Pit ruling?

[bjvando]

DOES ANYONE KNOW WHERE TO FIND THE RULE FOR DISTANCE FROM THE OUTER EDGE OF THE POLE VAULT PIT TO THE INSIDE CURB OF THE TRACK.???

MY OLD HIGH SCHOOL IS GOING TO BE ILLEGAL BECAUSE THE COACH DOESNT THINK THAT THERE IS SUCH A RULE? I KNOW THERE ARE A FEW "RULE BUFFS" OUT THERE SO ANYTHING YOU CAN FIND WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL.

AND IF ANYONE HAS THE CODE AND ACTUALLY MEASUREMENT THAT WOULD BE GREAT.. ( AND EVEN BETTER....... its a HS in CA, so if anyone has the C.I.F. rule, that would be very much appreciated.)

thanks everyone.

[Bruce Caldwell]

the IAAF rule is 1 meter which might be a NCAA rule also and USATF.

But I do not think there is a rule for the pits that run parallel to the track.

If the box is 11' from its middle to the track it will fit most 21'6" and 22' wide pits.

Looking at the 2004 rule book I do not see anything about this

[PVJunkie]

From the NFHS website for 2004

7-2-9 Warming-up shall not be allowed in any jumping venue until supervised by a coach or official. Rationale: To minimize the risk to competitors and bystanders, no warm-ups shall be allowed until there is an adult coach or official on hand to supervise the area.
7-5-9 Note In the pole vault, the front cutout should be tapered away from the planting box to allow the pole to bend uninhibited. Rationale: This change will minimize obstruction to the bend of the pole.
7-2-10 Illegal aids shall include the practice of taps (pushing the vaulter on his back) at take-off in the pole vault during warm-up or in the competition. Rationale: In order to minimize risk, aids that assist athlete are not legal.
7-5-19l A competitor shall have the pole vault standards or uprights set to position the crossbar from a point 15.5â€Â

[PVJunkie]

This Interp suggests that there is not a rule regaurding the porximity of the pit to lane 1. Of couse the rules in CA tend to be more aggressive. I reccomend you contact ~JJ~ on this site for an answer.


2003 TRACK & FIELD AND CROSS COUNTRY
RULES INTERPRETATIONS


7-5-10 Situation 8: A vaulter from Team A requests that the landing pit be moved to the right for each of his trials. The official refuses to move the pit because the position will put the pit on the track. RULING: Illegal Procedure. COMMENT: Although the landing system has a new dimension, this does not reduce the need to adjust the pit or eliminate the pad surrounding the pit, including covering the curb in lane one. (7-5-10)

[dafox]

the IAAF rule is 1 meter which might be a NCAA rule also and USATF.

But I do not think there is a rule for the pits that run parallel to the track.

If the box is 11' from its middle to the track it will fit most 21'6" and 22' wide pits.

Looking at the 2004 rule book I do not see anything about this

is there, or shouldnt there be a rule about the distance of the box from the side of the track? even if theres 11' from the track, and it'll fit a big enough pit, what if I push my 15' pole to the side after pushoff, and it blocks lane 1?

univ. nebraska has a net to catch poles on their indoor track cause of this (at least they used to for the few meets I went to there)

[higherflyer]

Bj

I believe that the distance from PIT to track has to be at least 4 feet.
When we put in our new runways we had both of them formed and ready for concrete, because the new pit size rule we had to have one runway moved over 8 inches to be legal. Lucky we didnt pour concrete without double checking.

Higherflyer

[Bruce Caldwell]

I think it was 4 foot but too many schools had a lane 1 too close and the NFHS finally realized that most of the injuries were from short back system. If they imposed a 4' rule especially on the side where the track is this would require the runway of the pV to be moved.

Even if there is no rule I recommend that you provide removable padding of 3" along the side of the pit close to the pit just to be safe as the rule does say you have to pad hard and unyielding surfaces, as this would apply!!!!!
You would remove it for each race run.
Especially padding for those curbs that are hard and unyielding

[vaultdad]

To be honest, I don't know of such a rule in Missouri, but I'll look.

The important thing here is that it's a high school, not a college environment. One field that has many uses, and could be setup for track,soccer, and football in a small district. On our field the scoreboard is located pretty close, but they don't want to move the pit because the opposite end would be worse.

Most high schools I've worked have had their pit on either end of the field or on the runout behind the straightaway. On the field has its own challenges because the area under the pit is usually ashpalt or concrete for the pads to sit on. There are MSHSAA rules for Football that state how close a hard object can be to the endzone such as a runway or pad. In MO I believe that number is 15' behind the line the football uprights sit on, but I am not positive because I don't ref football. That number didn't change due to the increased size of the pit as far as I know.

By the way, how many schools have EVER moved the whole pit assy left or right to accomodate one vaulter? I have moved the front buns slightly if the athletes pole was really rubbing on them.

[Bruce Caldwell]

I remember the pit at the KU relays was always narrow

One year Bob Seagren went up and right down on the track.

OF course that was in 1973 so I am sure that they have moved it over by now or to another area of the stadium.

[rainbowgirl28]

I don't think there is a rule like that in WA. I have been to a number of meets there where the pit butts right up against the track. One kicked off crossbar and a whole slew of distance runners could be taken out Never actually seen that happen, but it's been close a few times.

[Russ]

I scoured the 2003 NFHS Rules Book pretty thoroughly last Summer while I was writing an article about safety issues related to the pv rules. I don't recall a rule that directly addresses this issue. But one rule that indirectly relates is 7-5-10, which states that "hard or unyielding surfaces...around the landing pad...shall be padded or cushioned with a minimum of 2 inches of dense foam or other suitable material(s)." This leaves open to interpretation what "around the landing pad" means. The rule fails to directly define how close the proximity needs to be to come within the scope of what it means to be "around the landing pad."

As is the case with most interpretations, the Referee is given very broad discretion. Rule 3-3-4 states: "Upon determining that the event venue does not meet the criteria set forth in these rules, the referee can declare that the event will not be contested." And, Rule 3-3-6 states: "The referee has the sole authority for ruling on infractions or irregularites not covered within these rules."

So, if a Referee were to determine that lane one of the track were so close to the pit that it needed to be padded with 2 inches of foam pursuant to 7-5-10, s/he (i.e., the referee) has the authority to decide not to contest the vault pursuant to 3-3-4 and 3-3-5.

Sorry to give such a legalistic-sounding answer, but I guess that the original question was a legalistic one to begin with.

[dafox]

Russ, thats a perfect sounding answer. I'm thinking the curb is obvious, but a dirt track (the school in question has dirt) is definitely a 'hard surface' in my book.