<To RDs, racers are their customers. They don't like to see them upset by being penalized>

I'm sorry, I don't understand. If I pay money to participate, I can violate the rules because I'm a customer? I'm gonna try this logic with the cops next time I get pulled over for speeding (a semi annual event). "Shit occifer, I pay your salary. Therefore, I don't think you should give me a ticket. What? Who's Mister Hickory?"

I think I'm gonna hold a triathlon. I'll make my Momma the RD. When people come up to her to complain about being penalized for violating the rules, Heaven help them....

I have an idea! Everyone print this entire thread out and take it to the RD at their next race. Ask him/her to include it in the race packet. Hell, I'd pay the $$ for the 500-1500 copies myself if I had to. Free education to everyone at the race on me. I'm seriously thinking this might be a good idea for the White Lake 1/2 IM I'm racing this weekend. Either that or I'm going to post some copies near the packet pickup.

Perhaps along the bike course we could just add signs that remind racers to stay to the right.. instead of the witty rhymes about flowers and hills I enjoyed last weekend...

---

Meg.

dan you missing the whole point. a solution will not help. sure you could use officials to help get better control of the race. the newbies and distracted would be shown how to do things correctly and the races will be more fun. that is not the point.

the point is we have been doing it longer and are more hard core. these newbies have no right to be near us. they don't keep it real. they have crappy bikes that clash with our aeroed out race rockets or they have aero bikes and only got them because they are rich fat posers. purple shirts clash with our speedos.

there is no hope. we all need to quit in protest.

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.

The only, imperfect, solution to this is to verbally warn the athlete and tell them their number has been noted and that at the end of the race, when officials get together, if they've had more than one warning they will be a DNF and barred from the race next year.

When someone complained about drafting at California I suggested that photographs be taken and persistent violators be sent the evidence and the above action taken.

Athletes themselves should report violators' numbers.

This would mean however a lot of work after the race and seems to be a bit "police state" but perhaps it would be worth it.

Dan, under the current administration, you know this will not happen. This administration takes the hard line and only strict adherence to the rules and penalties to all rule breakers is THE rule now. I followed the way you suggested in my one and only chance at officiating and was called down by the head official and complained about by the athletes for not issuing enough penalties. But it is not just not knowing the rules. In a sprint race this past weekend, a local fast guy pulled up alongside a young dude who latched onto the one of the leaders wheel. He asked him what he was doing and the young dude said he needed to be following someone fast so he could catch one of his buddies. Well, the local fast guy said, "You know you're drafting." Young dude shot back, " You know you're blocking." So they know the rules.
I'll say it again there should be competitive and non-competitive waves. A 7 hour 1/2 or 16 hr full person could care less about a 2 minute penalty. Even a DQ if they can finish the race wouldn't matter.
In todays society a camcorder of some sort would document rules infractions and allow the official to cover a lot more course. If people are so good at rules, why does SAn Diego have camera at stop lights?
Maybe Cathy could start a petition like her buddy Alan and we could get something done in this arena.

Bob Sigerson

One more possible solution...go to the pre-race meeting and when they ask for questions put it squarely on the official and ask them what you are supposed to do as the athlete overtaking bockers and lane violators? I did this at a Powerman Race last year and got a considerate responce. The official acknowledged the pain in the ass it is for faster cyclists overtaking slower ones. He applied the "intent" standard in any given situation. If in the above scenario the intent is simply to get around the violator and it is done so as safely as could be expected he would not hand-out a penalty to the athlete who had to pass on the right.

He sort of implied this "intent standard" was a personal judgement on his part.

I wonder how the rest of officialdom would respond? It's not a solution but it might lead to one.

I think most officials I know would recognize the situation for what it was, if a faster cyclist was forced to pass on the right. The problem is that the official is often NOT in the right place at the right time and may only see the pass on the right. REALITY to them in that situation, unfortunately for both athlete and official, depends on how much they saw.

Hey Sig,

"I'll say it again there should be competitive and non-competitive waves. A 7 hour 1/2 or 16 hr full person could care less about a 2 minute penalty. Even a DQ if they can finish the race wouldn't matter."

Who do you think you are to judge people acording to their finish times?

Dre'

So as not to start a flame, the person who would judge the finish time would be the person filling out the app. He or she could put himself anywhere he or she wanted but if they were in the competitive portion, the scrutiny by the officials would be greater because that's where the official would be concentrated.

Bob Sigerson

...that official doesn't know that this particular racer has already recieved one, two, maybe three warnings already.

Have the officials shoot violator with paintballs! The more splats, the more violations. Say, three splats and then the REAL hardware comes out...

---

"My strategy is to start out slow and then peter-out altogether" Walt Stack

I've heard this a number of times. In past years I have actually heard that the RD's of both Wildflower and Vineman actively PROHIBITED the officials from assessing "excessive" penalties out on the bike course! I don't know if these were just rumors or true tales. But I would bet that neither of these events needs to worry about "losing" customers as a result of vigorous rules enforcement. I mean, come on--- Wildflower sells out in a day! The Half Vineman has a field of 2200 athletes. People are CLAMORING to do these races. And there are an awful lot of people clamoring for strong rules enforcement as well.

With Half-Ironmans becoming the most popular distance out there, and with only a few fledgling Half-IMs starting to crop up in CA now, I would say that race directors don't need to worry about rules enforcement driving racers away. On the contrary, I think greater rules enforcement would make more racers happier!

You're right, though, that the RD's react to the squeaky wheels---which generally means the whiny-ass idiots who bitch and moan about being made to obey the rules, because, Duh! the Universe revolves around them and so why should they have to follow these piddling little rules that apply to everybody ELSE?

;)

I still like the signs on the course idea. Also like the "quiz" requirement for registration. Good one!

TriBaby

I was the head ref at the Wildlfower long course and did the Oly race the next day. Dan is 100% right about what he observed, and it was even worse (at least from a racer's perspective) in the Oly. What Dan described the refs doing at the long course is exactly what they were supposed to do. From his description, I think I recognize one of the penalties we assessed. But that's not his point.

If we give warnings before we give penalties, then the rule becomes "it's OK to (draft, block, moon a race official with your middle aged bootie) until you're warned." That doesn't work.

Arguably, we could advise people at the same time we document their violations (the documentation is later reviewed and actual penalties are then assessed by the head ref). I won't get into the practical arguments against such an approach (abuse, distraction, uneveness, etc.) though.

Instead, I'd say that the middle of a race is simply too late to begin educating people about the rules. It's like asking a traffic cop to explain turn signals while driving down the freeway. Or trying to teach a triathlete proper stroke technique in the middle of the swim leg. Once people are racing, reasoned discouse becomes next to impossible. That's not a slam, it's just the way it is for me and everyone I know.

USAT referees are happy to come talk to clubs or any other groups about the rules. The primary reason we haunt the transition area before the race is help educate people. We give pre-race talks, we write up rules briefings for race directors to distribute, we contact large tri-related organizations and virtually beg for a chance to address the multitudes. That's when rules education has to happen.

It takes a commitment from all of us, before the gun goes off.

Cheers,

Steve Blum

"Arguably, we could advise people at the same time we document their violations (the documentation is later reviewed and actual penalties are then assessed by the head ref). I won't get into the practical arguments against such an approach (abuse, distraction, uneveness, etc.) though"

----------------

I think advising while documenting is a good idea. I don't see any point in warnings, but why not just simply indicate to someone that they are being penalized, with the implication "it's wrong, stop doing it". This ties is with the housetraining your dog analogy someone used above. As for "abuse", etc., you're on a motorcycle, man. If you're getting abused, ride away, or better yet DQ them.

Another reason for the audible assessment is to alleviate that "omigod, why is this guy on the motorcycle riding along beside of me, am I doing something wrong" feeling I've had in a couple of races. Never had a penalty assessed so far, so it's probably just pity causing the close inspection.

>but why not just simply indicate to someone that they are being >penalized, with the implication "it's wrong, stop doing it".

Biggest problem with that approach, IMHO, is the uneveness with which it would be applied. Some referees would say the right thing at the right time, some wouldn't. Sometimes it's practical to converse, sometimes it isn't. In other words, in many cases we'd just make things worse, in others we'd give people a false sense of security. I really believe that whatever we do, it has to be as evenly applied as humanly possible.

There's also a trump argument against it -- if the rider makes a move that results in a crash, we (USAT, the RD and the ref) will be sued. I don't like that argument (I don't like the sue-happy society we live in or the lawyers that infest it, but that's another rant...) but it's real. I was subpoenaed and spent a very unpleasant day in a deposition (not to mention the couple of days I spent preparing for it) just because I was refereeing in the general vicinity of a crash. I'm not complaining -- it's part of the job -- but it's indicative of the very real liability issues our sport faces.

Cheers,

Steve Blum

[snip]

you know that i consider you one of the truly good head refs. along with kathy matejka, norcal is in good hands.

the more that i think about what i wrote, however, i wonder whether the time inbetween the wave starts isn't a good opportunity, because you get everybody's attention, it's a good use of manpower (one guy hits all the people with the message) and the lecture is fresh in everyone's mind.

at base, we all have the same agenda, i think. the target is not so much to CATCH the infraction, the target is that there BE no infraction. USAT is clearly not successful in that effort.

i raced in a USCF bike race the week before wildflower. they have a sort of version of wave starts themselves: 30+, women, 45+, 55+, CAT III, Pro/1/2, etc. we all leave, say, 2 or 3 or 5 minutes after the previous group. the USA Cycling ref stands in front of the group before they go off and recites the rules of the day: "centerline rule in force for the entire race, no tossing bottles outside the feedzone, wheel in / wheel out," blah blah. a guy asks a question. ref answers it. 1 minute before the whistle the meeting's over, people get ready to start.

obviously, you don't recite the whole rulebook. but the biggies, ride right pass left, drop back if you're passed, what's the protocol if you're being blocked, centerline, abandoned equipment. takes 30 seconds.

what's so bad about that idea?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I think it's a great idea. The question is: who implements it and how?

The RD is in charge and hires the announcers and provides the PA system. He or she has to support it, at the expense of other considerations such as sponsor mentions, "celebrity" mentions, and all the other stuff announcers say. The head ref could provide a brief script for the announcer to read. However the RD has to give the announcer clear direction on priorities, and that hasn't happened. We ask that the pre race announcer talk about the rules, and it used to happen years ago. But now "the show" must go on.

(Somewhat off topic -- there was a thread on the IMNZ list about current announcing trends. It has changed, and been changed by, the sport and those who shape it, and not necessarily to the good IMHO).

It can be a struggle to get the cooperation we need from RDs. But any RD that wanted to work with us in that way would have our enthusiastic cooperation and gratitude.

"I think it's a great idea. The question is: who implements it and how?"

have any of the RDs ever been asked about this? yes, it's a time to plug your sponsors. but perhaps 15-30 seconds can be given to this OTHER effort, leaving another 1 to 3 minutes (depending on how far apart the waves are) to explain why every triathlete needs a popeil pocket fisherman.

who actually does the speaking? you do it, or your designate. it's probably your largest and most captive audience. no better thing a head ref can be doing at that point than give that speach.

if i had charlie's job -- which is a tough, mostly thankless, and very necessary job -- i'd do two things immediately. i'd fight hard to implement something like this. there are certain key people who i'd contact and use:

1. whomever is currently in charge of sanctioning apps in the nat'l office.
2. don ryder
3. bob babbitt
4. greg welch
5. whit raymond
6. mike reilly
7. jerry mcneill

notice that numbers 2 thru 7 are prominent announcers. there are another half dozen to add to that list. ask THEM to ask the RDs to be on your side in this issue, and they'll get used to handing the mike over to the head ref for the 20-second blurb between waves.

look, frankly, i'm a patriotic guy. and a spiritual guy. but honestly, we'd ALL be better off if we traded in either the nat'l anthem or the pre-race prayer for something that would keep us all healthier, safer, and less likely to get a penalty, like a 30-second pre-race speech. if the RD has time for the anthem and/or a prayer, he has time for a little safety speech, either before the race or inbetween the waves.

i mentioned that if i were charlie i'd do two things immediately, and i listed one. the OTHER thing i'd do is i'd find a RELIABLE handlebar plug, buy 10,000, and i'd send them to ALL the head refs, and they could SELL them at check-in. it isn't that these athletes are cavalier about plugs. the one piece of technology that has REALLY gone to hell in the last 20 years is the handlebar plug. they fall out while the car is on the roof rack on the way to the race.

imho, the most LIKELY cause for a DQ these days isn't drafting, blocking or helmet chinstrap. it's the lack of a handlebar plug. if USAT is going to enforce this, it needs to fix this problem, not just spank unsuspecting newbie athletes with a DQ while they're out tackling the swim leg, just because a piece of equipment they thought was reliable turned out not to be.

you probably don't want to even talk about handlebar plugs at WF, do you? i wouldn't blame you. how many did you guys take out there, i wonder, and how many got used? and did you run out? and then what? it's not a problem of your doing, but unfortunately you get the fallout from it, being on the front line and all.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

>>imho, the most LIKELY cause for a DQ these days isn't drafting, blocking or helmet chinstrap. it's the lack of a handlebar plug. if USAT is going to enforce this, it needs to fix this problem, not just spank unsuspecting newbie athletes with a DQ while they're out tackling the swim leg, just because a piece of equipment they thought was reliable turned out not to be.<<

You need to step back even further. Most newbies have no clue WHAT a handlebar plug is. One thing more veteran people can do if you are in a club or an email list, is to pepper said club/list with "stuff you should know". I'm notorious for this with my club and at WF, a fairly new gal thanked me for all the emails I send, saying she's learned a lot.

On the RD front, there are quite a few people in NorCal talking about boycotting WF in the future due to the hassle it's become. My suggestion (for all races/RDs): EMAIL the RD and POLITELY tell them what works and what doesn't. Thank them for the good stuff and if possible, offer a suggestion for what doesn't. Bad mouthing the race or complaining here doesn't get the word out to where it needs to go. If enough voices are heard on any subject, someone has to sit up and take notice (you'd think).

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

I think a 15 to 30 second script, delivered by a professional announcer, would do the trick. Consumate, thoughtful pros like Don Ryder, Alan Reeves (IMNZ) or The Guy at Ironman Austria (who gets extra points for flawlessly alternating between English and German) could do a better job than any head ref. Speaking as a broadcaster of 30 years standing, announcing should be left to the pros when possible.

We just have to convince RDs that it's a Good Thing to Do.

As for bar-end plugs at the Wildflower long course: we didn't DQ anyone. We spent a lot of time in the transition area checking bar ends before the race, and advising people to fix any problems. Part of our procedure is to also inform race management of bar ends that need replacing, so they can follow up. But I agree 100% -- it shouldn't be a problem in the first place.