YEP, nothing to see here, he has been training really hard while all the others spent their pre season eating maccas and playing video games..... Pink

I was half joking really (I haven't even seen the race) I firmly beleive in innocent until proven guilty, maybe Schoeman can just get into great shape for big competition (Comm games) years.

Schoeman said he never tested positive, or had a TUE or an adverse finding.

🙄

Check out his brake hoods after his crash. The right side is completely jacked. He very likely had a lot of impairment braking on the corners after that. That being said JB needs AB way more than AB needs JB.

If he said it, then its over. Why would he not say the truth? I heard that for 2.019 anti doping controls are going to be replaced by a questionaire.

Henri Schoeman is a beast in the water, he must be training in the endless pool with lionel. Also Flora Duffy and Johnny Brownlee should get bike handling tips from sanders if they wanna get on the podium this year. Also Also on a less serious note, this race was brilliant, im all up for more technical courses like this. Finally just wanted to comment that Katie Z and Flora D were riding disk brakes and crashed while braking, whats that with the braking superiority of disk brakes?

FIFY to separate out the true from the absurd, just for other readers. :) While Henri is indeed quite fast in the water, i highly doubt his speed is from an EP. Speed in the water almost always comes from hard intervals in the pool. Further, i just can not believe how many references to Sanders have occurred in this thread (i.e., many others besides you) when the guy was not even in the race.

In any case, i thought it was very cool that Schoeman took a 30 sec lead over Mola coming out of the water, and made it stick for a 6 sec win. First OOTW and first OV at the end, very nice!!!

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Wasn´t Johnny Brownlee riding a bike with disc-brakes too? There you go...

Anywhere to watch this race without the subscription?

No there's not but I think you'll find that if you fork over the twenty something dollars for the whole season plus all the archived footage it won't take long to realize it was money well spent. I did anyhow and I'm a total cheap skate.

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

They show it on a Comcast channel 870 OLY in my neck of woods. Day after event I think. Last year they were on NBC related channel if memory serves.

Anyone know why Kasper was pulled to the penalty tent? Per her social media accounts, the 10 sec penalty was called erroneously and overturned following the race, but she wasn’t allowed onto the podium....

She said it was a littering penalty that she protested and had overturned. Seems like bullshit to me that a penalty can be protested, and won, but the podium spot is forever gone. I knew the result already but watching her charge for the line was awesome, such a close finish.

The OLYMPIC Channel carries ITU this season.... (591/Verizon in Philly). They are replaying the men's race tomorrow at 10:30am.

Sooo, the problem with protesting a penalty is this... You can not serve the penalty, protest it, and if you win, get your result.... But if you lose the protest, get DQ'd... or you can serve it and then get the safe result. that said, if you protest successfully, they cannot take it off your time (rule 3.2g (point ii))... She made the call to serve the 10sec penalty and still have a guaranteed top 4, rather than to risk not serving it for 3rd place (possibly 2nd with how she sprinted) and then potentially be DQ'd... (since ultimately you have to provide compelling evidence that you didn't commit the violation, so it's contingent on there being a camera on the incident or witnesses corroborating the story at a minimum)

Based on social media, it was a littering penalty that was mistakenly given to her instead of someone else. Curious as to who actually committed the penalty, from the stream, I couldn't tell...

No wonder she's pissed. That puts an athlete in the position to make that choice literally in the middle of a race. I dunno how they could do it better, but that still seems pretty questionable to me.

It's a gamble for sure, and with the penalties for sprint distance being only 10sec, there's really only one call to make... as she did. I can see why they don't want to be changing times adding or removing penalties after the fact, so that the order at the finish is the order (minus any DQs obviously) and to give the other athletes a shot at a result (like if you subtracted the 10sec from her time, she might have ended up 2nd, but that wouldn't give Learmonth a chance to sprint against her to try and hang on to second...)...

I know some governing bodies (USAT being one of them) sometimes do the time penalties after the fact, rather than using a penalty box. That system has some merits, but in terms of those watching the race, it gets a bit confusing... Not sure what is the ideal situation... my gut says the ITU system gets it right, but it royally sucks in cases like what happened to Kasper (in years of following ITU racing, this is the first case like that I have come across...).

I have no inherent problem with athletes making split second choices, they do that hundreds of times during a race... In ITU racing, the coaches/team managers hang around the penalty board after T2 to be able to relay the info to their athletes, along with their recommendation as to when to serve, and possibly whether to protest (ultimately there's a very tight window after the finish in which they can lodge a protest).

I absolutely saw someone throw something out of that group to the right side of the road and it wasn't Kasper. Remember seeing it and thinking "oh penalty!" but didn't hear about her fiasco until much later. Will have to go back and review the footage to see if I can discern who it was. Regardless, someone in that group is full aware that it was them and I would hope has the character to apologize to her privately, if not in public. The real offender got off easy and cost Kasper a podium spot (or two), $$, series points and more. She was robbed and has been incredibly polite about it

Any idea why Kristen was initially assigned a DQ if she served her penalty before finishing? I've not found an explanation.

Thanks,

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

Was it confirmed she was initially assessed a DQ? Are DQs on the spot normal? All I saw her say was she was given the bad penalty.

And yeah, she was really robbed here. I feel for her, and am impressed with how she's handled it.

The official ITU results listed her as a DQ on their web site and later changed it to show her with 4th place. IIRC Richard Murray was DQed on the spot for his outburst last year.

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

But I thought Murray made his obscene gesture in the direction of the official, not at the official... In his case, I don't even think that's a protestable offense... Abuse of an official is auto-DQ (no time penalty, straight up red card)... I think he is smarter than that now, given that he is the self-professed most penalized athlete in the ITU...

Not sure why the results would have temporarily listed her as DQ'd, it could have been a misunderstanding as to whether or not the penalty had been served when going through the protest process (initial protest to head referee, who likely upheld the FOP call, which would then result in a DQ if she hadn't served the penalty... the decision could then be appealed to a competition jury process... which given the outcome in this case, would have likely ruled in her favor overturning the the penalty...

I'd have to go back and watch to see who littered where (because there are legal litter zones... it's littering outside of those zones that results in the time penalty...) to see if we could figure out who was the culprit. It's shitty for sure, and you would hope the guilty party apologizes (they would likely wait until after the 48hr window for the results revision process... to not open themselves up to a protest and potential DQ...), but who knows if they would.

Not sure what is the ideal situation.//

I understand why they do what they do, but they could easily put in place one more thing to make it fair for the injured party here. Do it all as they did, but if they fucked up by getting the wrong number, take the 10 seconds off her time and double up the place it would have given her on time. That way you dont have to wonder who would have won a spring finish, just assume they tied, double up the money and points to each.


Not sure why they don't do something like that, but I'm am smarter and fairer than most who write these rules. It's ok and they have my permission to steal this one from me...(-;

I saw Kasper toss something just after T2 and I assumed the penalty was for that. But if the penalty was "overturned" post hoc, then that likely wasn't the foul that was called. I also have no idea where the legal littering zone was. It sure is a tough situation, but I think I see the benefits to this rule as written to generally outweigh risks of misapplied penalties. However I thought I heard some reference that Kasper saw her number on the penalty list but was not informed of the violation. That sounds like a rule that needs to change. If you are called for a penalty and you must choose to serve or not serve (based on potential future protest) then you certainly deserve to be pre-informed of the specific rule which was violated. This should be an easy change to implement on the white boards. eg "#42 Wetsuit out of box"