Skip to content

Yeah, just sitting back trying to recapture a little of the glory

July 29, 2010

Well that was a nice re-introduction to the track… now I want to race the 5000m at Nationals.  I probably actually would double back but I’m happy to get on with the marathon training ahead. 

I finished third in the 10 000m race last night but I got the National silver medal seeing as that Kip Kangogo is Kenyan.  I’m happy enough with the result (29:14) but I think a sub 29 and second place would of been possible had I really gone for it.  When Simon Bairu made his move with 11 laps to go I felt that I didn’t want to risk blowing up.  Covering the move, (or even half covering it) comes down to confidence and fitness and I think I’m lacking a bit in both.  The track fitness simply isn’t there right now and that doesn’t bother me at all training for the marathon.  I’ve only been on the track twice since March 19th (once to pace a 5000m and one track workout last week), I simply haven’t had enough running in that ‘zone’ to be comfortable going ‘there’.  When you train in that ‘zone’ the confidence will come.  The race last night was, in itself, a confidence booster for me because I ran in control the whole way and felt good which bodes well for the marathon.

This is the first year since 2003 in which I haven’t won a national track title (not including ’08 injury when I didn’t compete) but I also never had to compete against a 27:23 guy for that title, haha.  Ah, the glory days…

Guelph Mercury article from last night’s races.

  1 Bairu, Simon                 Queen City Striders   28:49.25%  10        
  2 Coolsaet, Reid               Speed River T&F       29:14.63%   8        
  3 Gillis, Eric                 Speed River T&F       29:35.82    6        
  4 Kitz, Robert                 U Toronto TC          31:39.78    5        
  5 Parrott, John                Speed River T&F       32:39.33    4        
  6 Monette, Sebastien           Vaudreuil-Dorion      32:56.76    3        
— Kangogo, Kip                 Running Room         X29:02.12             
— Ball (T44), Richard          Orillia Legion       X37:53.51           

Simon now has the track record (I did have it) and Richard Ball set a PB and National record in the T44 category (he has a prosthetic leg).  It’s always inspirational to watch Richard out there racing.  Speed River has the early lead in the team title championship.

Here is a stupid new rule (or at least a bad application):  No watches are to be worn on the track.  I wasn’t planning on wearing my watch but I know some people like to keep and eye on the splits without looking for the clock.  The official said not to worry because we would be given splits.  There wasn’t a clock or splits given at the 200m mark, which coincides with the 3km and 5km splits.  Those are the two most meaningful splits to me in a 10 000m.  Is this an IAAF rule (highly doubtful), an Athletics Canada rule (wouldn’t surprise me) or a U of T rule (most likely)?  Either way I don’t see the harm in wearing a watch on the track.  Or at least accommodating the rule with two clocks (which most track would have anyways).

  1. Kevin Dooley permalink
    July 29, 2010 6:45 pm

    I looked up the IAAF 2010-11 rules. There’s nothing in there about athletes wearing watches.

    Interestingly, Athletics Canada does have a policy regarding watches and heart rate monitors, but only as it affects their exclusive sponsorship agreements with Timex.

    It’s possible that some official got overly zealous about enforcing that Timex policy.

  2. larry bradley permalink
    July 29, 2010 8:23 pm

    Awesome result considering your current training focus! Love reading your blog to get amazing insight from the most elite distance runner in the nation. Best of luck with your marathon training. Thank you for letting us in on your running world.

  3. Ian permalink
    July 30, 2010 9:50 am

    Contrary to Larry’s statement, there is a rule:

    Click to access 20091027115916_httppostedfile_CompRules2010_web_26Oct09_17166.pdf

    Rule 144.2 a):

    “For the purpose of this Rule the following shall be considered
    assistance, and are therefore not allowed:
    (a) pacing in races by persons not participating in the same race, by
    athletes lapped or about to be lapped or by any kind of technical

    Key term: any kind of technical device.

    Now the question of 3000 and 5000 splits might be of relevance to para 1 where splits
    “shall be given only when there are no time displays visible to athletes
    at the relevant point”.

    A clock at the start/finish is provided. Is 3000 or 5000 a “relevant point”? Sounds like a question that should have been asked at the technical meeting.

    • Ian permalink
      July 30, 2010 9:51 am

      Sorry, make that ‘contrary to Kevin’s statement’.

  4. July 30, 2010 10:10 am

    Thanks Ian! I was wondering what I said that was debatable. HAHA

  5. reidcoolsaet permalink*
    July 30, 2010 10:30 am

    Ian you’ve got to be kidding me. They’re talking about pacers or something such as an electronic bunny along the inside rail.

    Here’s a pic from the World Championships 10 000m final

    Or a pic from the Olympic 10 000m Final

    Notice anything?

    In my opinion (whatever that is worth) a 5000m split is relevant. In some of the articles that were written about the 10 000m final they referenced our 14:32 split. No other split was referred to in the articles.

    And if you want to be a stickler on the rules…

    3. Times for all finishers shall be recorded. In addition, whenever
    possible, lap times in races of 800m and over and intermediate times
    at every 1000m in races of 3000m and over shall be recorded.

    …so where can I find my 1km splits?

    • Ian permalink
      July 31, 2010 8:17 am


      I’m not saying all watches need to be taken away always. I simply pointed out that there actually is a rule. The question comes down to how it is enforced. Just because the World Champs ignored a rule or chose a different implementation does not mean the rule does not exist. It would be a decision made by some combination of the track referee, the appointed Technical Delegate and the meet directors.

      The women’s Berlin 10,000 had a third of the runners ignore the first turn stagger and cut in well in advance. That should have seen a whole whack of DQs (including two out of three medalists), but for whatever reason, the referee decided not to.

      I also understand that to many/most athletes, the 5000 split is ‘relevant’. I am simply pointing out that that is still a subjective call and therefore should have been asked by the athlete or their coach at the technical meeting. That is exactly why those meetings are held, to answer those types of questions regarding things that may be a little hazy in the rules.

      Complaining about not being allowed to wear ones watch isn’t really of relevance anyways since had any athlete been timing themselves (using their own watch), that would have likely resulted in an umpire recording a rule violation and possibly the track referee deciding to DQ the athlete. So any wearing of watches would be for purely cosmetic reasons, not functional.

      The final point you raise about recorded split times, it says ‘wherever possible’. Doesn’t say the HAVE to be recorded. While it is technically possible, doing so requires a significantly higher workload on the photo timers and lap scorers (I can tell you they were using hand time lap splits to keep lap count in the 20km walk, but that requires a large number of lap scorers planted on the outside of the track right past the finish line – something that does not necessarily make for a good presentation for a higher profile event like the 10,000. Getting 1km splits would have also necessitated a photo timing system at the 200m mark, something that adds for resource and equipment requirements.) Sounds like another question of relevance for the technical meeting.

      As for Brendon’s wish, I doubt he’ll get his wish. What started out as more a limitation on heart rate monitors, has become more applicable to watches as due to technological advances, it is harder and harder to determine what is a watch and what is a heart rate monitor (or any other fancy electronic device/aid). It makes things far simpler for everyone (athletes and meet officials) to have a clear-cut, straight forward rule.

  6. Brendon permalink
    July 30, 2010 2:27 pm

    Good run brosky…I hope that ‘rule’ is ki-bashed, seriously what harm is there??

  7. mjm permalink
    August 1, 2010 2:41 pm

    Any excuse to link a picture of Kara Goucher is welcome……

  8. Desy permalink
    August 3, 2010 4:34 pm

    Yeah, for the 5k race, they had a clock at the top of the back stretch for the 1500m splits, but then didn’t move the clock for the 5k. Couldn’t they just have used that clock?

    It might be an Ottawa Lion thing. One meet the started didn’t allow anyone to wear a watch during the race and this was at a twilight meet where the goal is to run fast, not for place!

  9. Gary Rush permalink
    August 16, 2010 12:27 pm

    “Glory Days”

    Bruce Springsteen….

    Gary Rush

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: