However, we refer to our readers as we wrote on June 15, 2016, and the detail about the history that had passed in Italy, which the very wise and pragmatic Pino Dordoni called "the historical error of putting into practice the different rule even though in domestic competitions only, which could not be accepted at international level. This kind of choice turned from a good fairy to bad witch and immediately came back to Italian athlete when he came out of the Country".
We also repeat what we wrote about time evolution.
Race walking of that period was, however, very different from today's.
An eye of an careful judge was still able to seize a flight, which today is hardly possible to do and now we are arguing to use the "electronic eye" to put all the athletes on the same level but its application is not yet in the starting tapes although it is in the advanced design stage.
Race walk of our days, however, leads some athletes often to make both mistakes compared to the past, in which at lower speeds and frequencies one could still perceive a clear difference between the two types of technical error.
Nowadays sometime two athletes who in their progression have a gesture with a flying phase and also an impact with the leg advancing to the ground bent, are differently evaluated by the jury, while this should not happen.
To this we like to add that when in 1999 the IAAF Walking Committee decided to make public the reason (bent knee or loss of contact with the ground) of the red card posted on DQ board against the single athlete did it with the main goal of giving all athlete's ability to know his technical situation in the race, but above all, with the aim to help his coach, even in future races.
We have long ago emphasized the importance of correct reporting. Today we say it even more.
We divided our work into decades of history (1990-1999), (2000-2009), (2010-2019), and we segmented them into the three usual Olympic races to give our readers the ability to draw their own historical and technical considerations.
Evolution of decade 1990 - 1999
| Competition | Athletes at the Start | Red Cards issued | % on athletes |
| | | | |
| Barcelona 1992 | 129 | 117 | 90,70% |
| 50km Men | 43 | 44 | 102,33% |
| 20km Men | 42 | 38 | 90,48% |
| 10km Women | 44 | 35 | 79,55% |
| | | | |
| Atlanta 1996 | 156 | 134 | 85,90% |
| 50km Men | 52 | 50 | 96,15% |
| 20km Men | 60 | 46 | 76,67% |
| 10km Women | 44 | 38 | 86,36% |
| | | | |
| Total in Olympic before 2000 | 285 | 251 | 88,07% |
| 50km Men | 95 | 94 | 98,95% |
| 20km Men | 102 | 84 | 82,35% |
| 10km Women | 88 | 73 | 82,85% |
The first answers we have from reading this table tells us that:
- The 50km is judged more rigorously by juries than the two fastest races.
- The 10km women, although the shortest race and therefore the fastest, has the least number of red cards against the athletes. The logical consequence is that it is to be asked: "But women walk better than men ?"
Red cards issued for bent knee and loss of contact
| Competition | Red Cards issued | Bent Knee | % | Loss of Contact | % |
| | | | | | |
| Barcelona 1992 | 117 | 36 | 30,77% | 81 | 69,23% |
| 50km Men | 44 | 21 | 47,73% | 23 | 52,27% |
| 20km Men | 38 | 11 | 28,95% | 27 | 71,05% |
| 10km Women | 35 | 4 | 11,43% | 31 | 88,57% |
| | | | | | |
| Atlanta 1996 | 134 | 43 | 32,09% | 91 | 67,91% |
| 50km Men | 50 | 24 | 48,00% | 26 | 52,00% |
| 20km Men | 46 | 12 | 26,09% | 34 | 73,91% |
| 10km Women | 38 | 7 | 18,42% | 31 | 81,58% |
| | | | | | |
| Total in Olympics before 2000 | 251 | 79 | 31,47% | 172 | 68,53% |
| 50km Men | 94 | 45 | 47,87% | 49 | 52,13% |
| 20km Men | 84 | 23 | 27,38% | 61 | 72,62% |
| 10km Women | 73 | 11 | 15,07% | 62 | 84,93%
|