals. (She was also part of the 4x400 m relay that won the race). So she managed to realise 60% of her prediction. And a few years later that was transformed to 0%. I will not go into all the sordid details of the M. Jones doping affair. Jones had been accused of doping from the outset of her career. Already at high school she missed a random drug test and was banned for four years from track and field competitions. She claimed that she was never informed about the test and managed to get the ban overturned. In Sydney there was a minor scandal involving her then husband, shot-putter C.J. Hunter. He was present as Jones' coach, having withdrawn from competition for an alleged knee injury. And then the real reason became known: he had, prior to the Olympics, failed antidoping tests, being positive for steroids. (As a result his coaching accreditation was revoked). Things came to a head years later, when V. Conte, the founder of BALCO, stated publicly, in 2004, that Jones had been doping already before the 2000 Olympics. Jones denied the accusations but in 2006 a sample of her urine tested positive in EPO. She was cleared of doping allegations after the examination of the B sample but the cogs of justice were turning. And finally in 2007 Jones confessed that she had been using steroids, already before the Sydney Olympics. She was suspended for two years and all her results from September 1, 2000 were anuled. And so the career of one of the first T&F female millionaire came to a sad end. 

But this article is not about M. Jones. It's about the disqualification and the medals. M. Jones was active till 2006, participating in high-level competitions. Her results were, quite understandably anuled. But just try to find them anywhere. World Athletics has decided to publish pages upon pages like the screenshot below, where no results are given but just the mention -(DQ).

I cannot imagine a worse display of disrespect for Athletics than this. How can anybody who supposedly loves Athletics do this? What is the point in telling us that M. Jones participated in this and that competition without giving her performances? Would have been so difficult to keep them, adding on each line the code DQ, indicating that the performances were anulled? By making tabula rasa of all post 01/09/2000 performances, WA reminds me of the rewriting of history that is so popular in autocratic states.

The IAAF (that's what World Athletics was called at the time) recommended to the IOC that the two US women's relays be disqualified, due to the presence of M. Jones. That's what happened. Initially. France, having finished fourth in the 4x100 m was promoted to third. Same for Nigeria, who was fourth in the 4x400 m relay. Alas, that was short lived. The US brought the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, invoking a legal vacuum (there was no clear rule disqualifying a team because of a doping offense of one of its members) and obtained a favourable judgement. So M. Jones appears in the official World Athletics page with Olympic honours, gold and bronze medals in Sydney. What a shame!

And the unfair decision of CAS robbed France (and Nigeria) of a medal. Still we have this great photo where one can see D. Ferguson celebrating, ahead of M. Ottey and C. Arron, with M. Onyali on the left and half of M. Jones. (I cannot imagine why WA did things halfway. They could have taken Jones completely out of the picture). Both Ottey and Arron look clearly disappointed. Ottey would have hoped to win the gold medal for Jamaica. (No, I am not going to tell the story of the controversy around M. Ottey's participation in the 4x100 m relay final. I am too big a fan of Ottey to enter these unsavoury gossips. If you are interested you have to find out for yourselves). And Arron was unfortunately no match for the steroid-enhanced Jones. But she got her vengeance three years later in the Paris World Championships.