It wasn't about assistance. The article states:

"The British duo then forced a healthy lead on the run and finished together, breaking International Triathlon Union (ITU) competition rule 2.11.f, which states "athletes who finish in a contrived tie situation, where no effort to separate their finish times has been made, will be disqualified".

Seems like a lame rule to me, but it's a rule.

They weren’t DQd for holding hands, they were DQd for not contesting the sprint.......

Only thing it effects is moving everyone up two spots, which for many countries means possibly affecting Olympic spots, so at the end of the day everyone else “wins” in this situation.

And at the end of the day, only negative effect on the British athletes is probably not getting prize money, as no Olympic slots were on the line, as only Vix was eligible, but due to shortened course, the slot ended up not being available.

---

-Brad Williams
Website | Twitter: @BW_Tri |Instagram: @BW_Tri | Strava | Co-Founder & Coach at: KIS Coaching
Partnered with: Zoot Sports | Precision Fuel &Hydration | ISM

GTN did a quick video on it. It's a stupid rule. A rule nonetheless, but it is stupid. They're on the same team, and clearly contested the entire race up until that final 15 seconds or so.

So I guess the lesson is to not hold hands and pretend to sprint.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Thankfully no one achieved or lost AQ spots due to this issue/ruling. Everyone who achieved AQ status was well inside the line before the DQ (Germany, US). So essentially didn’t matter if they won or lost. So far prize money has been TBD but in years past rest event has been $0 prize purse.

I get it was a rule but they + Duffy put an ass whopping to that field.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Maybe just maybe federations need to actually use the test even for how it should be used....real race scenario on the f’ing Olympic course. But because neither athlete could AQ it really didn’t matter how they finished they both “lost”.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

The ITU is just as bad as the UCI in regards to stupid rules.

The lesson is that the race isn't over until you cross the finish line. There is way too much celebration and "quitting" before the line. It kills me to watch NCAA cross country races where team points are at stake to see athletes slow down before crossing the line and watch as others pass them that actually race through the finish. Same goes for the clowns in football that drop the ball before crossing the goal line. There's a video of a track and field runner whooping up the crowd thinking he's won the race when someone passes him just before the finish line. The race isn't over until you cross the line, unfortunate for the two GB athletes but hopefully a lesson to all that the celebration shouldn't start until the race is over.

I'm a bit of a nerd. I actually spent a couple of hours just this past weekend reading through the entire ITU Competition Rules. There are some other interesting rules that also seem lame (like the one about zipper length — no more than 40cm or DSQ! — and make sure it's zipped up during the last 200m of the run!). Most of the rules are about safety. Those that aren't about safety are about fair play, and ensuring that no one athlete has any kind of unfair advantage over another.

But yeah, I'm not really sure how a contrived tie situation contributes to fair play or safety…

---

--
darrylh, vancouver, bc.
it's not about being really good at one sport, it's about being just a little better than average in three. oh, and it's about gadgets. buying lots and lots of expensive gadgets.

Which has zero to do with any of this. There's already a penalty for that, you lose a spot in the placings.

This is, in essence, a rule that invalidates the athlete's entire race because they don't "try hard enough" in the finish chute. I'm not aware of any other sports which will DQ you for not trying hard. Actually, it's even for less than not trying hard. It's for not "appearing" to try hard. It's likely that if they simply ran across the line next to each other in the exact same positions, there would be no DQ. But they were DQ'd for holding hands.

stupid rule.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

This makes sense in some ways.

You can get athletes in cahoots who need points or want to win specific races. ie - you get to win this race and I win my home race. You need points, and I already qualified so you can win this one if you give me a win at X course.

Granted it would have to be always top contenders but still - could easily happen.

Not really, fake it to make it 1km back. Agree to who goes and feign not being able to handle their final kick.

Exactly... how many times have we seen Ali, Gomez or someone else high fiving down the finish chute or whatever when they have the race won and no need to kill it to the line... I know that's different than two athletes crossing the line together... but agree, they won the race and deserved 1 and 2 in some fashion. Looked like Learmonth was a hair in front in the photo.

stupid rule.

Race fixing is a different issue, and would probably have to be figured out between the athletes before the race even starts. Can't imagine negotiating wins at sub 3:00/km pace. And it's not likely that athletes involved in race-fixing would be holding hands across the finish line...

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

At a meet when I was a roller speed skater, nearly an entire heat was disqualified after multiple warnings of skating too slow.

4 people were to advance to the semi's and there was 6 in the heat, 2 of which had absolutely no chance of advancing. The best 4 guys kept the pace down so they would be fresher for the semi. Refs said it was not in the spirit of racing, gave 2 warnings then DQ'd the 4 of them.

This is literally the exact lesson... it’s written in the rule book

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

They should've only DQ'd Jess, because ... Double letters

Oh wait!


Double letters all OVER the place

So confusing

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

You have interpreted the rule exactly right. This is exactly what it is.

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

As has been said, it's a rule, but it's a very stupid rule. Or at least, there should be some allowance for interpretation. The circumstance that occurred cannot be what the rule was intending to penalize/prevent. Shame on the judges or race organizers from not applying some reasonable judgement here.

Have you read the rule? That has nothing to do with what we are talking about

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

I would argue this is *exactly* what they wanted to prevent when the wrote the rule. It’s a *rule*, voted on, approved, and written down on paper. It’s very clear. No judgement or interpretation necessary

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

To what end though? Sure, this is "exactly" what they wanted, but why did they want this scenario, (i.e. where 2 teammates have a dominating lead and decide that because they're buds, they're going to celebrate the win as a team) to be a DQ'able offense.

What is the underlying sporting purpose here? Because to a casual fan, it seems pretty odd to invalidate the clearly well earned #1 and #2 spots simply because they held hands.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

This past June, Wimbeldon fined a player $56K for "not trying hard enough" (technically, for not meeting the "required professional standards"). It's not a DQ but $56K isn't chump change.

FIFY.

Rules can easily be written so that they do allow for judgement to be made.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Why? These are professional athletes. Professionals, in theory (yes, in theory) should uphold some degree of professionalism (remember, I said in theory). Trying your hardest is what professionals should do. What reasonable judgement do you recommend in this case? The rule is clear, a contrived tie is a DQ. Had they both been red-lining when crossing the line, the rule would not have applied. But they didn't and hey, in fact, held hands, so it was.