In a message dated Wed, 14 Mar 2001 12:39:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
<< The women's hurdles need to be raised because as the heights currently
stands, very little hurdling is required of the women. This is very
prominent in the 400ih.
As it stands currently in the short hurdles the men are required to clear a
hurdle 122% higher than their leg length, and the women 100%in the long
hurdles it is 103% to 91%. In the latter that means the women are already
higher than the hurdles, and it shows when you watch tape of the races.
Consistently, you will see the trail leg come under the women because they
can get away with that. If the hurdles were raised 3 inches, you would see
the hurdle height demand change to 115% for the short race, and 101% for the
long race. The important element in the latter is that the difference from
sprint stride rise to hurdle height rise (the difference needed to clear the
hurdle) does NOT change. In other words, the women already jump high enough
to clear a higher hurdle right now.
For the integrity of the event the hurdle should be raised. Contrary to
popular thought I believe you will see an improvement in times and race
quality. >>
Nice numbers! I've always thought that there was also a concomitant need for greater
distance between the hurdles as well (also for the men, but that's another story)
because of the way so many people have to chop their strides. If they're changing one
parameter, they should change both, but if the distance between gets greater, would
that mean that the height increase should be less?
gh
