Analysis: Here's what 8,000 race results from 20 years of data has to say about the long-held beliefs about lane advantages
It's conventional wisdom in athletics that the middle lanes – lanes three through six – are the best and this idea, in a way, is baked into the rules of track and field. In events with multiple heats – from college level all the way to the Olympics – the people who run faster times in earlier heats are assigned to middle lanes in later heats. In other words, the fastest runners are rewarded with what are, supposedly, better lane assignments.
In my professional life as an economist, I think a great deal about using statistics to extract meaning from data. Using 20 years of track and field data from the International Association of Athletics Federations, I found that the long-held beliefs about lane advantages are not supported by the data. And in fact, for the 200m sprint, the evidence suggests that lanes often perceived as the least desirable are actually the fastest.
From RTÉ Sport, Rhasidat Adeleke reflects on a "messy" semi-final in the 400m in Paris
Myth of the middle lane
If lane assignments do matter, their impact would be most noticeable for events where the runners have to stay in their lanes for all of, or at least a large part of, the race, like 100m, 200m, 400m and 800m events.
In my experience, the myth of the middle lane being the fastest is most commonly associated with fast-paced races that also include corners, so the 200m and 400m. There are two rationales behind this point of view, and they have to do with why the inside and outside lanes are bad, more than why middle lanes are better.
The reasoning for why inside lanes are bad is that in races with turns, the inside lanes are slower because the corners are too tight. Indeed, researchers who study the biomechanics of running find that tighter corners do slow runners down.
The rationale behind slow outside lanes has to do with the staggered starts required to make sure each racer runs the same distance. Due to this staggering, runners in the outside lanes cannot see their competitors for the majority of the race. The thinking goes that outside runners may have less motivation to chase competitors or have difficulty gauging their speed compared to the pack if they can't see other racers.
From RTÉ Sport, Quincy Hall (running in lane 8) surges from deep to take the men's 400m at the Paris Olympics
Not all lanes are the same
In most races, the fastest runners are assigned to the middle lanes in accordance with the competition rules. Not surprisingly, the fastest runners – who are in the middle lanes – often win. Are these racers winning because those lanes are the fastest or because those runners tend to be the fastest?
Similar to the idea behind clinical trials for a drug, the ideal way to test lane advantages would be to randomly assign runners to lanes and see how they do on average. Thankfully, there is a subset of race data that does this: Typically, runners are randomly assigned to lanes in the first heats of events. By using data only from first heats of elite track and field events, I was able eliminate the bias from faster runners being assigned to certain lanes.
Using roughly 8,000 individual race results, I found that the "middle is best" belief is not well supported by the data. For the 100m – which is run on a straightaway – I found no evidence of lane advantages. The myth is less prevalent here, though, so this lack of difference isn't surprising.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From the RTÉ Olympics podcast, why the 400m race is such a painful event for athletes
The most striking counterpoint to the "middle is best" assumption is the 200m. I found that it is in fact outside lanes that are associated with faster race times – on average lane eight is roughly 0.2 seconds faster than lane two. This is sizable for a race in which the world record is 19.19 seconds. Faster outside lanes make sense biomechanically as tighter corners produce slower race times. But the result seems to disprove the idea that not seeing competitors can slow a runner down.
In the 400,, I found no evidence that middle lanes are fastest. All lanes seem to be roughly equal. It is worth noting that there is more variability in 400m times, so it is harder to detect small effects, if they exist. But even this nondifference between lanes in the 400 is striking.
In the 2016 Olympics, people were amazed when Wayde Van Niekerk won the 400m final from lane eight, the farthest outside lane. The astonishment stemmed from the belief that lane eight puts runners at a disadvantage. The data doesn't support this. But what is impressive about Van Niekerk's win is that he was one of the slower runners to qualify for the final – that's why he was assigned to one of the "least desirable" lanes.
READ: Rhasidat Adeleke's toughest challenge? Changing how she runs
The last event I looked at, the 800m, is distinct from the other events above. It has what is called a "lane break," which is where runners must remain in their assigned lanes for the first 100 metres but are then free to run in any lane they wish. Since the inside lane of a track covers the shortest distance, runners in outside lanes move inward after the break. As they do this, they may have to run a tiny bit farther than their competitors and jockey for position with runners who are already in the inside lanes.
I found that racers who start at the very inside lanes ran the fastest times. While outside lanes might have a small advantage over the first 100 metres, runners who have an established position on the inside of the track seem to have an overall advantage.
Next time you're watching any of the shorter track and field events at the Olympics, listen to see if anyone repeats the old adage that the middle lanes are fastest. The data says this isn't true, so if someone in the outside lanes takes a surprise gold, you'll know to be surprised not because of their lane assignment, but because they were a slow qualifier.
Follow RTÉ Brainstorm on WhatsApp and Instagram for more stories and updates
David R. Munro is Assistant Professor of Economics at Middlebury. This article was originally published by The Conversation.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
