Nm. Addressed already.
Yes, I think if a sport can be safely run simultaneously, it is. Most sports that run separately can’t be run together without slamming into each other.
Like Rally racing.
I think that the NCAAs used to have this rule. One year, in the heats of one of the sprints or hurdles, there were so many false starts that the entire meet schedule ended up 45 minutes to an hour behind.
So imagine four heats of the 100 meters. First heat has 6 false starts, the next ones have 5, 7, and 6. You have essentially 28 starts to get 4 races done. Track without false starts can get tedious. Track with false starts will get incredibly tedious incredibly quickly.
Someone will correct me shortly if I’m wrong, but I believe many stadia are configured such that certain field events cannot take place at the same time as certain track events (e.g. the run up for the triple jump extends on to the running track). So potentially you are not just messing up the schedules for one event, you are doing so for several events.
Also, it kind of affects everyone equally, in that you could argue that preparing for the same race multiple times is part of the skill of racing, but if everyone got a free false start, sprinters could deliberately false start if they “didn’t feel right” on the blocks (I’m sure that used to happen regularly under the old rules). That’s not fair on the other racers, and the new rule removes that element, leaving the event to be decided on as level a playing field as possible.
Update:Twitch or flinch no longer a false start
This I can agree with.
Exactly. Allowing false starts opens the door to elements of gamesmanship outside the realm of the ability that the event is supposed to be about.
Very fair.
I didn’t know this. That removes my main criticism of the new rule: that a slight twitch can send years of training down the pan.
Yes, I can get on board with this change - especially as it appears starters will simply ask the athletes to “re-set” if they spot a twitch, rather than call a false start. I can imagine an involuntary muscle spasm causing a false start under the old rules, which you really wouldn’t want to see.
Maybe not if you still ran them at the same time. Here’s how I picture it: You are given a start time with some anticipation, e.g. “Ready, set, go!” A set interval of time, rather small is allowed for you to start. The exact time you start is calculated. When you get to the end, you are also scanned, and the winner is calculated. A lane could light up or something to tell the winner. Since the differences are in hundredths of a second, the results will seem to be instantaneous.
Runners are only disqualified if they try to start outside the window. This could happen with or without a reset–it doesn’t matter much since the impetus* to false start is removed.
The current rules don’t remove this, they just make you have to be very, very careful.
*I originally typed impotence.
Allowing false starts also potentially makes it possible to game the system by making other people waste more energy. Imagine you false start deliberately at 50% and everyone else starts at 100%. In the next start they’ll be more exhausted than you. It could have a pretty significant impact on the results if this happens multiple times in a row by different racers.