I love this place.

---

_______________________________________________________________

"the trouble with normal is - it always gets worse"

- Cockburn

"right the fuck on, dan! you start!"

okay, i think i will...

i think one really big prollum we got is we don't have enough good officials. in other words, we don't have officials who're coming out of a long racing career, where they've seen a lot of stuff, been in a lot of situations, and know how to read a race. now me, for example, or monty, or francois, or plumb, and many others of you out there, we pretty much know when somebody's drafting, when they have the intent to draft, etc., so...

i pretty much don't need a head ref to review my calls. i'd prefer to make the calls on the spot, and that's that. no review necessary. but i'm not an official, and i doubt i want to be, but maybe i might under the right circumstances, and if i wouldn't have to do it very often, because mostly i want to race.

i might even be MORE inclined to just be part of the officials training group, where you teach others to read a pack. but...

i must admit that i think i'd be a much more effective ref if i was given some rope by the head ref to:

1. be subjective
2. be proactive

it would seem to me that the problem is that we get a pretty neophyte group of people to choose from, and so we can't trust them to be proactive and subjective, and so we get these shitty calls because we try to teach them to be robots and they just don't make very good robots.

i guess what i'm saying is that i'd bet that charlie crawford would be a GREAT subjective, proactive ref on the course, but he can neither do that nor can he teach that because he's not got the raw materials to start with. i wonder if our problem is more the field of folk that we're drawing our officials from, that there are not enough of us doing the job who ought to be volunteering some of our time to do the job.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I will leave the idea of "abilty of the refs" up to you, as frankly I'm not experianced enough to make that call.

I will note that IMO subjective is very nearly always a superior method of controlling a situation than hard and fast rules. Simply stated real life is to complex to fit into a simple pattern of rules.

As I mentioned in another post the problem and or reason we have rules is not to necessarily to make things "more effecient", which in some cases they do, but to make things "fair" which quite often they do not. Subjectiveness allows for, as you pointed out, intent to be considered. 10 guy's in a pack wheel to wheel at the FOP vs some guy, staring at the pavement, struggling to keep moving, that gets to close to the guy in front of him. The "Rules" say both are drafting to keep it "Fair", however one is on purpose the other has no clue what they're doing and is certainly not doing it to "gain advantage".

These scenarios can be carried out thru pretty much every rule, littering, blocking, outside assistance etc etc.

The subjective call penalizes the "draft pack" but ignores or simply informs the guy at the back of the pack he's drafting and to pay closer attention.

However the problem ensues after the race when the draft pack complains that they were "Unfairly singled out" and no one else "drafting" was penalized.

At this point you can say "Too bad" or "well I guess we have to treat everyone"equally" and penalize the BOP'r that's still on the run course. Frankly I'm all for the "Too bad, screw you", even though I know at some point I will be the one getting screwed. However I also know that given decent refs, given that I do not intentionaly cheat and given that it will be several years before I REALLY get the hang of all the rules "subjectiveness" is on my side.

I'm a split desicion on the proactive and intant penalty issue. I see this as a real hazard in teh large groups of the MOP and BOP. However I see it as a plus, as far as "excitement" and knowing who's going to win the race for the FOP.

Not sure how you'd work that.

~Matt

I'm new to this sport within the last year, and not sure I should even contribute here, but maybe my point of view will help.

you're right on slowman.

I see those guys on motorcycles and they seem like the same guys I see on the highway talking into their little headphones to their wives on the bike behind them.

sorry just telling you what I think while i'm pushing as hard as I can into a headwind uphilll while they go flying by looking so happy to ding somebody.

we need people that have been in our shoes to judge us.

but who wants to stop participating and be a ref?

the beauty of this sport is we can participate forever, and most of us want to.

I'm 45 and just starting and i'm looking forward to the next 45.


I don't want to see 'draft-legal ' triathlon though. that's bullshit.

it's not safe drafting in the aero postition with your hands on the shifters.

I wouldn't even want to draft in a tri.

and all you out there who do, and especially that guy at st anthony's who said ' thanks for the pull' as he flew by me after using me for 2 or 3 minutes,

screw you.

if more people would just follow the rules we woulnd't have as big a problem as we do.

---

_______________________________________________________________

"the trouble with normal is - it always gets worse"

- Cockburn

OK, Dan I'll have a go at this. I have been around for a few years. At least as long as Mike, but not quite as long as you and Monty. Here's some random points:

1. When the no-drafting rules were first made up it seemed to me it borrowed a bit from the ITT's and then it was a gentleman's agreement out on the course. I don't seem to recall that much blatant, athlete to athlete drafting back in the 80's.

2. When the rules where formalized sometime in the 80's, I don't think that people had a concept of 2000+ participant IM races with several hundred people a minute pouring onto a one lane road from T1. I have said this time and time again here - you can't put that many people on the road in that short a period of time on the bike and poooff!, magically they all line up with a 7m gap between them all.

3. Being a relativly slow swimmer(58 min for IM) I first noticed this congestion problem in big races in the early 90's and this was in big IM races with only about 1200 people - now there is almost twice that many. Not that I am any great predictor at anything, but I thought back then, that the problem would only get worse, and in fact it has at all levels. In fact you, yourself Dan pointed out in an editorial, that the "stick" was not working. That all of this enforcment of the rules was not reducing the incidents of drafting.

5. I see three groups in tris these days. 1) Blatant drafters who do it on purpose to gain advantage. Sometimes these guys get caught, sometimes they don't. 2) Serious folk who race by the rules, under the oldschool gentleman's agreement. 3) MOP and BOP folk who really don't care. They train in groups. It's a social thing. They come up on a nice group on the bike in an IM and they figure, let's share the joy/pain. That's cool.

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Have you written/spoken with JimmyR about his experience at Honu as the head official. I think his insights might be helpful/useful/interesting to any discussion regarding rules. During the pre-race meeting he mentioned the word "intent" several times when discussing how officials would be looking at the racers in the packs. It would be interesting to see how successful he feels the offciating crew was at determining intent.



My view of Honu's bike race was that it looked and felt much like any other long distance triathlon. The leaders were so spread out that it is hard to imagine that there were too many packs in the front. As regards the back of the field, I had the miserable experience of being passed by over 400 cyclists ( it was a bad day in Mudville). I saw lots of small groups of riders going by me in clumps. Clearly there was drafting going on. This experience was not much different than I had at IMOO this year.

In any sport the rules are given to officials and like it or not dome are good and some are simply shit! No way to get beyond that- without levelling refs and classifying them for tiered competition.

I like the idea of instant penalties- much better to ding someone right away- but the issue is tainted by the fact that it will often come down to a "he said, she said" scenario. I was brought up and taught in sport that the ref is always right- like it or not- but in an event of 2,000 cyclists it is imperative that decisions are made fairly and in light of circumstances...but this requires experience refs who can empathize and interpret the situations accordingly? Is triathlon old enough as a sport to expect these kinds of refs in the numbers needed? I think not.

In terms of USAT... I have always been unimpressed by the races they sanction that are uttlery crap and devoid of competent crew. If WTC can police themselves effectively and create a balance between good customer/ athlete PR and competent and fair refereeing, then power to them.

Weeman

Random thoughts on the officials recruitment problems:

1. The motorcycle thing. I've done my share of working other sporting events. I've volunteered at triathlons. But there is no way in hell I'm going to put myself in a position where I'm supposed to be doing something at the same time while hanging on for dear life on the back of a motorcycle. They scare me in a bad sort of way. (compared to the good sort of way where my brain says "let's do that because it's scary!") I'm probably not the only one who feels that way.

2. Lack of the usual/traditional sports development route in triathlon. Look at football, baseball, swimming, basketball, etc. The officials seem to follow the same progression as the athletes go: you start out as a little paid or volunteer at the youth/Little League/Pop Warner/Country Club league events, get your state certification and National Federation rulebook, and you're clear to work high school events. Get some of those under your belt, get a reputation for competence, talk to the right people, and you start working small college events, which leads to bigger college events, and if you're really good, and in the right place at the right time, you can maybe move over to working pro games.

And there is a learning curve if you're going to make it as a zebra. I got my start working junior high volleyball games. Lots of them. I remember very little of volleyball rules these days, but those games taught me how to control a situation, maintain authority without coming across as a bitcah, and how to 'develop an eye' for the process and identify problems quickly, and that carries over into other sports I've worked.

With our tri officials, they don't really get the chance to go develop that eye like the baseball umps do- watching countless 11-12 year olds over the course of a season. Instead, they're dumped into a situation where they have to know all of those things from the get-go.

If I was looking for tri officials, I'd look towards the guys/women who work basketball or hockey games or some other sport where the official is used to making the call while in constant movement. They know how to control a situation, and how to watch for infractions. Those skills will carry over. The tri rulebook can be easily memorized from that point.

"Have you written/spoken with JimmyR about his experience at Honu as the head official."

extensively. i think jimmy's view is exceedingly relevent. but i think charlie crawford's is as well, even though the two would probably not agree on very much.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

because it actually deals with the sport of triathlon.... no penises, cervelos, bike positions, hotties or sales pitches. A$$hole is going to cough his cornflakes outta his nostrils when he sees this...

Weeman

This is just off the top of my head, and focuses on bike penalties, as most of the posts have, and I'm adding the focus on IM.

What if there were some sort of sliding scale on the road wherein drafting penalties don't start till a certain point? Hear me out.

Fleck's post about the 3 types of racers got me thinking. Those folks at the pointy end of an IM, by definition, know what they're doing. You don't get to the front of an IM at say anything after 20 miles, unless you have done the training and racing to be there. If you're there, no excuses for drafting, whatever the drafting/blocking/passing rules are.

But, if you're at the middle or back of the pack, then is it really as important if there is drafting? Obviously the ideal is no drafting. But that would require a hell of a big road at an IM, and some moral fortitude that we just don't seem to have en masse anymore. As Fleck pointed out, many of the BOP'ers are there for the social aspect, and if they have a gruppetto to get through, is that so bad?

The next point is that it seems impossible to effectively and fairly marshall the bike course when 100's of people are hitting the road within minutes of each other. Simply too many people in not enough space.

So, if there were a cutoff of some sort, which might start at the mounting line for the first x# of racers, then move slowly up the road as the # of racers increases to end at a fixed point closer if not at the end of the bike course for the BOP'ers.

That way, the folks for whom drafting really matters, the fast people, won't be able to draft. There aren't that many folks on the road at the front, and the marshalls can have effective numbers to stay on them.

Then, as the MOP'ers arrive on shore, they have some portion of the road in which to sort themselves out as they race through the faster swimmers but slower bikers. However, once they reach that certain point on the road, they are deemed to have reached their "racing" area for the remainder of the bike.

Ditto the BOP'ers, but the line is farther up the road.

The immediate problem that comes to me is how to: 1) set that line in the road, and 2) how to communicate that to the racers so that they know they don't have to worry about drafting until mile X.

Just a thought, since we're starting from scratch.

Comments?

---

"The mind can calculate, but the spirit yearns, and the heart knows what the heart knows."

The reason Plumb hasn't replyed is probably that he is making his was back from Duathlon Nats in Ohio.

I'm another fairly new triathlete (second season of tris after 4 of road racing). I wonder, is there no technological solution to the drafting problem?

What about this: A receiver/transmitter on the fork of every bike. Doesn't have to be fancy, no GPS or anything like that. If your receiver gets to close to someone else's, it starts to beep. It proceeds to beep for 15 seconds. If, at that point, you are still in the draft zone, the the receiver records that fact. When you finish the bike leg, the receiver gets read at the timing mat, the officials instantly know of any drafting penalties, and they take you to the penalty box.

Certainly there would be issues to work out, such as directionality of the receiver signal, but I'm sure those could be resolved. Would there be a lot of opposition to a solution such as this?

Without something like that, I think that wave starts is the way to go. I've seen people say they are opposed to waves, because they paid their money, so they want to start next to the pros. Tough cookies. If you want to start next to Peter Reid, go get a pro card and come back next year. Put a cap on the number of entrants at 1500-2000 (I don't know what is best), and make 5-10 wave starts. Don't big races such as wildflower and ralphs work better due to the waves?

I don't know how I feel about the idea of letting the back of the pack folks ride together, like a big, very well supported, century ride. Yes, most people train in groups (I'm an exception), but if you turn the bike leg of an IM into a cyclo-tourist event, then those people really aren't competing in a triathlon, are they? They are doing a swim, going for a group ride, and then running. Odd type of warmup for a marathon, isn't it?

-Colin

---

------------------------------------------------------------
Any run that doesn't include pooping in someone's front yard is a win.

Personnally I would rather see the guy who has "no clue" get the penalty as he is the greater danger to me out there on the course. At least someone intentionally drafting is aware of what they are doing, and hopefully acting accordingly to keep things as safe as possible (which is still not extremely safe if he is drafting while on his aerobars). The "no clue" guy is the one who would most likely rollup onto my rear wheel and take me down to the asphalt with him.

This doesn't sound like a bad idea, but I would probably just impose a "neutral zone" for perhaps the first 5 miles of the bike. So if there is drafting out of T1 due to road congestion you have 5 miles to find your draft free position on the road. If you have not done so once you pass the "no drafting" sign, you will be penalized. You can even have a few signs before that like "Warning No Drafting in 1/4 mile".

Now that I think about it I would probably say the size of the "neutral zone" should be determined based on the number of starters, whether or not there are wave starts, and the size of those waves. It should be easy to create a matrix which gives guidance to RDs.

A "sliding" zone would probably be too hard to both calculate and communicate in runtime during the event. However a fixed size "neutral zone" would be easy to implement and police.

Hello,

My two cents - First I think all of the people who think that the refs should be lenient due to extenuating circumstances have it all wrong. The rules should be written such that they can be rigidily applied: no room for favoritism. If littering is a rule it shouldn't matter how big or if I was on a hill and its accidental. that said the rules should be written to ensure fair and reasonable competition.

The problem I have with most discussions of the rules is that a lot of people miss the fact that Tris are competitions. They aren't really personal achievement events such as a lot of the charity walks, even though a lot of people enter tris for that reason.

My proposals are two sets of rules one for competitors, no matter how fast, the other for tourists. The tourists go last and can draft, get outside assistance, what ever, just can't get prizes or block the road or do anything dangerous.

For the competitors the current USAT rules are pretty good. If you drop a waterbottle on a bump or drop a gu wrapper on a downhill, tough go back and get it and those of us who pass you as you do will smile at the advantage that paying attention to small details has given us.

As for drafting on the bike, again its a race. If you are a fast swimmer but a slow biker and 30 bikes legally spaced catch you you have the choice of dropping back or picking up the pace as they go by so that someone can't get by in 15 seconds and you are then in the train. If you are a fast biker and you catch a train of bikes you may have to make a strong move to get by. Nothing in racing says you have to be allowed to ride a 178 watts and 167 HR for the whole ride without interuption. The fish complain that the swim is a minor part of the race. it wouldn't be if drafting rules were applied. Fish have the advantage of a clear course. Fast bikers, slow swimmers have a lot of interuptions as they pass, tough, learn to swim.



Styrrell

"What if there were some sort of sliding scale on the road wherein drafting penalties don't start till a certain point? Hear me out."

Don't quote me on this, but I suspect that this is already going on at many of the big IM races - it almost has to be. Stand down the road about 5K from T1 and I bet you could hand out a drafting penalty to close to half the field in one of these races. That does not appear to be happening.

My girlfriend was dinged with a drafting penalty at IMFL last fall. It was not when she got swallowed up by several large packs with really no where to go and offcials right there. Every seemed to ride along for some time and nothing happened, but this was in the first 30K. Apparently the call on her was made at mile 95 when she did not get out of the draft zone fast enough in a one-on-one over take with just one other cyclist in site. She had no recollection of this at all.

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I can maybe agree with one of your two cents...

My two cents - First I think all of the people who think that the refs should be lenient due to extenuating circumstances have it all wrong. The rules should be written such that they can be rigidily applied: no room for favoritism. If littering is a rule it shouldn't matter how big or if I was on a hill and its accidental. that said the rules should be written to ensure fair and reasonable competition.

I don't mind rigid rules, it's the penalty part that I take issue with. If you litter, yes you have to pick it up. But a 2 to 4 minute penalty for it. It takes you out of the race. In most other sports, a penalty is just that. You don't get kicked out of the game for a foul, in fact you need 6 of them in basketball, unlimited in football, not sure how you get kicked out of a hockey game, maybe murder. My point is that a very minor infraction like littering, helmet buckel in transition, bike racking, and on and on, should not put you out of the race. Two to four minutes does just that for the serious competitor. And the non serious ones just leave pissed off....

My proposals are two sets of rules one for competitors, no matter how fast, the other for tourists. The tourists go last and can draft, get outside assistance, what ever, just can't get prizes or block the road or do anything dangerous.

Not a bad idea, but these should be two seperate races, and the tourist one should be non sanctioned. Kind of like the Tecate to Ensenada ride. Just throw it out there, preferably in Mexico, and let'm have at it. No rules, no awards, no complaining, just some exercise without the lawyers....

As for drafting on the bike, again its a race. If you are a fast swimmer but a slow biker and 30 bikes legally spaced catch you you have the choice of dropping back or picking up the pace as they go by so that someone can't get by in 15 seconds and you are then in the train. If you are a fast biker and you catch a train of bikes you may have to make a strong move to get by. Nothing in racing says you have to be allowed to ride a 178 watts and 167 HR for the whole ride without interuption. The fish complain that the swim is a minor part of the race. it wouldn't be if drafting rules were applied. Fish have the advantage of a clear course. Fast bikers, slow swimmers have a lot of interuptions as they pass, tough, learn to swim.


You're right, it is a race, and you should be able to speed up or slow down however you choose. If you want to ride over your head and blow up, or sandbag and go for the killer run split, the rules should not stop you. You're wrong about the swimmers getting the clear course though. Maybe the swimmers in the first or second waves, but after that it's all elbows and assholes. I swim just about as fast as anyone, and at the LA triathlon last year, I probably passed 700 to a 1000 riders. ANd oddly enough, I saw very little drafting, and the course handled the 3000 or so athletes pretty well. Point to point, with 3 lanes does wonders for the big races....

Apparently 100km isn't enough to break up the packs... ;-)

There might need to be two sets of rules for races under XXXX participants and races over. It seems part of the reason we have big packs in IM races are several fold.

1. Loop courses = less road for more cyclists. but also helps keep the costs down which should mean lower entry fees (this part is rather debateable). As said before 2000 people with 70% hitting the roads in a short period of time leads to clumping.

2. Too many racers - or could it be not enough road. If you have a single lane then there needs to be less people, if you have multiple lanes than you can have more people. Field limits might need to be smaller. This would probably increase races fees but I think the demand currently is out there to support higher fees.

3. Not enough road two loops three loops four loops doesn't matter. If you only have a single lane, and this will become the norm instead of the exception in races then you have trouble enforcing rules regarding drafting. You also, no matter what your intentions are forced by the RD into a situation where drafting may occur even though you are trying your best to not draft.

4. Lots of people swim and ride within the same time frame. The run seperates the athletes from the tourists so to speak. Move the bike to after the run. Although then you might need bike lights to be mandatory for sevreal riders. Although an earlier cutoff might elimnate this hassle.

5. those who swim/ride in the same time frame try to police themselves but often end up w/ nowhere to go. (maybe this goes back to #1,2,3) Is it fair to ask me, someone who has paid for the righ to go as hard as I can race, to slow up just because I end up around people with the rough same ability just so I don't get a drafting or blocking call.

If you have multiple sets of rules, lets say one is for races w/ 1000 or more then maybe the draft zone becomes 3, 4, or 5m. The zone depth changes to increase safety and/or accomadate the number of racers. If you have less racers then maybe the zone is the standard box we attempt to live with today. If you have multiple lanes with a high number of racers then maybe you can use a larger box. It should be up to the RD, the safety committee and the RD's bike person to make the call then inform the masses. As it stands now, USAT sanctioning should stand for a quality race but that is highly subjective, dependent upon the RD, the course and the number of entries. A 100 person race can be more dangerous than a 2000 person race.

Are wave starts the answers? If you are to respect the 17hr cut off from the start of the race, many 16:20 finishers are not going to officially finish and be swept off the course. Is, for IM racing, adjusting the cutoff to 15hr a solution? It would have an impact on the field size, expenses and revenues. I don't see IMNA going in this direction though as they seem to only increase the size of the field year to year. It could be a sum zero game for the RD's. But it could also decrease bike packs.



Subjective officiating I think is a good thing but it elimnates consistency from the officiating. I all the officials are told drafting is XYZ but use your best judgement then drafting could actually be WXY, or YZ, or XYA. There should be a minimal standard that racers are held to and officials don't have to worry about. Could it be letting people know it's a 7m from the edge of the front wheel then strictly enforcing a 5m box? Could it be pulling packs over then letting them restart at :15 intervals and if so how do you figure out who goes first and last?

As costs rise forcing more loop courses and more out n backs or double out n backs, and triathlon becomes more mainstream this issue will rear it's head more and more.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Looks like the IMC bike course somewhere in the Similkimeen Valley. (Great scenery) So indeed, it's round about the 100K mark. I notice that it's going up a hill, which again, if I follow what I have seen going on at IM races, is that the offcials may( but then again they may not) back-off in obvious situations where their may be drafting due to course congestion, but no serious or significant advantage is being gained.

Or perhaps this is one of these MOP to BOP guppetos that has formed and people are just riding along sharing the journey together. There is no age-group places on the line here. No IM qualifying spots given or taken. It's just a group of people out sharing the challenge. What's the point rushing in and handing out penalties and DQ's. That crowd will either shrug their shoulders and go, "big deal" or get really pissed off and never come back to the race.

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

what about the people racing the race for a PB in that group? Might they get pissed at no one caring that big packs form and then piss off tris for good? Not everyone just riding along is sharing the journey. I still don't have the answer..yet.
I think there needs to be a minimal hard standard though, with the ability to go above that.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

"I still don't have the answer..yet."

I don't think there is an easy answer to this. I saw this coming 10 - 15 years ago. The same arguments were going on back then. Now they have just become more frequent and the emotions higher.

Say what you want about the ITU, they had the same problem in the World Cup races and they took the gutsy stance of saying fine - it's swim/bike/run, however you want and the first across the line wins. It's easy to understand. It's simple and straightforwd. It requires a minimal amount of "policing". It's not the answer either, but it's a route that I suspect if the current imbroglio does not sort itself out may start to have more appeal.

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I can remember ITU races when they were draft illegal. Your right, drafting was a way to get the sport to an acceptable level of fairness with the rules. With out draft legal racing I doubt you would have seen it in Sydney. Without Sydney we might not be having these discusions for another 5-10yrs. The naysayers can say wat the want about ITU racing but it is the catalyst behind the growth, even of IM.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

geez, I go for a swim tonight and all hell brakes loose while I'm gone. Of course I'm dirty now, looks like we have a bout of red tide rolling into LaJolla Cove now.

I see two problems. First of all, most of these rule suggestions for drafting really only apply for Ironman distance events. What percentage do Ironman events make up of the total race calander? Very small !! So do we need different rules for an Ironman then we do for the 1km/30km/5km sprint race? It would appear so because a lot of these rules suggestions aren't really applicable to a sprint race.

Second problem is the misconception that the only racing going on is at the front, or at least near the front of the race. Take Ironman Arizona for example. There were 80 Kona slots up for grabs. 27 of those slots went to finishers that came in over 11 hours. 11 slots went to finishers over 12 hours. 4 slots went past 13 hours. The guy that finished in 15:30 and earned a Kona slot, was he racing or just trying to finish and hang with his buddies out on the race course? Point is, there is racing going on all through the field so to limit "racing rules" to just the front half of the field does not do justice to the people that are still racing and finishing in the back half of the field time wise. Not everyone is under 30 and racing at the front.

How to enforce anti drafting rules? That's the 50 million dollar question and I don't have an exact answer. I agree with Dan in that we don't have enough good officials. That is a start. People like Charlie Crawford, Dan, Monty, etc, we all know how to be subjective, read a situation and make a call, but for a lot of the officials out there, they have to be trained and the current method is to teach them the rules and for the most part they apply them as they are read in the book. Part of their training is a one race apprenticeship they get the weekend of their officiating certification. You can't always teach twenty years of racing experience and equating it to how to read a situation.

So in light of not having an answer myself, everyone else keep offering opinions and suggestions. Just keep in mind some of the parameters. There is not an endless pool of officials to draw from, and there is racing going on all throughout the field so rules that apply only to the front are discrimanatory to older groups that may be slower, but still racing nonetheless.

---

Mike Plumb, TriPower MultiSports
Professional Running, Cycling and Multisport Coaching, F.I.S.T. Certified
http://www.tripower.org