sounds pretty annoying. Didn't they have an elite or open wave?
one thing they had at a few tris in australia this year for the guys who dont want to race pro but are borderline pro/top age grouper was an open age group category which was a combined wave of fast age groupers generally between 18-35 who wanted a good race against the other fast guys, they also let them off just after the elites so that they had a clear course under similiar conditions to the elites.

I agree - part of the fun of racing is racing against people, including the use of those people to bring out the best in you. It isn't as much fun (for me, at least) to race ghosts (those in other waves). As a 40+, I am usually relegated to the later waves and frankly don't enjoy it as much.

Bottom line - I favor a mass start, regardless of event size. The masses will separate...I contend it is probably safer, since the masses get gradually strung out, rather than have waves where the "faster" are continually overtaking the wave in front, and the "slower" are continually dropping through the subsequent waves.

Seriously, what is your suggestion for fixing this problem?

Should safety be jeopardized for the glory of the race winner?

Who would have known that a 44 year old would kick everyone's butt?

I feel a mass start would have cut the field in half, is that worth it?

jaretj

After twenty years of racing my opinion is that the first 100 finishers from the previous years race regardless of age or sex wowuld have the option of the first wave start. It would reward not only excellance but encourage people to return the following year. Chances are most age group winners would emerge from this wave and it would be easier to weed out the wheel suckers.

In my feeble mind, I always thought the use of some seeding method using the past year's age group rankings would make things a little more even instead of age group waves.

This would have two effects in my mind - the USTA could hope to gain more members, to be included in an early/fast wave you would have to have a ranking. Secondly, some of the MOP/BOP in each age group would be more fairly split, which might be better of for all waves. Of course, there will be exceptions, when a racer from a later wave might win the race overall. But, the chances would be smaller than they are now.

Go ahead, rip this theory. I'd like to hear what flaws I'm not seeing.

thanks
Barry

---

Great things never come from comfort zones.

It seems pretty simple, every race should have an open wave which you are eligible for by:

USAT Ranking (for the sake of argument, anyone over .85) or petitioning the race director if you don't have the ranking but feel you 'got the goods'. It shouldn't be a choice, if you are going to be racing for the overall, you should have to race against the others that are racing for the overall.

---

"The more you sweat today, the less you bleed tomorrow"

I think that's a great idea

jaretj

Another good idea but as I remember USAT distinguishes open waves separate from age groups and rankings are compromised because of the chance of differing conditions.

In my opinion a race that small, less than 400 entries, should only have about 20 minutes between the first wave and the last so everyone is still competing in the same conditions

jaretj

[reply]Who would have known that a 44 year old would kick everyone's butt?[/reply]

anyone who's raced in Indiana the last 5 years

It's not about racing in the same conditions, it's about racing head-to-head. It really sucks to finish first in your wave only to be edged out by others racing in different waves. I know what you are going to say, go faster. Whatever. Do you think the Marathon World Record and 10,000 Meter World Record would be where they are today if it wasn't for head-to-head racing? It makes too much sense so I guess it will never happen....

---

"The more you sweat today, the less you bleed tomorrow"

Why complicate the issue. Seed on time. First wave, fastest times. Last wave slowest times. First Race? Seed at a realistic goal time (if you have no idea you haven't been training very seriously so seed at the back).

Many benefits to this system - first across the line wins, the awards ceremony could be held promptly after the finish of the race instead of two hours later, no need to figure out overall results from wave results, easier to prevent drafting, etc...

Seeding would have to be on the honor system. Lie about your times and look like an @ss hanging out the back of your wave.

I agree with you on the head to head competition issue and I like your ranking suggestion.

We had a discussion here a while ago why the open wave athletes weren't scored as age-groupers and as I remember the issue was because USAT felt that the different start times gave open athletes an advantage over the standard age group athletes. So anyone starting in an open wave was scored as such.

Personally I would like to see less time between waves with a smaller number of people in them. Honestly 1 minute is all that is needed to separate groups. The swimmers would be in a straighter line and easier for the faster swimmers in the following waves to pass. You could get 400 swimmers going in 7 minutes by putting 50 people in each wave.

Without going to a mass start I don't see a way of solving the problem. Should we go that way to satisfy the top 20 althletes? Or should we keep the waves and satisfy a few hundred?

jaretj

If you can have a mass start w/ 2000 athletes, you damn sure can do the same for 200....

---

RunFAR Racing Services
http://www.Run-far.com
Team Cambridge
Hilltop Bicycle Repair

Sorry guys but I keep coming back to Categories for triathlons and duathlons. Your description of starts based on finish times is basically the same principal.

Why not do what big running races do? Seed yourself, but if you want to be in the earlier waves you have to have proof of a past time to be in that wave (ie the Bolder Boulder 10k with thousands of runners)

To seat youself in the early waves you have to have proof you have ran that fast in previous years BB's or other races. No proof = you race in the waves that you think you will run in, but it wont be in the 'qualifying' waves up front. This keeps similar speeds together, etc.

Less chaos.

I think it is silly to go off in waves split up by age and gender. As has been pointed out this is unfair to the faster older people and it is also generally unfair to women. If there is a woman or older guy who is as fast as me then I want them in my wave, I am there to race and I want to race the people who are closest in speed to me regardless of age or sex. And if I get beat by a 50 year old (I am 34) man or women and then good job to them and for me back to training and working hard, because I sure as hell don't like loosing (to anyone).

I see no reason why we shouldn't be seeded, just like in swimming. That brings out the best in everyone, it creates competition and makes everyone faster and offers a more race like atmosphere. This will also resolve some of the issue surrounding group swimming starts with slower/weaker swimmers being intimidated by and swum over by stronger faster swimmers. This could be done any number of ways including, but not limited to the following.

1. USAT ranking as previously mentioned

2. Results from previous years race - The top X # people from the previous year leave in the first heat, X-Y leave in the following wave and so on.

3. Results from similar distance races done prior to the event in question.

The USAT could help the RD's in determining how to weight the value of a race in terms of toughness. Hell they already do it when they award the points for ranking. In order for this to work all of the seeded entries would need to be in a few weeks prior to the race so the seeding could be done, but this also would help RD's get a better fix on the number of people they will have at the race. All race day entries would be in the last heat(s). Ultimately the RD would be responsible for determine how the seeding would go, strictly USAT rank, previous results, other races ect. I could see a combo set up something like for a 50 person wave the top 30 from the previous year then 20 slots for the folks who are at the race for the first time or not in the previous year. The 20 slots could be given away based only on USAT rank or by other race results, RD’s choice. The beauty of this will be that it will allow for both overall winner racing but also age group racing as well because a persons from the same age group who are similar speeds should be in the same wave.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
I'm just a 10 cent rider on a $2,500.00 Bike

In N.C. and the vicinity Set-Up Inc used to have prize money at many of their events, but you had to race in their Elite Wave to win any. You could race with your age group and win an age group award, but the first guy across the line won $500 or whatever it was a the time. Since they went away from prize money there has been less motivation because people care about the silly rankings, but all the races I attended the Elite winner did win overall. You still had to race in the Elite wave to be considered for the overall awards.

Anybody could sign up for the Elite Wave and race. The self-policing occurs because you don’t want to look like a dork. One year I raced White Lake and was second to last in the Elite Wave, but would have been third in my age group.

If USAT can’t even put on one National Championship event per year, how can we expect them to solve this complicated a problem?

Chad

I've been in many other races which Tuxedo Brothers managed and they had let Mike Smith go in the 18-39 wave because he was competing for the win. I've also seen them let other contenders (Boggs) do the same thing. Perhaps USAT would not allow this in a championship race?

Drafting??

---

adrialin

(BOMK, racing drug and supplement free since 1985)

All of you are taking something that is simple and making into something extremely complicated to solve a problem that matters to a very small segment of the population of triathletes and spectators at AG events.

First, at almost every race, you need to have wave starts to spread the field out enough so that the bike is relatively safe and does not mess up traffic too much. Otherwise, you have almost everyone getting on the bike within a 10 minute windown and that would create a lot of problems.

Second, setting waves by AG and gender is a really simple way to do things. Race directors have enough trouble getting a race organized and off as is. Trying to make sure that everyone is in the right wave based upon their USAT ranking or place at last year's race or some other mathematical formula would create incredible headaches. The RDs, after all, need to have their waves more or less set a couple days before the race so that they can move onto other problems.

Third, I don't think that having an elite wave that starts as the first wave of the day would be a bad way of doing things. But, I bet you would have just as many complaints as with the current system. For example, if getting into the elite wave is voluntary, don't you think that almost half of the Men between 30 and 44 would try to get into it. If half your AG is in the elite wave, then what's the point of AG rankings? For this MOPer, moving up a little in my AG is a nice little reward for training hard. If it's based on another system, that's going to be at least somewhat arbitrary too.

Fourth, everyone loves stories like the one about Sheila Taormina just showing up at a local tri, crushing all the women and beating all but a few men like she is supposed to have done at the Waterloo Tri in the late 1990s. But, it's still a great story, and Americans love an underdog.

I was thinking about a problem with drafting or bunching on the course. But, jut because people expect a similar finish time doesn't mean that they expect a similar time for each part of a race.
I race a couple minutes faster than a friend in the swim and a couple minutes more on the bike but he always gets me in the last mile of the run. We finish within 30s of each but never see each other on the course until the end. And by then drafting is negligible.

---

Great things never come from comfort zones.

CTL - I agree with you, except:

I've seen races with Elite waves and they are generally VERY small. Only a hand full of people sign up to win the race overall. So why bother racing Elite when you loose by :30 seconds to Overall but win your age group by 3 minutes. People want the AG win!

I'd rather see 1 of 2 things happen:

1. Leave well enough alone. The system works 99% of the time. OR

2. Go to the USCF system of earning points in races and moving UP categories. You will then be racing against athletes of your own speed and experience.

---

.
.
Paul

I posted this a few weeks ago but what the hell I'll post it again...

I suggest that we use an "index system" similar to golf. It would solve two problems with the current system. First, it would allow athletes of different abilities to compete against each other. Second, by starting the waves lowest index to highest index we would be grouping competitors by speed and removing most of the dangerous passing that is occurring on the bike course. So here is how I see it working:

1. Courses are given a "standard time" similar to par for golf and then a "difficulty rating" similar to the "slope rating" for a golf course.

2. Athletes post their times and after 5 races the athlete receives his/her "index".

3. You cross reference your "index" to the "difficulty rating" of the course and that tells you how much time you deduct or add to your finishing time. FYI this is how a "handicap" is determined in golf. At a golf course there is a large poster that has two columns on it. One column has the index number and next to that is what your handicap is for that course. You then adjust your score card accordingly.

4. Awards would be given to the fastest unadjusted times and to the fastest adjusted times for both male and female competitors.

5. This system would allow slower athletes to compete with faster athletes on a handicap biases but still recognize the fast competitors.

6. Starts waves would be by "index" with the lower index (faster) participants starting earlier.

For example:

Say my index is a -15 and I am racing the City of Los Angeles Oly. This race has a difficulty rating of 90 (on a zero to 200 scale) so my "handicap" would be 15x.90 or 13.5. If I finish in 2:10 I could then subtract 13.5 minutes from my time to get my adjusted time of 1:56.5. This could be compared directly to the adjusted times of the other athletes including the pros. Keep in mind that just like in golf some of those pros may have to ADD time to their finishing time to arrive at their adjusted time.

---

----------

Yay common sense! I bring this up every time this comes up and have yet to hear a GOOD reason why it wouldn't work.

1. Sign up for race and have an input field for anticipated finish time.
2. Assign people to waves in order of speed.

So difficult...

ot

I agree people are making this way way to complex.

When I did the sac marathon last year, they had signs for folks to start at based on their estimated finish time. THere were no chips for these folks so it took me about a minute to get across the start line. No big deal since I started towards the back. Now, the people who were trying to qualify for boston, had chips, and of course had seeded themselves on finishing times much faster and were further up front. Was this perfect. Nope. But nice and simple.

Now, at the napa half, Dave had two waves for the swim start. He just asked us to seed by our abilities. It worked great.

So, seems simple, even if you were to just do a fast , medium, and small wave start. The results still are used for AG awards. Just use the KISS rule, keep is simple stupid.



Dave

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Did anyone post this link in response to your post? Once upon a time there was something like your idea, don't know where the handicapped scoring is archived.

---

Marty Gaal, CSCS
One Step Beyond Coaching
Triangle Open Water Swim Series | Old School Aquathon Series
Powerstroke® Freestyle Technique DVD

The problem now for these Set-Up Inc races in the elite wave is all the guys in the elite wave(masters and under 39) end up drafting off each other and coming in together on the bike. Yes the top 1-2 and sometimes 3rd place overall come from this elite wave would still be good enough to take these spots if they raced in there age group wave. But alot of the guys in the age group waves would end up higher in the overall if they had the advantage of the draft with a faster bike time and fresher legs for the run. Also it is not fair to compare your age group time against this drafting elite wave either. This happens at the big sprint races that sell out among others.

Focus 90% of the race officials on the first wave or two. Simple.

In any case, an inability to police our sport is not a good reason to not seed all waves based on time.

[quote]The problem now for these Set-Up Inc races in the elite wave is all the guys in the elite wave(masters and under 39) end up drafting off each other and coming in together on the bike.[/quote]

Please point to some actual results in support of your argument. From my experience watching these guys from the back of a motorcycle, the elite wave participants tend to know and follow the rules.

I say do away with age-group waves and self-seed every wave. There's a local tri that has done this for the last two years. The did a survey after last year and response was 80% favorable and they have improved it for this year (select wave at body marking/chip pick-up and go off and warm-up instead of having to wait in line to hold your spot for your wave). Nationals and world qualifiers should still go based on age-group, IMO.

Age group waves work for most of us who aren't going to be competing for overall prizes. I've been in races where I've been in the first wave because they had the 45+ women go first, and I've been in races where I've been in the last wave because the 50+ regardless of gender have gone last. These have all been USAT sanctioned races. I like being in the same wave as the people I'm competing against. When I come into transition from the swim I have an idea of where I am based on the number of bikes remaining on the rack. Same thing when I come back from the bike and see how many bikes are there already. If my competition is spread out over various waves I really don't have a sense of where I am.

It depends on the race as to whether I care if my wave is first, last or somewhere in between. I did sprint races on back to back weekends. Both races I was in the last of 5 waves. In the first race I hated being in the last wave because it was a crowded 2 loop bike course where I had to fight my way through crowds of slower cyclists who didn't know about staying to the right, and there was a fair amount of vehicular traffic that made things dicey. The second race I had fun being in the last wave because it's one big loop on country roads with lots of room to pass, and not much traffic. It was fun blowing by the youngsters from the earlier waves. Both races I knew exactly where I stood in relation to my competitors.

I did one race this year where they gave past Top 100 finishers the chance to pre-enter and get a spot in the 1st two waves. Everyone else in the race was assigned waves by entry receipt. I was in the first wave. 47 guys and 3 women. One of the other women was my age group competition. We had fun racing each other head to head in the first wave, but neither of us had any idea about other women in the AG. She was 1st, and I was 2nd. The 3rd place finisher was about a minute behind me, but had started 4 waves later. She didn't have any idea of where she was in relation to Lisa and me. In some ways I'm glad I didn't know about her, but in fairness to her she should have had a chance to see where she was in relation to us.

I can see why people who may possibly place overall or win their age group wants the benefit of the 1st wave, but for most of us that are strictly contending for age group glory we probably want to go head to head rregardless of which wave we're in. I would like to see race directors rotate the wave order from year to year. I'll be reluctant to do that race with the two loop bike course if I'm in the last wave again.

---

Tri-ing for a cure.

NYtrigal's Team in Training Page

Amateur elite wave participants are not eligible for USAT points, so this seems to prevent everyone from entering. If half your age group is in the elite wave, then your USAT points will likely be artificially high, which is another reason for those that care about USAT rankings to stay in the age group waves.

---

__________________________
http://www.aliciaparr.com/blog
http://www.performentor.com

Yes, I too am on Facebook. And LinkedIn. And Twitter. Which begs the question - do I exist in the physical world? Do I?

So....how the hell would you add "butter and syrup" to the pancakes? It's real easy to bitch and moan but a bit harder to come up with solutions to problems.

That's BS. I've never seen drafting in the elite wave in Set-Up races. I see a lot of people that are very careful at following the rules, never mind that there's always at least one draft marshall riding by on the bike. When I competed in the age group waves, I frequently saw drafting and blocking, moreso on multi-loop courses. You are completely out of line making these accusations.

aliciap

---

__________________________
http://www.aliciaparr.com/blog
http://www.performentor.com

Yes, I too am on Facebook. And LinkedIn. And Twitter. Which begs the question - do I exist in the physical world? Do I?

Has someone in Indiana been 44 for five years or has a different 44 year old dominated the each of the past five years?

I would say they "work" but they aren't as safe nor are they as fun as a time seeded waves. Sounds like a complaint for only a few of the slower AGs (where top positions might not come from the first wave). Maybe they could just start those AGs separately in the first or last wave?

I love racing against people across AGs who are about my speed and I'm certainly not going to be in contention for an overall prize.

A couple of of the vastly outnumbered AGs being minorly inconvenienced (if at all) is not a good reason (recurring theme here ;) ) to not implement time seeded waves.

ot

I've seen this happen.

Did a USAT race where the elite wave was larger than the 34 and under wave! I'm no elite, but I beat more than half of the guys that started in the elite wave. The real pisser was this RD didn't separate the elite wave from the awards or USAT points. I got out of the water 2nd in my wave and was never passed on the bike and run. Got 5th in my AG!!! 3 elites that I never saw where thrown back into the AG results. Not cool.

---

----------------------------------
Justin in Austin, get it? :)

Cool races:
- Redman
- Desoto American Triple T

Did a USAT race where the elite wave was larger than the 34 and under wave! I'm no elite, but I beat more than half of the guys that started in the elite wave. The real pisser was this RD didn't separate the elite wave from the awards or USAT points. I got out of the water 2nd in my wave and was never passed on the bike and run. Got 5th in my AG!!! 3 elites that I never saw where thrown back into the AG results. Not cool.

I'm sure you know this, but this is totally against USAT rules. It's an either/or situation and I agree that it is not cool. That one is on the race director. I would guess that if enough people complained about a particular race then USAT would toss the results.

Chad

OK. It has taken a little time to sift through the comments but here goes:

1. CLT pretty much has most of the points.

2. Mass starts are just plain stupid, unsafe and carry way to much liability and negligence to even still be used. Seeding complicates what is already taken to much of an RD's time.

3. The only way you can win a race is from the elite wave which you must select to be in before race day. Men and women go off in the first or second wave depending on size. This was actually the USAT position as late as 1997 on a championship event

4. USAT needs a new category just above AG but not Pro that has nothing to do with age but maybe region?

5. The big question is how do we get this changed?



ST

---

STIndiana
America Multi-Sport, Inc.
America's Half June 10, 2017
USAT RD Century Club
http://www.americamultisport.com

From what I have understood from several race directors and USAT, is that the only USAT rule about the elite wave is that the people who participate in the Elite wave are not eligible for the national ranking points. Only the people who are in the AG waves are eligble for them and only the fastest AG time is the denominator, irregardless if the Elite times were faster. It is also only up to the discretion of the Race Director to include/exclude the elite people from the AG awards. I had this issue at a race a couple years and brought the issue up to USAT and got informed.

As for other posts, I have participated about one half of my races in the Elite wave if possible, and I am going to say that drafting has almost been a non-issue. The biking section on the Elite wave is way tougher than being in the AG, and I think your legs pay for it even more on the run. You do not get to hold a steady pace within your level of comfort as you would in the AG waves. When you are faced with several people riding the same speed as you, you have to constantly attack and defend your position. CONSTANTLY. It totally hurts because you are either on the attack or recovering. You do not want a competitor to get ahead of you and lull you into a false sense of speed when you could actually be going faster. To the AG person, it may look and seem like there is drafting, but there are usually double the amount of draft marshalls per capita than in the AG.

All this talk has brought up another question for me about the issue of sandbagging. At what level should a person stop doing the AG waves and only do Elite? I don't consider myself to be a contender for the top 3 overall, but at the same time, if I do not come back with hardware from the AG, then something has gone "wrong". I am constantly trying to figure out where to seed myself for races, and the times I do that AG and place, is that considered sandbagging?

I'll say it again...Categories.

Quote:

I've seen this happen.

Did a USAT race where the elite wave was larger than the 34 and under wave! I'm no elite, but I beat more than half of the guys that started in the elite wave. The real pisser was this RD didn't separate the elite wave from the awards or USAT points. I got out of the water 2nd in my wave and was never passed on the bike and run. Got 5th in my AG!!! 3 elites that I never saw where thrown back into the AG results. Not cool.

Didn't separate the elite wave participants from the awards or USAT points? Yeah, that's a pisser.

---

__________________________
http://www.aliciaparr.com/blog
http://www.performentor.com

Yes, I too am on Facebook. And LinkedIn. And Twitter. Which begs the question - do I exist in the physical world? Do I?

hey y'all don't pick on us wes went to publik schuul

---

----------------------------------------------------------
I'm just a 10 cent rider on a $2,500.00 Bike

If you are seeded based on your time then you will be racing against those in your age group and gender. Think about it, if you enter a local sprint and you can it in 1:05 and there are four other people in the same age and gender class they will be in the same wave as you and you can race them. Not to mention the fact that everyone else around you will be seeded at a similar time, which should result in pushing faster and harder.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
I'm just a 10 cent rider on a $2,500.00 Bike

Read the entire thread. Michael Smith has been dominating races in the area for many years. My point was that any one who races in the area isn't surprised.

From what I have understood from several race directors and USAT, is that the only USAT rule about the elite wave is that the people who participate in the Elite wave are not eligible for the national ranking points.

You are completely correct and I was wrong. There is no rule that I can find that does not permit the RD from dropping Elite Wave participants back in the age group awards.

This seems kind of cheesy. You should be scored in the wave you raced. I would hate to race age group and find out some guy from the Elite wave beat me and received an award.

I raced the Desert Duathlon in February with the Elite wave and finished next to last. When I went back through the results I would have won my age group. I just figure that is my loss. Had I been the age group guy that day and found out somebody from another wave beat me and received an award, I’m sure I would not have been happy.

We receive precious little return on our time investment besides personal satisfaction and winning an award can be a big deal for some people.

Chad

-------------------------------
You are completely correct and I was wrong. There is no rule that I can find that does not permit the RD from dropping Elite Wave participants back in the age group awards.
-------------------------------

There is a rule. "Any participant who starts in an open, elite or other special wave shall be ineligible for age group awards and USAT national rankings."

So, any RD or timing company who doesn't separate them out isn't doing things right.

With regards to sandbagging - there is no such thing. If someoe who is your age (age-group) beats you, you were not the fastest person there that day in that age-group. If some one who is 28 and a pro, elite, etc... beats someone who is 28 and is not a pro, elite, etc... it does not matter. The second person has no claim to being the fastest person in his age-group (or the age-group "winner") regardless of classification because someone else who is the same age completed the course faster than they did. Age-group awards that exclude any competitor are bunk, and the age-group system as it is now (attempting to shield less acomplished athletes from faster competitors) is a sham.

Keep it simple, keep it legit - self seed on time, first to the finish wins. Break down the age group results from the overall results, do away with classifications, and allow double dipping. Only way to make it honest.

Then you must of missed the last lake norman triathlon. The guys in the elite wave the 2-9 guys off the bike came in within 23 seconds. 8 guys within 23 seconds and you don't believe there was no drafting. 2nd, 3rd, 4th and fifth came off within 2 seconds total of each other. How can you tell me these guys where not riding together.

One of the guys I know who races in the elite wave who is a strong rider has stopped doing these races because of the drafting. BTW some of these guys in the elite wave and age group waves do a time trial over at the speedway. I have noticed in the results that the age group times are faster in a TT than the elite but come the triathlon the elite guys times are now all of a sudden faster. Sometimes by almost 2 minutes.

sorry this took so long to respond as I was away.

Then you must of missed the last lake norman triathlon. The guys in the elite wave the 2-9 guys off the bike came in within 23 seconds. 8 guys within 23 seconds and you don't believe there was no drafting. 2nd, 3rd, 4th and fifth came off within 2 seconds total of each other. How can you tell me these guys where not riding together.

One of the guys I know who races in the elite wave who is a strong rider has stopped doing these races because of the drafting. BTW some of these guys in the elite wave and age group waves do a time trial over at the speedway. I have noticed in the results that the age group times are faster in a TT than the elite but come the triathlon the elite guys times are now all of a sudden faster. Sometimes by almost 2 minutes.

sorry this took so long to respond as I was away.



Sounds like you are an official. If Set-Up has 2 motorcycles for the big sprint races like latta, lake norman, triangle, etc they should have just 1 motorcylce just follow the elite wave the entire time. Even turning around once you get to far ahead. I have also see them do this at worlds where they will go ahead then wait on the side then write down the drafters numbers, etc.

I agree.

I have always been a competitor. Regardless of the race, I want to have the opportunity to race head-to-head with the people that I want to race against. Racing "ghosts" as you say is no fun. This sitiation is further complicated when it's a multi-loop bike and run. The you have absolutly no idea what place you are in until the results come up.

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I've been thinking about not knowing your place during the event. How difficult would it be to place a portable electronic display or two on the course that could display some of this info?



For example, put one of these along the bike course (perhaps on a hill, so riders are going slow enough to read it) and one on the run course.



When a competitor passed over a timing mat, the display could show something like:

Name.................AG Plc...Ovrl Plc....Time back from next AG competitor......Time back from 1st ovrl
Joe Competitor......3............9............................0:01:12...................................0:03:45

With a large enough display, even on a packed course, most people should be able to get some feedback on how they are doing.

This probably isn't practical for smaller races, but the 1000+ events could probably handle the extra cost.

Thoughts?

--Marcus George
UCLA Triathlon
http://www.triathlon.ucla.edu

I don't know bighead. I ran my cumulative clocktime spreadsheet on the Lake Norman elite male results and it looks like it was a very close race. Really hard to tell since there were no transition splits. One of the elite males received a penalty about something. Am not certain what your complaint is really about.

Depending on speed and course circumstances even a 1 second gap can be entirely legal under age group rules.

10 mph = 14.67 fps
15 mph = 22.00 fps
20 mph = 29.33 fps
25 mph = 36.67 fps

If you have concerns about the Lake Norman race in particular perhaps you should post over at the Set-Up forum at http://trimycoach.com/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/index.php

If are concerned about rules enforcement and fair competition it might be eye opening if you made steps to become a USAT official. You see the whole range of athlete...the elite level racing tactically to the first timer on a mtn bike drinking a slurpee just trying to finish.

Talk to Henk he is from the Charlotte area he can get you pointed in the right direction if you are interested.