Looking for MP3 statistics

[SignMeUpDan]

If you want an interesting angle on this - contact Les Smith at the Portland Marathon. They now market their event as "The MP 3 Friendly Marathon"

www.portlandmarathon.com

[Brian Mastel]

I think Jim hit it the nail right on the head. We received 44 appeals with 21 of those having their results fully reinstated. The other 23 were "guilty" but had their penalty reduced. Just as an FYI, our Games Committee has voted to make the penalty lifetime disqualification with the opportunity for reinstatement after 3 years.

[Recreational Runner]

21 reinstatements out of 176 DQs is still a 12% false positive rate, which seems remarkably high, especially given the penalty of a lifetime disqualification. Are there any ideas or mechanisms around reducing cases of mistaken identity, where someone was identified as using an MP3 player, was DQed, and was reinstated after proving that they were abiding by the rules?

[imt des moines marathon]

This issue is tiring. It has really turned into a PR disaster and USATF was the fist to admit that at the 2008 Running USA conference.

There is a previous post that attempts to present an extensive explaination of Rule 144.3(b) but the argument is flawed. The post says that Rule 144.3(b) is mandantory and that simply is not true.

USATF will tell you, if you ask them, that Rule 144.3(b) applies to track and field events and is intended to keep athletes from having an unfair advantage by receiving information from a coach through a technical device such as a portable listening device.

Road racing events are able to use the ruling as a GUIDELINE in their events but it is by no means mandatory. If road races allow headphones, their sanctioning and/or insurance through USATF is not at risk.

A majority of race directors have already spoken and don't intend to do anything with Rule 144.3(b) due to a lack of resources and guidance from USATF on the ruling. RRCA has been mentioned. Don't you think that if they really were that concerend about Rule 144.3(b) they would have updated their stance on headphones that was passed almost 20 years ago?

I think the safety argument is weak at best. My 26.2 mile closed course is a safer environment for someone to run with headphones than if they were on a solo training run on our city streets.

I am not interested in grandstanding against apple, nike or any other company that is trying to bring more people into our sport. Feel free to. At the same time, I wish you the best in trying to keep their consumers out of your race. I'll take them in mine.

[Trailrunnerdude]

Originally Posted by imt des moines marathon

This issue is tiring. It has really turned into a PR disaster and USATF was the fist to admit that at the 2008 Running USA conference.

There is a previous post that attempts to present an extensive explaination of Rule 144.3(b) but the argument is flawed. The post says that Rule 144.3(b) is mandantory and that simply is not true.

USATF will tell you, if you ask them, that Rule 144.3(b) applies to track and field events and is intended to keep athletes from having an unfair advantage by receiving information from a coach through a technical device such as a portable listening device.

Road racing events are able to use the ruling as a GUIDELINE in their events but it is by no means mandatory. If road races allow headphones, their sanctioning and/or insurance through USATF is not at risk.

A majority of race directors have already spoken and don't intend to do anything with Rule 144.3(b) due to a lack of resources and guidance from USATF on the ruling. RRCA has been mentioned. Don't you think that if they really were that concerend about Rule 144.3(b) they would have updated their stance on headphones that was passed almost 20 years ago?

I think the safety argument is weak at best. My 26.2 mile closed course is a safer environment for someone to run with headphones than if they were on a solo training run on our city streets.

I am not interested in grandstanding against apple, nike or any other company that is trying to bring more people into our sport. Feel free to. At the same time, I wish you the best in trying to keep their consumers out of your race. I'll take them in mine.

The thing that I don't understand is that USAT seems to have forbidden the use of headphones in triathlons without causing a 'PR disaster' or widespread defections from triathlons. How do you know things will be different with running?

Why do you feel that the safety argument is weak? Have you not seen headphone wearing runners who are totally oblivious to what and who is around them in races or in general?

Feel free to absorb runners who insist on wearing headphones in your race. I'll be happy to keep majority who will appreciate the fact that I've done as much as possible to ensure a fair and competitive race.

[hillrunr]

Originally Posted by imt des moines marathon

There is a previous post that attempts to present an extensive explaination of Rule 144.3(b) but the argument is flawed. The post says that Rule 144.3(b) is mandantory and that simply is not true.

According to the USATF website, it is a mandatory rule. An initial draft included the sentence "In long distance running, this is not a mandatory rule, but is a strong suggestion as a guideline for safety reasons." but this was dropped before the rule was implemented. As the rule reads now, it is mandatory.

[Tom Filippone]

I hope that Eleanor Su of the San Diego Union-Tribune will let us know when her article is published and what statistics she finds on accidents in races. I wish her luck.

There has been a very heated argument going on in a running club I belong to over a Run Aware program that says don't wear headsets. One of the proponents of wearing headsets keeps asking opponents of wearing them to point out any stats on accidents in races. He has done research on this and hasn't found anything. And no one else seems to come up with study or stats. I haven't seen any such stats on any running site that I view.

So please Eleanor, let us know what you find!

[Brian Mastel]

Tom, sounds like the same argument everywhere. As race directors, we have to try and plan not only for what has happened, but what we think MAY happen, so the argument of "find me an accident and I'll stop" doesn't hold much water with me. Here's a story for those folks. I volunteer at a half-marathon and last year I was on the course in my vehicle heading to mile 12. The water stop there radioed that they had a guy not feeling well so I was heading that way and a woman wearing headphones was in the road in front of me. I had to get 3 feet away before she heard my horn. A couple minutes later, we dispatched our ambulance to pick up the guy because he was in trouble. The ambulance drove down the same "closed course" I had just driven 2 minutes before. The ambulance wasn't delayed by this woman, but could have been and that is what keeps race directors awake at night.

[Trailrunnerdude]

Originally Posted by Brian Mastel

Tom, sounds like the same argument everywhere. As race directors, we have to try and plan not only for what has happened, but what we think MAY happen, so the argument of "find me an accident and I'll stop" doesn't hold much water with me. Here's a story for those folks. I volunteer at a half-marathon and last year I was on the course in my vehicle heading to mile 12. The water stop there radioed that they had a guy not feeling well so I was heading that way and a woman wearing headphones was in the road in front of me. I had to get 3 feet away before she heard my horn. A couple minutes later, we dispatched our ambulance to pick up the guy because he was in trouble. The ambulance drove down the same "closed course" I had just driven 2 minutes before. The ambulance wasn't delayed by this woman, but could have been and that is what keeps race directors awake at night.

I think this post relates the status of the problem very well - essentially the number of incidents caused by headphone-wearing runners is still small enough for it to be anecdotal. If we were to get to the point where we could point to statistics such as "every year in the U.S. xx,xxx runners get tripped in marathons by other runners wearing headphones" or "every year in the U.S. x,xxx runners wearing headphones are hit by motor vehicles because they couldn't hear those vehicles," then I would say we had lost the battle and race directors would have a full-fledged crisis on their hands.