Converting 300m hurdles to 400m hurdles - ELITETRACK (2024)

underdog_19 on April 5, 2009 at 5:08 am#15557

Massachusetts has changed over from the 300 hurdles to the 400 hurdles. My AD is too cheap to spring for repainting the track (though we really need resurfacing), so I’m on my own for making the changes.

There are two schools of thought as to changing the lines. First is to use the 400m start and repaint every mark. This sure would get tedious.

The other is to use the regular 400m start and move the finish line back 5 meters, then I’d only have to paint hurdles 1-3 as the rest will match up with the 300m hurdle marks. Only problem is then I have to move the finish line and also move the 100m and 110m start lines. Here is a link for a short explanation from the MIAA. https://www.miaa.net/300-to-400m-hurdles.pdf

Going to do this next Saturday. Which would you do?

W.E. Price on April 6, 2009 at 4:18 am#80507

The school I coach at just implemented the latter approach. Repainting, let alone getting a new track installed is thoroughly out of the question here. Eventually, Al Porter’s idea was the least costly (human resource as well).

It wasn’t as difficult as would be expected. All we had to solve for were 12 hurdle placements (6-lane track), since hurdle 3 for all lanes on our track is at the final 4×1 exchange chevron.

Of course, the added green common line thru some people off I was told.

Good luck with your decision.

underdog_19 on April 6, 2009 at 4:43 am#80509

W.E. Price on April 6, 2009 at 6:00 am#80516

So did you move the 100 and 110 start back also? Did you fool with the mile and 2 mile start at all?

Everything else runs from the standard common line. We just added a green line through the lanes 1-6 at the 395m point. After implementing the calcs (since the school wouldn’t spring for a surveyor), it took all of forty minutes to complete.

Of course, I was later informed that the 400h common was confusing. Meet management should be able to right those issues.

RussZHC on April 6, 2009 at 1:18 pm#80552

This relates to a question I asked a couple of months ago as “Canada” tries to implement common standards for all provinces in all events.

If what the replies to that were accurate, and I have no reason to doubt that they were, what you are considering is the most efficient way but if you are ever using FAT timing then it is measuring BACK from a common finish line that could be the most important or you will end up with having to move cameras or to have multiple cameras set up…in that regard I am a little confused as to why the 100mH/110mH are discussed, unless in wanting to move the finish line to accommodate the 400mH marks you are then going to adjust the start lines for the 100m/110mH to still use that new common finish line, in which case would you then not have to change all the sprint hurdle marks as well? Just asking…and more, if you are moving the 110mH start “back” do you not run out of track…again, just asking as most tracks I have seen, the 110mH start line is “backed up” just about as far as possible without being “off” the track (unless that area on your particular track is much longer than on most).

RussZHC on April 6, 2009 at 2:00 pm#80558

Sorry, thought about this some more…the “way” to do it would be to paint on the new marks as the bulletin states BUT not use lane # 1 (as that start is common to the finish line that is common to all events contested on that straight) that way, you would not have the hassle of moving the finish line and all that would entail if FAT is used…the difficulty then, but only for the 400mH event, would become that you would be “down” a lane from what you are used to having.

Isn’t dealing with lots of hurdle specifications fun?

underdog_19 on April 7, 2009 at 9:04 am#80644

We actually have a lot of room behind our 110 start, so moving that back isn’t really an issue.

Luckily (or unluckily) our track is so gross and disgusting that we’ll never host anything where we’ll need FAT. Hand timing all day for us!

Good point about moving the sprint hurdles…didn’t think of that. I think I’m just going to make a finish line for only the 400h and make sure everyone is on the same page with where that finish is.

underdog_19 on April 8, 2009 at 10:25 am#80773

[quote author="underdog_19" date="1238973247"]So did you move the 100 and 110 start back also? Did you fool with the mile and 2 mile start at all?

Everything else runs from the standard common line. We just added a green line through the lanes 1-6 at the 395m point. After implementing the calcs (since the school wouldn’t spring for a surveyor), it took all of forty minutes to complete.

Of course, I was later informed that the 400h common was confusing. Meet management should be able to right those issues.[/quote]

Did you mark new staggered starting lines for the 400h too?

The way it’s running around in my head now (haven’t gotten a chance to measure it with a wheel yet)is that if we make a new finish line for the 400h and use the start for the 400, we’ll be off 5 meters. It only makes sense to get a 400m race if we also move the staggers back also. See my thinking?

The link I added above makes it seem that you use the original 400 staggers.

W.E. Price on April 8, 2009 at 11:05 am#80777

Did you mark new staggered starting lines for the 400h too?

The way it’s running around in my head now (haven’t gotten a chance to measure it with a wheel yet)is that if we make a new finish line for the 400h and use the start for the 400, we’ll be off 5 meters. It only makes sense to get a 400m race if we also move the staggers back also. See my thinking?

The link I added above makes it seem that you use the original 400 staggers.

Our 400h common line is at the 395m point (5 meters back from the standard common line) of our track. This is where all work (staggers included) began at.

Lanes 2 through 6 has an additional staggered line across the lane based on the new 400h common line (setup from lane 1). Placement for hurdles 1 through 3 have been appropriately marked for each lane based upon track configuration and compliance with existing 300h hurdle markings. Again, since we are 1:1 regarding straights to curves, we only needed to solve for the first 2 sets of hurdle staggers.

If you haven’t already, you might want to consult Computomarx (https://www.computomarx.com/Inquiry.htm) for assistance regarding staggered hurdle placement. I was fortunate enough to have members of the school’s various technical departments to assist in certain areas. Though I did use their formulas as a guide.

underdog_19 on April 8, 2009 at 9:22 pm#80822

RussZHC on April 10, 2009 at 7:28 am#80990

I can “feel” the aggravation from here, the only other thing I would suggest is double check the colors of the marks you are going to put down (that they do not match any other marks already in use, regardless how infrequently).

Our track has some hurdle markings that when they are common (the overlap between age group spacings for example) you end up with what should be a single mark split into quarters with each quarter being a different color but this also means some “common” marks are also not so common and are only split in half, yet others are marked only every 2nd lane to avoid confusion(???) as you begin to run out of near primary colors, plus, going the opposite direction for those training days when it is simply too windy, the same color is used for a partial set of women’s (8.5m) and men’s (9.14m) markings meaning there is an odd partial start line at what is the regular finishing end of the track (I smiled when I saw video from Florida Relays this past few days…where it appears that they can run full events in either direction on at least one straight)

underdog_19 on April 11, 2009 at 7:28 am#81092