In a recent article, where I returned to the subject of (nonexistent) innovation in Athletics, I wrote that I had seen a steeplechase mile only once. My memory had played a trick on me. In fact, I had watched two of them. The first was part of the farcical comedy that was the Fribourg Track Lab, a competition I hurried to forget. The second, however, was memorable for a completely different reason. It took place at the 2025 Diamond League meeting in Brussels, where a women’s steeplechase mile was organised with the participation of Winfred Yavi, the World and Olympic champion. Yavi did not disappoint. She won in 4:40.13, establishing the inaugural world record for the distance. She does not hold the world records for either the “canonical” 3000 m or the shorter 2000 m steeplechase. Those belong to the great Beatrice Chepkoech, with 8:44.32 and 5:47.42, respectively. Yet Yavi’s 8:44.39 and 5:56.83 place her firmly among the discipline’s best, especially over 3000 m, where she is only 0.07 seconds away from the world record.
And what happened next? Exactly what usually happens with World Athletics’ attempts at innovation: nothing. The event was promptly forgotten. No other steeplechase mile has been organised since, and none appears to be planned in the near future. That is a pity, because it could have been an interesting event.
Actually, that is precisely why it got me thinking. What other distances could be used for steeplechase races? In my article, a follow-up to “Metric versus Imperial”, I examined several possible alternatives for track events. One of them was a 5000 m steeplechase. I remember presenting the idea to the late great Greek steeplechase champion G. Papavasileiou, who found it particularly attractive. He even suggested that, given the difficulty of a race involving more than 50 obstacle jumps, it might be more interesting than the standard 3000 m event.
But the steeplechase mile also raises the opposite question. Could the event be made shorter still? Before answering that, let us look at how the steeplechase is run today. The water jump cannot, for obvious reasons, be placed on the main track. It is normally located in the infield, producing “steeple laps” of roughly 390 to 395 m. It can also be placed outside the track, which produces laps of around 420 m. Each lap contains five jumps, including the water jump. As a result, the 3000 m race contains 35 obstacles, 28 ordinary barriers and seven water jumps. The 2000 m race contains 23, 18 barriers and five water jumps.
How short could the race become before it stopped making sense as a steeplechase? My guess is that 1000 m is the lower limit. To make the format work, the race would have to begin with a water jump. Unlike the 3000 m race, it would need a water jump at the beginning, and there would be three water jumps in total, producing 12 obstacles altogether. That does not sound unrealistic. It would attract a different type of athlete, and the battle for position at the first water jump could provide a particularly entertaining feature.
Now let us remove the water jump but keep the steeplechase obstacles. If we also fiddle with the distances, could an 800 m hurdles race make sense? The average distance between jumps in steeplechase races is roughly 80 m. Over two laps, that would give us ten jumps. There is, however, a complication. The rules require at least 70 m from the start to the first obstacle and at least 40 m from the final obstacle to the finish. Applying the same principle here, we must leave enough room at both ends of the race. So this is what I propose:
There would be six obstacles per lap, with an average separation of 66.67 m. The first obstacle, on the right-hand bend, would be removed on the opening lap, giving the athletes roughly 120 m before the first jump. They could begin in lanes and move to the inside after 100 m. The final obstacle, the second one on the finishing straight, would be removed on the second lap, leaving more than 80 m for the finishing sprint. The result would be an 800 m “hurdles” race with ten jumps in total. And once we accept that such a race is feasible, why not consider relays as well? But relays deserve an article of their own, so I will leave them for another post.
It is clear from the above considerations that there is room for real innovation. Not just new events, but new events that could create new specialists. Will World Athletics ever take such a road? Unfortunately, I do not think so.
No comments:
Post a Comment