We as coaches need to have the rule changed to only 4 events per athlete. To many athletes are being used way to much in meets. If you are lucky enough to be a special athlete that can do muliple events and are good at them all Great. Pick one a weekend to focus on and put one or two aside for the next meet. I know coaches are saying we should police ourselves but that does not work. I see it almost every meet. If you are saying "but I need them to fill out a relay".... recuit or plan your season out better.
@royalfamily I think the 3 running and open amount of field events is perfect. Especially on 2 day meets and championships. I watch 1 kid this weekend, Felicia Majors a junior from South County, maybe the best female in the state. She usually is top 3 in whatever she does in what ever meet she is in. Its incredible to see an athlete do so well in so many different areas/disciplines. I would hate to limit those athletes. Some parents and coaches get mad because they take away chances from their own kids placing. As a former athlete, current head coach, and current fan it isnt often talent comes around this. Let them shine. Not every athlete can do it.
I agree that the limits should be reviewed. To my knowledge, Maryland's limit is a total of 4 events, as is USATF and AAU. I think it's risky for the athletes to push themselves or be pushed to compete in 6-7 events every weekend. Yes, it's great for scoring points and it's great for the spectators, but athletes need balance in their lives. It's very hard to achieve that balance while training for the pole vault, TJ, LJ, HJ, and sprints and then compete all day for two straight days. Some of these very talented athletes are doing this almost every weekend from December through June. Sometimes, twice a week meets. I often shake my head and wonder why? Is the risk worth the reward? Risks include injury, burn out, academics suffering, and overall lack of balance in the high school years, just to name a few. My athlete does not do field events so I am speaking strictly as an observer. When is enough ENOUGH? You cannot trust that a teenager knows their own limits or knows what is best for them in the long run. The coach and/or parents need to establish reasonable limits with the rule as it stands now.
The problem is not the rule but the application of the rule. We have heard "In Maryland we don't allow coaches to abuse athletes because we only let them compete in four events." Well I have seen a Maryland coach run a girl in the 400, 400 Hurdles, 800, and 4 x 4 - three of those races being back to back to back. Once again like any regulation in regards to participation limits it is the application of that rule by the coach not the rule that is the problem. I agree that having an athlete compete in seven events twice a week all season long is probably not best for the athlete's health but that is not the fault of the rule but in the application of the rule by the athlete's coach.
We in Virginia adopted the change to the National Federation participation rule to allow athletes that are gifted in field events to be allowed to participate in the running events.
If not for this rule Sheena Johnson of Gar-Field would have had to decide at the state meet in 2000 which do I delete from the record books: 20'2 1/2" Long Jump, 40'7 1/4" Triple Jump, 13.82 100 M Hurdles, 11.87 100 M Dash, 40.94 300 M Hurdles
Over its history the VHSL has seen many talented multi event champions. It has been a positive that Virginia went out of its way to pass legislation to allow these gifted athletes to compete in multiple events. We should not change the rule to restrict participation but once again focus on what is the real issue - the actions of a few coaches that apply this rule in a way that may be bad for the athletes health. These kind of coaches and their mindset are to blame not the rule.
Here is the greatest example in Virginia Track History of a multiple participation.
Only in Virginia:
Francis Byrd of Lafayette High School in Norfolk County on April 21, 1916 (one day State Meet)
Francis scored 22 points in the meet placing third as a team.
1st Broad Jump 22’2” (state meet record)
1st High Jump 5’11 ½” (state meet record)
1st Shot Put (12 lb) 41’8” (state meet record)
3rd Discus
4th Pole Vault
4th Javelin
2nd Hammer (12 lb) (This was the only year that this event was held)
Francis also ran the 100 Yard Dash – running in the prelims, he qualified for the finals to run against the favored McCall, but opted not to run the finals to save himself for record breaking attempts in later field events.
@Historian Few years back, Shakeela Saunders finished 2nd to Western Branch in the state meet by herself scoring 41 points. Pretty impressive with the female athletes in the state that year. And im pretty sure she can high jump too.
1st Long Jump 19-0
1st 300m 39.8
2nd Triple Jump 39-7
2nd 55m- 7.04
4th 500m- 1:15
I like the 3 running events limit. Governing bodies did do a smart thing when it came to the 2mile/3200 though, with just 1 other running event. Some of these athletes will go on to compete in the deca/hept/pent events in college. Some even on the national level now. Smart coaching,training staff, and vocal athlete all play a big roll in the safety and growth of their athletes.
To your point - then why are we only allowing a sprinter/field S/A the opportunity to show their talent and not the middle distance/distance runner.
Because VA is one of very few states that does not follow the NFR with regard to the 4 event rule, you can be a very good or great field event S/A and a sprinter and have trials and finals in the 100, 200, 400, 800, 100/110H and 300H as well as the SP, Discus, Pole Vault, High Jump, Long Jump and triple Jump which allow you to perhaps compete in as many as 6 field events in the trials and final and 3 running events in the trial and finals for what cold be up to 6 races and 28 field event attempt plus however many attempts in the High jump and Pole Vault.
However, an outstanding distance runner like Catherine White or Annie LeHardy or The Steven's sisters or Megan Moyer only have the opportunity to show off their talents in 2 events in a one day meet if they are competing in the 3200.
I do not buy the point that distance runners could not handle 4 event or that coaches would abuse the talent of the distance runners. If anyone is being taxed it is clearly the the sprint, field athletes. This is why the rule is in place in the 1st place.
Would it have been great to have seen Allison Felix or Marion Jones compete in more than 4 events in the California State Championships? Perhaps. It would have also been ashamed to have limited Ryan Hall or Brian Dameworth or German Fernandez or Mary Decker to less than 4 event. Why VA thinks that this National Federation Rule do not apply, but applies in Ca, TX, NY and most other states in the union is beyond me?
We want to do all that we can to protect the athletes, but we must also insure that we don't limit the athletes. Some athletes are capable of 4,5 or even 6 event performances (not twice a week, but on an occasional basis), should we deny them the opportunity. Good coaches protect their athletes while providing them with opportunities to excel. Bad coaches don't look out for their athletes best interest, and that will be the case regardless of whatever rules are passed. One event can be to much for an athlete, if for some reason that athlete's health is subpar(injury, illness). Coaches, athletes and parents, doctors, and trainers, all need to play a role in determining what is in the individual athletes best interest, then the coach and athlete can determine what's in the team's best interest, then and only then, mature athletes can determine what mountains they choose to climb. Two events is too many for some, and four ,five or six may be fine for others. Sometimes, some practices require more from an some athletes then some 4,5,or 6 event competitions. Sometimes one event requires more, depending on other factors (weather, level of competition, prior rest available due to travel, and other factors). I recognize the need to protect the athletes (kids), and I realize that there are some coaches who will exploit the athletes, but that will always be the case. As an athlete,even as a child, I never liked rules limiting, what I could compete in. I felt that choice should be left to me, with input from my coaches (I was fortunate enough to have good ones) and my parents (again I was fortunate enough to have good ones), and any doctors and trainers that we choose to consult. As an adult athlete, the choice of how many events I enter, should be mine. Generally a person knows their body better than anyone else, and they have a better understanding of their limitations.
@sprinterfan I think this have more to do with losing then anything else. These kids that can do multiple events are balanced that's why they do it. The risk of injury is the same as for an athlete that does one event. Academic doesn't drop because they are driven. And if a teenager can't identify his/her limit then you should not send them off to college a long way from home. I have a teenager that do multiple events and I wouldn't limit her for a second. She not going to do nothing that she can't handle. She do it because she loves it. Kids are not dumb especially when they are at this level. They know what they can do and can't do. I know mine do.
@CoachKing
Obviously you have never done a distance double like 1600 and 3200. If you put a lot of effort into the first (usually 3200 in the morning) then the even with two or three hours between depending on the meet you feel tired. Thats just how your body works there is a reason that there are no finals and prelims for longer distances (yes the times are over a wider spread normally), no one can run them twice at a faster or similar pace. Not to mention the number of miles the athlete would put in that day if they warmed-up and cooled-down properly to avoid injury. so the current rule is a good thing, especially for distance runners in a non-distance school with a coach unfamiliar with distance training so that he or she will not make a mistake and over work an athlete.
Actually, in high school in Ohio, I did double in the 1600 and 3200 and sometimes the 800. In College I doubled in the 5000 and 10000 and once the steple.
As a head coach of some 25 plus year at the high school level and a student of the likes of Red Haberlack of Northern AZ University, John Estes of the University of Alaska-Fairbanks and Jim Sackett of California Poly Tec University - Pomona, as well as mentor like Jeff Sink, Bob King and Clyde Lehman(some of the most successful coaches in history of California) I am well versed in the training of the distance runners.
Over time I have seen far more injuries in athletes who compete in field events and the sprints than I have in the distances. It is evident in many studies that events that have explosive movement cause injury more often than event that donot have explosive movement.
Are athletes capable of doing more than 3 or 4 or 5 events, sure, based on ability. Athletes are usually not in the drivers seat when it comes to what events they compete in and do not compete in, so while athletes may know their capibilities and limitations, coaches are not always ahear to them!
My issue is that based on our training program, which is the same program I have been following while coaching in Alaska, California and VA with some modifications, my runners should have the same advanatage as as athlete that runs 3 events with trials and as many as 6 field events with trials and finals. Fatigue is more likely to effect the jumper, sprinter than the distance runner!
My other issue is that VA should follow all of the National Federational Rules and not just the ones that fit the folks on the rules committee or are all the other state associations in the union doing it wrong?
If you like Virginia's event participation rule you need to ask yourself why do you support it. A - Do you like it because it descriminates against the distance runner? Or B - do you like it because it protects the distance runners but the sprinter and jumper athlete does not need to be protected? Seems harsh but is it not a fair question?
In situation A many of you said it was great to watch a star sprinter and jumper athlete set multiple state records without having to be limited in their events. Why can't the distance star? Sarah Bowman set three state meet records in the 3200, 1600 and 800. Yet couldn't run the 4x400? Her team was #1 in AA with her on it, without her they didn't score. Peter Dorrell won the 1000 yrds, mile and ran a leg on his 4x400 at the region III indoor championships but couldn't run his best event, the two mile. Even though he won the mile by 22 seconds, easily won the 1000 and anchored his 4x400 to a 3rd place showing. Peter scored 20 points and with his relay mates added another 6. Standout athlete Ethan Nixon in the same meet got to compete in four events and scored 38 points for his team. Peter would have scored 30 for his team and added six if given the same opportunities. The same can be said for Catherine White and many others. Why have rules that limit some athletes and allow other athletes more opportunities? Are we not descriminating against the distance runner or that sprinter who doesn't jump?
If you like situation B - Is not competing in the long jump - taking six jumps, six triple jumps, multiple high jumps, 100 prelims plus 100 finals, 200 prelims plus finals, 4x100 too much? This includes warm-up jumps and cooldowns. This weekend at the Cosmopolitan meet in Roanoke, athletes did this. Is that not hard on a young athlete's body? If you like situation B - Don't you care about that athlete like that two mile athlete? Obviously not.
Those who said it will prepare athletes to do the hep/ decathlon - decathletes do two or three decathlons a YEAR. We have high schoolers doing this every week although decathletes are limited to just three jumps/ throws instead of four (common in small meets) and six in major invites for high school.
Its interesting 40,000 people signed up to run the NY City Marathon (26.2 miles) and they have to do a lottery to select who gets to run. The Marine Corp Marathon fills up with 20,000+ in less than a few hours. Running alot obviously can't be that hard if so many age 30 and 40 somethings are running 26 mile races. Our cross country kids run 1-2 5K's every week during the cross country season. I believe the triple jump is much harder on the body than running. The greatest long jumper in history (Carl Lewis) rarely ever long jumped. Hitting the board at 20+ mph and hurdling through the air 28 plus feet (Carl record best was 29' 2 3/4) - what kind of crash impact does that have on the body? There is a reason he rarely long jumped compared to racing on the track. Running a World Record in the 100 meters is much easier on the body than doing a world record in the long jump. Running a 5K on the track is much easier on the body than jumping.
To say its too hard for an athlete to do a 1600 and 3200 double on the same day and then add the 4x400 is to show your ignorance.
So again I ask all those who like Virginia's unlimited field events and limited to three running events rule (unless you run the 3200 then you can do only one other event if on the same day) - Is it A or B?
A - Do you like it because it descriminates against the distance runner? Or B - do you like it because it protects the distance runners but doesn't care about the sprinter and jumper athlete?
In my opinion it should be four events max for all like the NFHS suggest in their guidelines OR just have no event limit for everyone. Keep it the same for everyone. I personally favor the NFHS guidelines.
This is an interesting discussion. I know that I have discussed the rules with my AD this year since we were going to a meet in WV and I was wondering if we were following their rules or our rules. For whatever reason (coaching, athletes, something in the water) we are almost always stronger at distance than field events. For that reason the unlimited rule hurts my team. My 3200 runner does the 1600 and he is done for the day and I rarely have the athlete who would do HJ, TJ, LJ, 100, 200, 400. I currently have one but I am so afraid of hurting him that I rarely have him do more than one field event at a meet.
I don't know if I would make a stand one way or the other. What I do find interesting is who the two coaches who seem to be strongly for the 4 event limit. I have great respect for these two coaches and their programs and this is in no way meant to be an insult or anything negative at all. Both of these coaches are most known for their distance programs. I am sure they have had and do have some quality sprinter/jumpers. I am just curious to hear from a program who is known for their sprinters how they feel.
Glory is nice to have but some injuries can last a lifetime. All we have to do is to look at the problems with concussions and we need to think beyond winning an Invitation in the middle of the season.
I agree there needs to be even across the board with distance and sprinters. I would like to see advocated season event limits just like there is a meet limit. To many coaches are throwing their athletes in 6 events a meet two days a week on top of training. They could limit the events up to post season and which would save the athletes from fatigue and over training injuries which are becoming more and more prevalent.
The way american HS track meets are run are geared toward the sprinters. A team with a couple outstanding sprinters can dominate team scoring (Look at Dimitrius Knowles from LCA last year). Louisa was able to win AA states last eyar without a single distance point...shameful:)
I do think the 3200 meter rule makes distance runners less valuable to the team. Simply not an opportunity to score as many points. A lot of schools rarely field 4 x 800 teams due to this rule. Getting most valuable athlete at a meet is close to impossible (if they're just basing it on points scored) for distance runners due to rule.
The kids who are the most dedicated to track are our distance runners. Most of these kids would tell you track and/or cross country is their main sport whereas many of the track kids tell you it's football or basketball or something else and the dedication is quite the same. I know that's a generalization, but we are careful with our kids and there is no doubt they could do a triple (one kid has been doing the distance double since seventh grade). They never miss practice for anything short of a meeting with the president. They are in shape and I feel like the risk of injury to a kid from doing the distance triple is super small compared to the risk of injury in pole vault, jumps, throws, hurdles, relays and sprints.
I've actually not seen a distance runner injured in a meet in the four years I've been out here, but I've seen kids injured in just about every other event. I think people overestimate how hard it is on the body to distance run. The real risk of injury is from impacts and twisted, pulled and torn muscles and tendons and things from quick, explosive movements.
Distance runners, do indeed, get more injuries like stress fractures, but that's not from running 3 miles at a meet, that's from running 40+ miles a week in practice. Injuries like sprained ankles and stuff seem to happen a lot more in cross country on the uneven terrain than in track.
I think the rule was made by people who weren't doing a realistic assesment of the risk of injury in the various events.
All that being said. If we could enter our runners in more than two running events in a day, I doubt we would. A kid's gotta be pretty special to perform well in all three in the same day. So while I think the rule is illogical and ought to go, it doesn't have much of an effect on our team.
The one thing I think the rule does is it causes a lot of schools not field 4x800 teams or at least not their best possible 4 x 800 teams.
The kids who are the most dedicated to track are our distance runners. Most of these kids would tell you track and/or cross country is their main sport whereas many of the track kids tell you it's football or basketball or something else and the dedication is quite the same. I know that's a generalization, but we are careful with our kids and there is no doubt they could do a triple (one kid has been doing the distance double since seventh grade). They never miss practice for anything short of a meeting with the president. They are in shape and I feel like the risk of injury to a kid from doing the distance triple is super small compared to the risk of injury in pole vault, jumps, throws, hurdles, relays and sprints.
I've actually not seen a distance runner injured in a meet in the four years I've been out here, but I've seen kids injured in just about every other event. I think people overestimate how hard it is on the body to distance run. The real risk of injury is from impacts and twisted, pulled and torn muscles and tendons and things from quick, explosive movements.
Distance runners, do indeed, get more injuries like stress fractures, but that's not from running 3 miles at a meet, that's from running 40+ miles a week in practice. Injuries like sprained ankles and stuff seem to happen a lot more in cross country on the uneven terrain than in track.
I think the rule was made by people who weren't doing a realistic assesment of the risk of injury in the various events.
All that being said. If we could enter our runners in more than two running events in a day, I doubt we would. A kid's gotta be pretty special to perform well in all three in the same day. So while I think the rule is illogical and ought to go, it doesn't have much of an effect on our team.
The one thing I think the rule does is it causes a lot of schools not field 4x800 teams or at least not their best possible 4 x 800 teams.
@mattymath I saw someone blow a hamstring at the Region II meet this week, in the 800. As a 3200 runner, I'm not sure how I'd feel about the limit being raised to four. It would allow some talented mid-distance guys to do the 8-16-32 triple, but that just sounds so terrible.
My nephew in Kentucky runs 4 events in a meet and no field events. He usually runs 4x8, 1600, 800, 4x4. He's a freshman. I don't think he has done 4 including the 3200 too, but I'm pretty sure he could. I do think it's too much to do four distance events. I find the reaction most kids have to these heavy meets is that they begin to have a lot less fun and "hate" their events. Sometimes coaches put a lot of pressure on talented athletes to win team titles. I think this is a little unfair to the athlete, whether sprinter or distance runner.
It seems that the distance arguement is based on the limitations imposed upon 3200m runners. A logical solution: For the two day meets, AA & AAA State Championships for example, switch the 4x8 with the 3200, and run the 32 on Friday night. Amend VHSL Rule 84-3-1, which reads in part "In any meet contested over two days, a contestant competing in the 3200 meter run may compete in two additional running events as long as only one of the two is contested on the same day as the 3200 meter run" to read "In any meet constested over two days, a contestant competing in the the 3200 meter run may compete in three additional running events as long as the additional contested events are scheduled on a different day. The 3200 meter contestant may enter only one other running event on the day of the 3200 meter run, and if participating in two running events the first day, is limited to two running events on the second day of competition."