Throwdowns > Closed

Gruden said 06/28, 09:37 AM
Mine is far more simple. If you look at the picture, it is clear who actually crossed the finish line first. Jenebah Taboa did. While I realize that track and field rules are that the chest is the determiner, a simple tweak would say that when the chest is equal, you give the tie breaker to any other part of the body that crossed first. It's really just that simple, and doesn't require someone who just gave every ounce of their energy to run a race to go back and rerun it.

In your scenario, what if they tie again? Do you wait two hours and run again? Since you can't guarantee an outcome with your scenario, it doesn't solve the problem.

As for your final argument, measuring stamina and ability to recover has nothing to do with the goal of the race. If it did, they'd simply measure stamina and recovery and not race, and select from there.

And honestly, the reason they don't have a procedure in place is this is the first time in my 51 years that it has ever happened. In track and field events, they'd simple award 2 bronze medals. In this instance, any procedure to award 3rd place works. No need to race again.

Gruden said 06/28, 11:17 AM
Of course they have a policy in place that called it a tie. That's why we're discussing "tiebreakers". If the chest doesn't decide it, then you need something else, right? At least with my "first body part across the line", you decide it on the track. With your second argument you say "it makes no difference, toss a coin and take that person". There's no consideration given to to the actual athletic performance.

For my second tiebreaker, I'll submit an average of all times ran in the heats leading up to the finals. In most instances there are at least 3 heats before the finals. So in the case of a tie for 3rd, and only 3rd, for the Olympic team, you simply compile all three times from the previous heats and let the most consistent runner over the course of the Olympic qualifying event determine which of the 3rd place runners you want to add to the team. I'd rather have a consistent runner over someone who had one big burst in the finals.

And honestly, 1984? Every 28 years is a big cause for concern? And Hightower lost to a photo finish picture. They still use it today. They'd "go back" to nothing.

Gruden said 06/28, 02:36 PM
And the last time before it happened 28 years ago? Your math is skewed by thinking things only happen on earth in your lifetime. It's happened twice IN THE HISTORY OF USA OLYMPICS.

Now, you're confused as to what I said about photo finish. Which is a common mistake of many in a throwdown. I didn't say photo finish solved this one, I simply said that you were wrong about it in a previous statement. It's OK, common mistake.

But, the photo finish you said isn't working clearly shows one would win by my standards of first across the line in any fashion to decide a winner in a tiebreak. So, its working just fine.

My final solution, which you decided not to use..but to simply return to your first argument, is simply to turn to national rankings. Which runner has the better history. Which has the better times in other meets. Your solution sounds like you think Olympic qualifying is equal to an NBA game. We aren't deciding the game, we're deciding who plays in the game. In the event of a tie, send the one proven to be the best over time. Look at previous stats and pick the winner.

So simple. Why are we even discussion it?