If I were officiating at a race and saw an athlete that I coached cheating I would be sure to bust their ass for it (I have been on the jury of appeals at many track meets that I had athletes competing in and it has never been a problem). One thing that I would hope to instill in any athlete that I coached would be a sense of fair play. Of course, all of the coaching that I have done the past 13 years has been for high school runners and I don't get paid for it, so maybe I would look at things a little differently if I had some money depending on it, but probably not.
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Riccitello Interview [Sammy]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Riccitello Interview [Rob C in FL]
[ In reply to ]
I think there's a good reason why they don't allow a drop back to be legal. If an official sees someone ahead that looks to be sitting in the zone and not passing, and then speeds up to get next to them, the one in the zone can then hit the brakes, back out of the zone, and be legal. Or, a rider can just drift in and out of the zone, without making the commitment to pass. If it says you can only exit by passing, riders should think twice before entering the zone.
A different example. If you come up behind a bike that's riding to the left, how do you get by them? 1) Yell at them, and hope they move over so you can legally pass. 2) Look to see that it's safe; if so, speed up, quickly move left over the center line, complete the pass, and move right. 3) Look to see that it's safe; if so, announce and pass on the right. It's good to try #1 first, but if you have to, you would either have to sit in behind the slower racer (hurting your race), or break either the centerline or the always pass left rule. I've heard that as long as you're safe when you break a rule because of a blocker, then the blocker gets the penalty, not you.
Both of these bring me to this: for any sport, whether the rule book is 10 pages long or 100 pages long, there will always be times where the referee has to make a judgement call, because there's no way to codify every last situation. Sometimes you can pass right and its ok. Sometimes you can go over the centerline and its ok. Sometimes you can go into the draft zone, try your best to complete the pass, but then not be able to and have to back off. In all these cases, its up to the referee to take the whole, unique siituation into account, and then decide.
A different example. If you come up behind a bike that's riding to the left, how do you get by them? 1) Yell at them, and hope they move over so you can legally pass. 2) Look to see that it's safe; if so, speed up, quickly move left over the center line, complete the pass, and move right. 3) Look to see that it's safe; if so, announce and pass on the right. It's good to try #1 first, but if you have to, you would either have to sit in behind the slower racer (hurting your race), or break either the centerline or the always pass left rule. I've heard that as long as you're safe when you break a rule because of a blocker, then the blocker gets the penalty, not you.
Both of these bring me to this: for any sport, whether the rule book is 10 pages long or 100 pages long, there will always be times where the referee has to make a judgement call, because there's no way to codify every last situation. Sometimes you can pass right and its ok. Sometimes you can go over the centerline and its ok. Sometimes you can go into the draft zone, try your best to complete the pass, but then not be able to and have to back off. In all these cases, its up to the referee to take the whole, unique siituation into account, and then decide.
I agree with you that there are good reasons for the rule against dropping back after one has already started to pass. Nevertheless, you still need to address the case where the rule becomes self-contradictory: i. e., where it obligates you to move forward to pass one cyclist (because you had already started to pass him), while at the same time obligating you to move back from another cyclist (because he just passed you). One paramount principle in any good set of rules, IMO, is that it has to be logically possible to obey them consistently.
"A different example. If you come up behind a bike that's riding to the left, how do you get by them? 1) Yell at them, and hope they move over so you can legally pass. 2) Look to see that it's safe; if so, speed up, quickly move left over the center line, complete the pass, and move right. 3) Look to see that it's safe; if so, announce and pass on the right."
I've also found myself in this situation on more than one occasion. Note that all three of your alternatives would technically require infractions of the rules. In alternative (1), you have already moved into the blocker's draft zone, so regardless of whether you remain behind him or drop back, you fail to complete your pass. Alternatives (2) and (3) expressly violate the rules against crossing the center line and passing on the right respectively. Here again, the rules need to be constructed such that there is a logically possible way in which one can obey them. It's fine to tell people that they won't get penalized in practice because of the blocker's actions, but that really should be spelled out in the rules.
In may be true, as you say, that it's impossible to codify every possible situation. But these particular situations seem to come up over and over again, and for that reason deserve to be addressed explicitly, IMO.
-----
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
Which is probably why I was registering 59.67mi as I rolled into T2.
"A different example. If you come up behind a bike that's riding to the left, how do you get by them? 1) Yell at them, and hope they move over so you can legally pass. 2) Look to see that it's safe; if so, speed up, quickly move left over the center line, complete the pass, and move right. 3) Look to see that it's safe; if so, announce and pass on the right."
I've also found myself in this situation on more than one occasion. Note that all three of your alternatives would technically require infractions of the rules. In alternative (1), you have already moved into the blocker's draft zone, so regardless of whether you remain behind him or drop back, you fail to complete your pass. Alternatives (2) and (3) expressly violate the rules against crossing the center line and passing on the right respectively. Here again, the rules need to be constructed such that there is a logically possible way in which one can obey them. It's fine to tell people that they won't get penalized in practice because of the blocker's actions, but that really should be spelled out in the rules.
In may be true, as you say, that it's impossible to codify every possible situation. But these particular situations seem to come up over and over again, and for that reason deserve to be addressed explicitly, IMO.
-----
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
Which is probably why I was registering 59.67mi as I rolled into T2.