{"id":3147,"date":"2026-10-26T08:06:31","date_gmt":"2026-10-26T15:06:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=3147"},"modified":"2026-10-27T19:22:22","modified_gmt":"2026-10-28T02:22:22","slug":"what-sprint-results-mean","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=3147","title":{"rendered":"What Sprint Results Mean"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>If you are new to track and field, a results sheet can look like a secret code. There is a time, then a small number beside it, maybe with a plus sign. The announcer says the run was \u201cwind-aided,\u201d and a minute later somebody online calls it \u201cillegal.\u201d Now you are lost. I want to clear that up. I think announcers and people online make this far more confusing than it needs to be. This guide covers the sprints and hurdles, because those are the races where wind matters: the 100 meters, the 200 meters, and the 100- and 110-meter hurdles. When you finish reading, you should be able to look at a result and know what it really says.<\/p>\n

\u201cWind-aided\u201d does not mean \u201cillegal\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n

This is the biggest mix-up in the sport. When the tailwind in a race is stronger than 2.0 meters per second, the run is called wind-aided (or wind-assisted). Too many announcers say it as if the runner broke a rule. They did not. Nobody cheated and nobody was disqualified. The race still counts. The winner is still the winner, medals are still medals, and runners still move on to the next round. The only thing that changes is the record book: a wind-aided time cannot be used for a record, and it usually cannot be used for official lists or qualifying marks either.<\/p>\n

Wind-aided means \u201cnot record-eligible.\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n

It does not mean illegal, cheating, or disqualified. Save the word \u201cillegal\u201d for things that really break the rules, like a false start. What makes a time \u201clegal\u201d for the record book? When I say a time is \u201clegal,\u201d I mean it passes two checks. Fail either one and the time is not record-eligible.<\/p>\n

1. Timing –<\/b> The time must come from fully automatic electronic timing: the starting gun sets the clock going and a finish-line camera stops it. Times from a person holding a stopwatch are not accepted for records. Hand timing only reads to a tenth of a second and depends on how fast a person reacts. Records in the short races have required automatic timing since the late 1970s.<\/p>\n

2. Wind –<\/b> The average tailwind during the race must be 2.0 meters per second or less. A small detail that trips people up: wind readings are rounded up to the next tenth. So a posted +2.0 could really have been anywhere from 1.91 to 2.00. A posted +2.1 is the first reading that counts as aided. That is how thin the line is, and it matters later in this guide.<\/p>\n

Where did the 2.0 come from?<\/b><\/p>\n

It came from a vote, not from an experiment. The limit was set in 1936 at a congress of the sport\u2019s governing body (then called the IAAF, now World Athletics) in Berlin. One account says Germany proposed a limit of 1 meter per second, and the delegates settled on 2.0 as a compromise so they would not have to wipe out too many existing performances. Researchers who have looked at the history describe it as based on a small case study. Some have called it arbitrary. After all, why is 2.1 aided when 2.0 is fine?<\/b><\/p>\n

It is a line in the sand, not a cliff.<\/b><\/p>\n

The wind does not flip a switch at 2.0. A run at +2.1 gets almost the same help as a run at +2.0. Keep that in mind and the rest of this guide gets easy.<\/b><\/p>\n

How the wind is measured<\/b><\/p>\n

The wind reading is not a guess, but it is also not a perfect picture of what each runner felt. Here is how it works:<\/p>\n

\u2022 One gauge, one spot<\/b>. A wind gauge sits beside lane 1, 50 meters from the finish line, about 1.22 meters (4 feet) off the ground and no more than 2 meters from the track.<\/p>\n

\u2022 A short window. <\/b>In the 100 meters it measures for 10 seconds from the gun. In the hurdles it measures for 13 seconds from the gun. In the 200 meters it measures for 10 seconds, starting when the first runner enters the straight.<\/p>\n

\u2022 One average<\/b>. The gauge produces a single number, the average over that window, rounded up to the next tenth.<\/p>\n

\u2022 Only some races. <\/b>Wind is not measured in the 400 meters or longer, because runners go around the track and the wind helps them on one side and slows them on the other. Indoors there is no wind to measure. Even the number itself can be questioned. After a famous 1988 women\u2019s 100 meters, later analysis suggested the real wind was much stronger than the 0.0 on the gauge. The record still stands. It shows that the reading is a useful tool, not a perfect one.<\/p>\n

How much does wind really help?<\/b><\/p>\n

Scientists have studied this for decades. For the 100 meters, the best-known study found that the maximum legal tailwind of +2.0 is worth about 0.10 seconds to a man and about 0.12 seconds to a woman, with a small margin of error. A computer model of the 110-meter hurdles came out higher, at about 0.19 seconds for +2.0. The 200 is trickier because part of the race is on the curve, where the wind hits runners from different angles, so I will stick to the 100 here.<\/p>\n

Two more facts from that research matter. First, the help grows steadily as the wind gets stronger, but it grows a little more slowly the stronger the wind gets. Second, a headwind hurts more than a tailwind helps.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Extra help beyond the legal limit: men – women – help beyond +2.0<\/b><\/p>\n

+1.0:<\/b> about 0.05 s – about 0.06 s – none (legal)<\/p>\n

+2.0:<\/b> about 0.10 s – about 0.12 s – none (legal limit)<\/p>\n

+2.5: <\/b>about 0.12 s – about 0.15 s – about 0.02 to 0.03 s<\/p>\n

+3.0:<\/b> about 0.14 s – about 0.17 s – about 0.04 to 0.05 s<\/p>\n

+4.0:<\/b> about 0.18 s – about 0.21 s – about 0.08 to 0.09 s<\/p>\n

(Estimates for a typical 100 m run. Real runners vary.)<\/p>\n

How to read an aided time<\/b><\/p>\n

Now you can put the pieces together. The question is not \u201cis it legal or not?\u201d The better question is \u201chow much extra help did the wind give beyond the limit?\u201d Here is the rule of thumb I use. It is my own judgment, not an official rule.<\/p>\n

+2.0 or less Legal. <\/b>The time can count for records and lists. Remember that +2.0 still carries a real boost.<\/p>\n

+2.1 to +3.0 Aided, but only slightly past the limit.<\/b> Treat it like a legal run with a little extra help. It is a real, believable performance.<\/p>\n

+3.1 to +4.0 \u00a0A clear boost. <\/b>Still a fast run by a fast runner, but expect that athlete to need a good day and a good wind to get near it again.<\/p>\n

Above +4.0 The wind did a lot of the work. <\/b>Enjoy the race, but do not compare the time to legal times.<\/p>\n

A worked example<\/b><\/p>\n

Say a man runs 9.90 with a +2.5 tailwind. That wind is aided, so the time cannot go in the record book. But look at the numbers: +2.0 is already allowed and worth about 0.10 seconds. The extra half meter per second adds only about 0.02 to 0.03 seconds more. That is smaller than the natural ups and downs a sprinter has from one race to the next, even in the same conditions. A runner who can do 9.90 at +2.5 is clearly a 9.9-to-10.0 kind of sprinter, and I would expect him to run close to that in legal conditions. At +3.0, the extra help is still only about 0.04 to 0.05 seconds.<\/p>\n

The best proof that a fast time is real is not a wind reading. It is the runner doing it again. Look at the athlete\u2019s other races that season. If the aided time sits in line with them, believe it. If it is far faster than anything else they have run, the wind probably did a big part of the job.<\/p>\n

Why \u201czero-wind calculators\u201d do not work<\/b><\/p>\n

You will find websites that take your time and your wind reading and promise to tell you what you would have run in zero wind. People then say things like, \u201cThat 9.90 at +2.5 is really a 9.78.\u201d I think this is a mistake. The calculators are built on averages from research studies, and the researchers themselves say there is a margin of error. More important, what a person runs on a given day depends on much more than the number on the gauge:<\/p>\n

\u2022 Your lane. <\/b>The gauge sits beside lane 1. Lane 8 is a long way from it, and the wind is not the same everywhere on the track.<\/b><\/p>\n

\u2022 The angle of the wind. <\/b>The gauge measures the wind along the track. A wind that is partly sideways, or swirling, is not the same as one blowing straight down the lane.<\/p>\n

\u2022 Gusts and timing<\/b>. The reading is one average. A big gust at the start helps differently than the same gust at the finish, and the average hides which one happened.<\/p>\n

\u2022 Who you run against<\/b>. Runners push each other. A fast field can pull a runner to a time they would not run alone.<\/b><\/p>\n

\u2022 You.<\/b> How well you started, your form, how your body felt that day.<\/p>\n

A calculator can give you a rough idea of how big the wind\u2019s help might have been. That is fine for curiosity. But there is no such thing as a 9.90 that \u201cequals\u201d some zero-wind time. The runner never ran in zero wind that day. You run what you run.<\/p>\n

Quick cheat sheet<\/b><\/p>\n

You see or hear. What it really means<\/p>\n

+1.3 next to a time \u00a0–<\/b> A tailwind of 1.3 meters per second. Legal wind. A plus sign means the wind helped, a minus sign means it hurt.<\/p>\n

\u201cWind-aided\u201d or \u201cwind-assisted\u201d<\/b> – The tailwind was over 2.0. The race counts, but the time is not record-eligible.<\/p>\n

\u201cWind-legal\u201d\u00a0 – <\/span><\/b>The tailwind was 2.0 or less.<\/p>\n

An \u201cA\u201d next to a time – <\/b>The race was at altitude (over 1,000 meters). Thin air helps sprinters a little. There is no limit on altitude for records, but the A tells you about it.<\/p>\n

\u201cIllegal\u201d (used about wind) –<\/b> Wrong word. Nothing illegal happened.<\/p>\n

A hand-timed result (to the tenth) – <\/b>Not accepted for records. Different tool, different level of accuracy.<\/p>\n

A note on hundredths: the timing machines actually measure finer than a hundredth of a second, but official times are rounded up to the next hundredth. That is why you will never see a time with more than two decimal places in a normal results sheet.<\/p>\n

What I would like announcers to say<\/b><\/p>\n

Instead of \u201cthat run was illegal,\u201d try: \u201cThat was a 9.90 with a 2.5 tailwind. It is wind-aided, so it will not count for the record book, but it tells us he is in great shape.\u201d That one sentence is honest, it is clear, and it respects the athlete and the fans.<\/p>\n

The Takeaway<\/b><\/p>\n

Wind is a factor, not a verdict. Learn the limit, know what it is for, look at how far past it a run really is, and judge the runner by how they run over a whole season. Then watch the athletes run, and let it go.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If you are new to track and field, a results sheet can look like a secret code. There is a time, then a small number beside it, maybe with a plus sign. The announcer says the run was \u201cwind-aided,\u201d and a minute later somebody online calls it \u201cillegal.\u201d Now you are lost. I want to clear that up. I think announcers and people online make this far more confusing than it needs to be. This guide covers the sprints and hurdles, because those are the races where wind matters: the 100 meters, the 200 meters, and the 100- and 110-meter hurdles. When you finish reading, you should be able to look at a result and know what it really says. \u201cWind-aided\u201d does not mean \u201cillegal\u201d This is the biggest mix-up in the sport. When the tailwind in a race is stronger than 2.0 meters per second, the run is called wind-aided (or wind-assisted). Too many announcers say it as if the runner broke a rule. They did not. Nobody cheated and nobody was disqualified. The race still counts. The winner is still the winner, medals are still medals, and runners still move on to the next round. The only thing that changes is the record book: a wind-aided time cannot be used for a record, and it usually cannot be used for official lists or qualifying marks either. Wind-aided means \u201cnot record-eligible.\u201d It does not mean illegal, cheating, or disqualified. Save the word \u201cillegal\u201d for things that really break the rules, like a false start. What makes a time \u201clegal\u201d for the record book? When I say a time is \u201clegal,\u201d I mean it passes two checks. Fail either one and the time is not record-eligible. 1. Timing – The time must come from fully automatic electronic timing: the starting gun sets the clock going and a finish-line camera stops it. Times from a person holding a stopwatch are not accepted for records. Hand timing only reads to a tenth of a second and depends on how fast a person reacts. Records in the short races have required automatic timing since the late 1970s. 2. Wind – The average tailwind during the race must be 2.0 meters per second or less. A small detail that trips people up: wind readings are rounded up to the next tenth. So a posted +2.0 could really have been anywhere from 1.91 to 2.00. A posted +2.1 is the first reading that counts as aided. That is how thin the line is, and it matters later in this guide. Where did the 2.0 come from? It came from a vote, not from an experiment. The limit was set in 1936 at a congress of the sport\u2019s governing body (then called the IAAF, now World Athletics) in Berlin. One account says Germany proposed a limit of 1 meter per second, and the delegates settled on 2.0 as a compromise so they would not have to wipe out too many existing performances. Researchers who have looked at the history describe it as based on a small case study. Some have called it arbitrary. After all, why is 2.1 aided when 2.0 is fine? It is a line in the sand, not a cliff. The wind does not flip a switch at 2.0. A run at +2.1 gets almost the same help as a run at +2.0. Keep that in mind and the rest of this guide gets easy. How the wind is measured The wind reading is not a guess, but it is also not a perfect picture of what each runner felt. Here is how it works: \u2022 One gauge, one spot. A wind gauge sits beside lane 1, 50 meters from the finish line, about 1.22 meters (4 feet) off the ground and no more than 2 meters from the track. \u2022 A short window. In the 100 meters it measures for 10 seconds from the gun. In the hurdles it measures for 13 seconds from the gun. In the 200 meters it measures for 10 seconds, starting when the first runner enters the straight. \u2022 One average. The gauge produces a single number, the average over that window, rounded up to the next tenth. \u2022 Only some races. Wind is not measured in the 400 meters or longer, because runners go around the track and the wind helps them on one side and slows them on the other. Indoors there is no wind to measure. Even the number itself can be questioned. After a famous 1988 women\u2019s 100 meters, later analysis suggested the real wind was much stronger than the 0.0 on the gauge. The record still stands. It shows that the reading is a useful tool, not a perfect one. How much does wind really help? Scientists have studied this for decades. For the 100 meters, the best-known study found that the maximum legal tailwind of +2.0 is worth about 0.10 seconds to a man and about 0.12 seconds to a woman, with a small margin of error. A computer model of the 110-meter hurdles came out higher, at about 0.19 seconds for +2.0. The 200 is trickier because part of the race is on the curve, where the wind hits runners from different angles, so I will stick to the 100 here. Two more facts from that research matter. First, the help grows steadily as the wind gets stronger, but it grows a little more slowly the stronger the wind gets. Second, a headwind hurts more than a tailwind helps.\u00a0 Extra help beyond the legal limit: men – women – help beyond +2.0 +1.0: about 0.05 s – about 0.06 s – none (legal) +2.0: about 0.10 s – about 0.12 s – none (legal limit) +2.5: about 0.12 s – about 0.15 s – about 0.02 to 0.03 s +3.0: about 0.14 s – about 0.17 s – about 0.04 to 0.05 s +4.0: about 0.18 s – about 0.21 s – about 0.08 to 0.09 s (Estimates for a typical 100 m run. Real runners vary.) How to read an aided time Now you can put the pieces together. The question is not \u201cis it legal or not?\u201d The better question is \u201chow much extra help did the wind give beyond the limit?\u201d Here is the rule of thumb I use. It is my own judgment, not an official rule. +2.0 or less Legal. The time can count for records and lists. Remember that +2.0 still carries a real boost. +2.1 to +3.0 Aided, but only slightly past the limit. Treat it like a legal run with a little extra help. It is a real, believable performance. +3.1 to +4.0 \u00a0A clear boost. Still a fast run by a fast runner, but expect that athlete to need a good day and a good wind to get near it again. Above +4.0 The wind did a lot of the work. Enjoy the race, but do not compare the time to legal times. A worked example Say a man runs 9.90 with a +2.5 tailwind. That wind is aided, so the time cannot go in the record book. But look at the numbers: +2.0 is already allowed and worth about 0.10 seconds. The extra half meter per second adds only about 0.02 to 0.03 seconds more. That is smaller than the natural ups and downs a sprinter has from one race to the next, even in the same conditions. A runner who can do 9.90 at +2.5 is clearly a 9.9-to-10.0 kind of sprinter, and I would expect him to run close to that in legal conditions. At +3.0, the extra help is still only about 0.04 to 0.05 seconds. The best proof that a fast time is real is not a wind reading. It is the runner doing it again. Look at the athlete\u2019s other races that season. If the aided time sits in line with them, believe it. If it is far faster than anything else they have run, the wind probably did a big part of the job. Why \u201czero-wind calculators\u201d do not work You will find websites that take your time and your wind reading and promise to tell you what you would have run in zero wind. People then say things like, \u201cThat 9.90 at +2.5 is really a 9.78.\u201d I think this is a mistake. The calculators are built on averages from research studies, and the researchers themselves say there is a margin of error. More important, what a person runs on a given day depends on much more than the number on the gauge: \u2022 Your lane. The gauge sits beside lane 1. Lane 8 is a long way from it, and the wind is not the same everywhere on the track. \u2022 The angle of the wind. The gauge measures the wind along the track. A wind that is partly sideways, or swirling, is not the same as one blowing straight down the lane. \u2022 Gusts and timing. The reading is one average. A big gust at the start helps differently than the same gust at the finish, and the average hides which one happened. \u2022 Who you run against. Runners push each other. A fast field can pull a runner to a time they would not run alone. \u2022 You. How well you started, your form, how your body felt that day. A calculator can give you a rough idea of how big the wind\u2019s help might have been. That is fine for curiosity. But there is no such thing as a 9.90 that \u201cequals\u201d some zero-wind time. The runner never ran in zero wind that day. You run what you run. Quick cheat sheet You see or hear. What it really means +1.3 next to a time \u00a0– A tailwind of 1.3 meters per second. Legal wind. A plus sign means the wind helped, a minus sign means it hurt. \u201cWind-aided\u201d or \u201cwind-assisted\u201d – The tailwind was over 2.0. The race counts, but the time is not record-eligible. \u201cWind-legal\u201d\u00a0 – The tailwind was 2.0 or less. An \u201cA\u201d next to a time – The race was at altitude (over 1,000 meters). Thin air helps sprinters a little. There is no limit on altitude for records, but the A tells you about it. \u201cIllegal\u201d (used about wind) – Wrong word. Nothing illegal happened. A hand-timed result (to the tenth) – Not accepted for records. Different tool, different level of accuracy. A note on hundredths: the timing machines actually measure finer than a hundredth of a second, but official times are rounded up to the next hundredth. That is why you will never see a time with more than two decimal places in a normal results sheet. What I would like announcers to say Instead of \u201cthat run was illegal,\u201d try: \u201cThat was a 9.90 with a 2.5 tailwind. It is wind-aided, so it will not count for the record book, but it tells us he is in great shape.\u201d That one sentence is honest, it is clear, and it respects the athlete and the fans. The Takeaway Wind is a factor, not a verdict. Learn the limit, know what it is for, look at how far past it a run really is, and judge the runner by how they run over a whole season. Then watch the athletes run, and let it go.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3147","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pa3DCY-OL","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":351,"url":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=351","url_meta":{"origin":3147,"position":0},"title":"Only Track & Field Can Complicate the Obvious","author":"CHill","date":"July 1, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"The Visa Championship awards were given out at the conclusion of the National Championships this past weekend. The women\u2019s winner was Chaunte Howard Lowe with her American Record winning high jump. The winner on the men\u2019s side was David Oliver with his sizzling 12.93 hurdle win \u2013 the =7th performance\u2026","rel":"","context":"With 2 comments","block_context":{"text":"With 2 comments","link":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=351#comments"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":326,"url":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=326","url_meta":{"origin":3147,"position":1},"title":"Tyson Gay Highlights Hot Weekend","author":"CHill","date":"May 17, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"The face of track and field is Usain Bolt \u2013 he\u2019s double World and Olympic Champion and WR holder in the 100 & 200 meters. Until he\u2019s beaten everyone else will be compared to him. Tyson Gay\u2019s performance Sunday in Manchester say\u2019s he is definitely comparable, and must be in\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"QATAR-DOHA-ATHLETIC-IAAF-DIAMOND LEAGUE .","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/cdn.picapp.com\/ftp\/Images\/6\/e\/f\/9\/QATARDOHAATHLETICIAAFDIAMOND_LEAGUE_d58e.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":1048,"url":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=1048","url_meta":{"origin":3147,"position":2},"title":"A Big Weekend on Tap from 100 to Marathon","author":"CHill","date":"April 13, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"Typically the weekend of the Penn Relays marks the coming out of the majority of those athletes not yet seen in a given season as sprinters, hurdlers,\u00a0 and even\u00a0 milers find their way on \u201cUSA v the World\u201d relay squads. And while that most certainly will be true again this\u2026","rel":"","context":"With 1 comment","block_context":{"text":"With 1 comment","link":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=1048#comments"},"img":{"alt_text":"Boston Marathon","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/trackchill.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/04\/Boston-Marathon_thumb.png?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":364,"url":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=364","url_meta":{"origin":3147,"position":3},"title":"Some Overlooked Results","author":"CHill","date":"July 18, 2010","format":false,"excerpt":"Over the past week or so results have been flying in so fast and deep that there have a few things that I have overlooked mentioning as I\u2019ve tried to comment on various competitions. One of the biggest was the results of the NACAC Under 23 competition held last weekend\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1052,"url":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=1052","url_meta":{"origin":3147,"position":4},"title":"Blake 9.90 Leads Weekend Activities","author":"CHill","date":"April 15, 2012","format":false,"excerpt":"Rivalries are GREAT for the sport of track and field. I just can\u2019t say that enough. Athletes seem to compete better when they have a chip on their shoulder; something to prove; a score to settle; or sometimes just plain don\u2019t like each other. Ovett v Coe. Nehemiah v Foster.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Blake\"","block_context":{"text":"Blake","link":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?tag=blake"},"img":{"alt_text":"Yohan Blake","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/trackchill.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/04\/Yohan-Blake_thumb.png?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":193,"url":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/?p=193","url_meta":{"origin":3147,"position":5},"title":"Big Week Ahead – First Up, Lausanne","author":"CHill","date":"July 6, 2009","format":false,"excerpt":"With the World Championships just a little over a month away, the competitions are beginning to heat up. Many of the sports top athletes have competed sparingly up to this point, but this week we start to get some races and match ups that will bring some focus on the\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"USA Track and Field National Championships Day 4","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/cdn.picapp.com\/ftp\/Images\/3\/f\/d\/e\/USA_Track_and_d1a6.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3147","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3147"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3147\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3152,"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3147\/revisions\/3152"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/trackchill.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}