← Back to catalogue
Research draft

long jump

vr.tr.long-jump · ACT.ACT

Enable an AI agent to recognise, assess and support long-jump attempts by relating approach and take-off execution to landing distance, attempt validity and the conditions governing participation.

Thing Registry Activities and processes

Research draft, second pass

A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.

recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read

Researched by: Codex

Purpose and description

Enable an AI agent to recognise, assess and support long-jump attempts by relating approach and take-off execution to landing distance, attempt validity and the conditions governing participation.

Long jump is a horizontal jumping event in which competitors seek the greatest valid distance from a designated take-off line to their nearest landing mark, normally using a running approach, a one-foot take-off and a sand landing area.

It can be Identify whether an observed activity is a full long-jump attempt or a related drill.; Locate approach, take-off or landing observations that may explain a change in measured distance.; Check recorded evidence against the applicable attempt-validity rules and flag unresolved judgments.; Compare attempts while accounting for approach setup, wind, measurement method and validity.; Determine which recorded results may enter a ranking or eligibility assessment under an identified ruleset.; Flag runway, take-off-area or pit conditions that require inspection before another attempt..

Distinguishing features

The intended outcome is horizontal distance into a landing pit, rather than clearance of a raised bar.

A standard attempt combines a running approach with a single-foot take-off; a stationary two-foot launch belongs to standing long jump.

The event has one take-off followed by flight and landing, rather than the successive hop, step and jump of triple jump.

An official result depends on the prescribed take-off reference and landing mark, so it can differ from the athlete's actual airborne displacement.

A physically completed jump may be invalid, and a valid measured jump may have separate restrictions on record or statistical eligibility.

Scope

+ The running approach, single-foot take-off, flight and sand-pit landing of an attempt

+ Attempt validity under an identified ruleset

+ Measured distance, wind conditions and result eligibility

+ Attempt sequencing and performance comparison within a session or competition

+ Long-jump-specific readiness of the athlete, runway, take-off area and landing pit

- Standing long jump and other jumping tests without a running approach

- Triple jump and its distinct hop, step and jump sequence

- General sprint training, strength programming and athlete medical diagnosis

- Construction and maintenance specifications for athletics facilities

- Administration of an entire athletics meeting or combined-events competition

Characteristics

Activity setting
competition attempt | full-approach practice | shortened-approach practice | technical drill Determines whether a distance represents an official result or a training observation.
Governing ruleset
Identified governing body, rule edition and event-specific conditions Supplies the authority for validity, measurement, attempt allocation and ranking decisions.
Approach length
metres and/or explicitly defined stride count Makes approach setup reproducible and distinguishes comparable attempts.
Approach speed
m/s over an identified approach segment Supports assessment of speed carried toward take-off without treating measurements from different segments as equivalent.
Take-off foot
left | right | unobserved Connects approach setup and technical observations to the athlete's actual take-off pattern.
Take-off position relative to reference
centimetres, with the reference, observed body point and sign convention recorded Helps distinguish distance lost before the reference from a possible infringement requiring adjudication.
Attempt status
pending | valid | failed | passed | unresolved Prevents an unverified measurement or a passed opportunity from being treated as a valid result.
Measured jump distance
metres, with measurement method and reporting precision Records the assessed outcome while retaining how it was established.
Wind reading
signed m/s, or explicitly unavailable or not applicable Supports ruleset-specific eligibility decisions and interpretation of performance conditions.
Result eligibility
eligible | ineligible | unresolved, separately for placing, records and statistical comparison Keeps attempt validity distinct from the purposes for which its result may be used.

Also called

hitch-kickindoor long jump

Where this came from

wikidata · CC0 1.0

Drafted structure

Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 6 bundles · 11 layers · 18 findings · 28 questions.

Event identity and rule context Establishes which form of long-jump activity is being modelled and which requirements govern it.

Training jumps, adapted formats and official competition attempts cannot automatically share the same interpretation.

Activity boundary

Distinguishes the registered event from neighbouring jumping activities and partial exercises.

Running single-take-off attempt

Record whether the activity contains the approach, single-foot take-off, flight and pit landing that identify the model's central case.

  1. Does the activity involve a running approach and one take-off into a sand pit, or is it standing long jump, triple jump or a drill? boundary
  2. Which phases are intentionally omitted or modified in this practice or adapted format? definition

Applicable authority

Connects the attempt to the rules and event conditions needed to interpret it.

Rules and format reference

Record the governing rule edition, participant category and local modifications before deriving official judgments.

  1. Which published rule edition and event conditions govern this long-jump session? provenance
  2. Do age-group, classification or local provisions modify the take-off reference, assistance permitted or attempt format? boundary
Approach and take-off Relates the athlete's run-up to take-off placement and execution.

Long-jump performance depends on arriving at the take-off area with usable speed and sufficiently repeatable placement.

Approach repeatability

Captures how the athlete reaches the take-off area across attempts.

Run-up setup and arrival

Record start position, approach length, check marks and observed speed or stride adjustments near take-off.

  1. What start mark, approach length and check marks were used for this attempt? measurement
  2. Do repeated observations show consistent arrival at take-off, or late shortening, reaching or other adjustments? measurement

Take-off execution

Describes the final ground contact and its position relative to the event's take-off reference.

Placement and launch observation

Separate observed take-off position and movement from the official decision about whether the attempt infringed a rule.

  1. Which foot took off, and where was the observed take-off contact relative to the applicable reference? measurement
  2. What video, sensor or observer evidence supports claims about speed loss, body position or launch direction at take-off? provenance
Flight and landing Captures airborne coordination, first contact and subsequent movements that affect the landing evidence.

The feet's initial contact alone may not explain the mark used to determine a long-jump result.

Airborne coordination

Describes movement between take-off and landing preparation.

Flight pattern and preparation

Record observed limb and trunk movements without assuming that a named technique establishes quality or causation.

  1. What airborne movement pattern is visible, and is there enough evidence to assign a recognised technique label? definition
  2. How are the legs and trunk positioned immediately before pit contact? measurement

Landing mark formation

Connects landing movement to the marks left in the pit.

Initial contact and nearest mark

Distinguish initial foot contact from later contacts that may determine the measured result under the applicable rules.

  1. Which contact produced the mark selected for measurement, and how was that contact identified? provenance
  2. Did a hand, seat or other subsequent contact leave a mark closer to the take-off reference than the initial foot marks? measurement
Adjudication and results Determines attempt status and records distance with the evidence needed for its intended use.

Distance, validity and eligibility answer different questions and must remain distinguishable.

Attempt adjudication

Records the decision on an attempt and the rule and evidence supporting it.

Validity decision and evidence

Retain the official status, any stated infringement and unresolved reviews rather than inferring validity from distance.

  1. Was this opportunity completed, failed or passed, and who recorded that status? provenance
  2. If the attempt was ruled invalid or disputed, which rule and observed event support the decision? boundary

Distance and eligibility

Links measurement and environmental evidence to the uses permitted for the result.

Measured result with conditions

Record the measurement reference, selected landing mark, distance and wind evidence before evaluating placing or record eligibility.

  1. What distance was measured, using which reference, landing mark, method and reporting precision? measurement
  2. Given the wind reading and other required evidence, for which ranking, record or statistical purposes is this result eligible? action
Attempt sequence and readiness Places each jump within its session and assesses whether the next attempt can proceed.

Attempt opportunities and the condition of the approach and landing areas affect immediate decisions.

Series position

Tracks completed opportunities and the basis for selecting or comparing results.

Attempt history and next opportunity

Record attempt order, valid distances, failures and passes together with the applicable progression and tie-resolution provisions.

  1. What is the ordered series of results, failures and passes, and which attempt opportunities remain? measurement
  2. Which result determines the current placing or training comparison, and what rule resolves equal best distances if needed? action

Next-jump readiness

Checks immediate conditions specific to the run-up, take-off and sand-pit landing.

Runway, take-off and pit clearance

Record observable obstacles, traction concerns, pit preparation and athlete-reported concerns that require attention before another jump.

  1. Are the approach and landing areas clear, the take-off surface usable and the pit prepared for the next attempt? measurement
  2. Do observed conditions or athlete-reported concerns require holding the attempt for inspection or qualified assessment? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.

A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.

Reported evidence

Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.

Check these first

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • The intended sense is assumed to be the athletics event, principally running long jump.
  • The performance range is approximate and is not a qualifying standard or a statement of current records.
  • Exact competition procedures and para athletics adaptations require checking the applicable rulebook edition; no sources were consulted.
  1. Which of these check these first hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Kinds and varieties

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • Running long jump
  • Standing long jump, a distinct variant performed without a run-up
  1. Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Standards and regulation

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • World Athletics Technical Rules govern competition facilities, valid attempts, distance measurement and wind measurement for running long jump.
  • World Para Athletics Rules and Regulations govern para athletics long jump, including applicable classification-specific provisions.
  1. Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Real-world use

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • Track-and-field competition as an individual event
  • A component of combined events, including the decathlon and heptathlon
  • School physical education and athletics development
  • Standing long jump as a field test of lower-body explosive performance
  1. Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Typical measurements

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • Valid jump distance - Approximately 6-9 in high-level adult running long jump; varies substantially with competition category - m
  • Wind component along the runway - Variable; wind assistance affects performance and eligibility for certain statistical purposes - m/s
  1. Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Failure modes and hazards

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • Taking off beyond the permitted take-off boundary makes an attempt invalid.
  • Taking off behind the line sacrifices measured distance because measurement begins at the designated line.
  • Falling backward or leaving a nearer mark in the sand reduces the measured distance.
  • High-speed approach and take-off can cause muscle strains or lower-limb injuries.
  • Poorly maintained landing sand or an unsafe runway increases injury risk.
  1. Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Regional variation

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • School and grassroots competitions may modify equipment, approach lengths and attempt formats.
  • Distances may be reported in feet and inches in some settings, although international competition uses metric measurement.
  1. Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

  • Triple jump - Requires a hop, step and jump sequence rather than one take-off followed by landing in the pit.
  • High jump - Measures vertical clearance over a bar rather than horizontal distance.
  • Standing long jump - Uses a stationary start and usually a two-foot take-off; it is a related variant rather than the standard running athletics event.
  1. Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of long jump this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

What the second pass must settle

  • Which existing Vercy athletics or jumping model should supply shared concepts so that this entry owns only the long-jump-specific additions?
  • Which governing rule editions should be researched for precise failure criteria, measurement procedures, wind requirements, attempt allocation and tie resolution?
  • Which youth and adapted long-jump formats belong within this entry, and which modifications require explicit extensions?
  • What validated observation methods and uncertainty bounds support comparisons of approach speed, take-off placement and landing losses?
  • Which evidence-based technical interpretations can support coaching decisions without presenting correlations from individual attempts as established causes?