New World Tri Rules

Dec 1, 22 13:23

Post #1 of 16 (1726 views)

World Triathlon's rule updates are now posted (take effect Jan 1, 2023). https://www.triathlon.org/...es_2023_20221122.pdf

Some fairly significant updates were made this year, some of the highlights are listed below:
- Shoe Rule, more explicit mention of the World Athletics rules on super shoes, in terms of stack heights and carbon plates, including random checks for age group and elites, before, during or after competition (up to a week following), and this could fall into the protests concerning equipment category as well, so an athlete could protest someone else's shoes.
- Added bike conduct and run conduct penalties similar to what was added for the Swim in 2017.
- as previously noted, no more aerobars for elite draft-legal races
- the Vincent Luis rule, if you ride through the TZ and make no attempt to dismount, DSQ
- Riding out of transition rather than mounting at line, DSQ
- the Hayden Wilde rule, clarification that athletes must have their helmet securely fastened and may not touch the locking mechanism on their helmet when their bike is unracked (from when they unrack in T1 until they rack in T2, see the penalty at the commonwealth games for reference)
- The Tom Bishop rule, clarifying that equipment, used or unused needs to be in the Bin after T2 (or on the bike in case of shoes or helmets/sunglasses that were on the bike in T1), or a penalty for equipment outside of the bin (see MTR worlds in Montreal and the GBR penalty)
- Protest/Appeals sections entirely re-written (the big change here is clarification, that a penalty cannot be protested if it's served, so athletes can either serve it, or take the DSQ and protest and hope to have the call overturned) and clarification of the differences between protests and appeals
- Renaming "special needs" stations to "personal needs" stations (for obvious reasons)
- Change to definition of littering area (previously zone) to allow discarding of equipment or rubbish
- DSQ for athletes changing the equipment making up the field of play (aka modifying the course)
- Slight changes to the wording of the contrived tie rule (but the rule is still there)
- Some clarification of the Swimskin rules
- Mat leave rule, allowing ranking point totals to be paused from the moment pregnancy announced until 2years post-giving birth

There are many more changes as well, but those are some of the big highlights from a quick skim

Last edited by: Trauma: Dec 2, 22 8:06

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [Trauma] [ In reply to ]

Dec 1, 22 13:37

Post #2 of 16 (1699 views)

- Protest/Appeals sections entirely re-written (the big change here is clarification, that a penalty cannot be protested if it's served, so athletes can either serve it, or take the DSQ and protest and hope to have the call overturned) and clarification of the differences between protests and appeals

---

I think I understand the mechanics of this decision being they don't want to give time back and then get into the business of predicting how that would have changed the race, etc. But I'm kinda against a setup where you serve your penalty it means you can't appeal. I get it, they don't want 2nd to lose by 8s and 2nd did a 10s penalty so now 2nd "won"...So I dont know a better solution necesssarily, I just don't like that it seems it's "all" on the athlete.

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

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [B_Doughtie] [ In reply to ]

Dec 1, 22 13:51

Post #3 of 16 (1679 views)

For sure, they already weren't reversing time penalties, so even if they won and got the penalty overturned, nothing changed. I think the rule change was just to cut out a lot of effectively useless appeals.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [Trauma] [ In reply to ]

Dec 1, 22 18:40

Post #4 of 16 (1592 views)

A handful of trivia/lowlights/confusing things from my read through that probably don't affect anything or anyone in a meaningful way:

2.8.c.viii, uniforms and zippers: for all disciplines that allow short-sleeve uniforms (everything except elite/U23/junior for sprint and standard tri), the uniform may now have a front zipper instead of a rear zipper. Neat, and should be easier to deal with once federations and manufactures have new designs approved and available. Amusingly, the relevant section of the Penalties appendix was not updated, and still specifies middle-distance and long-distance events, so if you wanted to pick a fight with an official and lose, you could unzip your uniform in a sprint or standard distance race.
5.2.c.ii, Bike position for elite/U23 draft-legal events: clarification for saddle setback exceptions based on leg length ratio. Not sure I've ever come across this before in the context of mass-start cycling, so I wonder if there was a specific athlete or two that is the reason they're bothering with this. Especially so given than women get a 2cm minimum setback instead of 5cm minimum, which I (not a bike fitter) imagine fixes a lot of the problem for shorter athletes.
7.1.d, transition area for duathlon: removes a nitpick for racing with separate pairs of shoes for the first and second run, where a particularly obnoxious reading could argue for a penalty from taking your shoes off after the first run and having them touch the ground before being placed in the bin. See above on "picking weird fights and losing".
15.5, renaming of special needs to personal needs: changing the name in the section header, and not in the sub-section directly below. If it's important enough to rename, you'd think someone would have remembered to do a find-and-replace for the document. There's the same problem a few other places, too. Oops!
19.4.c, tires for cross triathlon and cross duathlon: Not actually new or a change, but it's a surprise to me that studded tires are allowed (with no stipulations like in the winter tri section) when they're banned in UCI mountain biking (regulation 4.1.039).
23/Appendix A, distance categories of races: Sprint duathlon is now "up to" 5k/20k/2.5k for each section, which includes the new (1.7k-3.5k)/(6.5k-13k)/(0.85k-1.75k) super-sprint duathlon.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [Trauma] [ In reply to ]

Dec 2, 22 2:00

Post #5 of 16 (1459 views)

Which race series does this apply to?

I'm surprised the shoe rule will have random checks for amateurs. In running, the shoe rule is not applied to amateurs.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [RunningChoux] [ In reply to ]

Dec 2, 22 7:57

Post #6 of 16 (1374 views)

RunningChoux wrote:

A handful of trivia/lowlights/confusing things from my read through that probably don't affect anything or anyone in a meaningful way:

2.8.c.viii, uniforms and zippers: for all disciplines that allow short-sleeve uniforms (everything except elite/U23/junior for sprint and standard tri), the uniform may now have a front zipper instead of a rear zipper. Neat, and should be easier to deal with once federations and manufactures have new designs approved and available. Amusingly, the relevant section of the Penalties appendix was not updated, and still specifies middle-distance and long-distance events, so if you wanted to pick a fight with an official and lose, you could unzip your uniform in a sprint or standard distance race.
5.2.c.ii, Bike position for elite/U23 draft-legal events: clarification for saddle setback exceptions based on leg length ratio. Not sure I've ever come across this before in the context of mass-start cycling, so I wonder if there was a specific athlete or two that is the reason they're bothering with this. Especially so given than women get a 2cm minimum setback instead of 5cm minimum, which I (not a bike fitter) imagine fixes a lot of the problem for shorter athletes.
7.1.d, transition area for duathlon: removes a nitpick for racing with separate pairs of shoes for the first and second run, where a particularly obnoxious reading could argue for a penalty from taking your shoes off after the first run and having them touch the ground before being placed in the bin. See above on "picking weird fights and losing".
15.5, renaming of special needs to personal needs: changing the name in the section header, and not in the sub-section directly below. If it's important enough to rename, you'd think someone would have remembered to do a find-and-replace for the document. There's the same problem a few other places, too. Oops!
19.4.c, tires for cross triathlon and cross duathlon: Not actually new or a change, but it's a surprise to me that studded tires are allowed (with no stipulations like in the winter tri section) when they're banned in UCI mountain biking (regulation 4.1.039).
23/Appendix A, distance categories of races: Sprint duathlon is now "up to" 5k/20k/2.5k for each section, which includes the new (1.7k-3.5k)/(6.5k-13k)/(0.85k-1.75k) super-sprint duathlon.

Some interesting points:
- good catch on the zipper rule, but the penalties for zip were largely enforced just for the elites, and short sleeves are still illegal for sprint standard for them. So again, I guess one could pick a fight with the officials and make a $50 donation to World Tri...
- 5.2.c.ii on elite bike position, is likely a mix of tri and cycling feedback, where there were people outside of the height limits for set-back exemptions, but because of their body proportions (specifically femur lengths) had legitimate cases for such exemptions.
- 7.1.d This is not really a rule change for Du, this is consistent with how this has been enforced for years, however, it makes the rules around a second pair of shoes more explicit, and will probably save a ton of questions (especially for a tri where the swim is cancelled and a du format is used for people who may not have du experience)
- 15.5 good point
- 19.4c, interesting points
- 23/App A - this change to "up to" is consistent with past changes to the wording on triathlon distances, and to provide some flexibility for distance deviations to accommodate different venues.

In terms of the other question in this thread, These rules technically apply to any World Tri sanctioned events (obviously the elite/U23 rules only apply to the elite races), so would cover ContiCups, World Cups, WTCS, Multisport World Champs, Age group competitions, etc.. Ironman technically uses World Tri rules, although there are some specific exceptions within their rulebook. For domestic, nationally sanctioned races, it depends on the country. Many align with World Tri rules, with some small exemptions, others have their own rulebooks with greater deviation. It's worth checking with your federation to see what rules apply to competitions in which you take part.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [B_Doughtie] [ In reply to ]

Dec 2, 22 19:31

Post #7 of 16 (1285 views)

Move the penalty box to the corner of the finish

___________________________________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/...eoesophageal_fistula
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_palsy
2020 National Masters Champion - M40-44 - 400m IM
Canadian Record Holder 35-39M & 40-44M - 200 m Butterfly (LCM)

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [Trauma] [ In reply to ]

Dec 3, 22 5:23

Post #8 of 16 (1238 views)

What I don’t like is not being able to protest an official’s decision (unless you risk a DQ). Like we have plenty more of events that athletes have ti decide on the fly with no help whether the penalty is just or not. And granted it’s only really 1 out of 100 that is even questionable. I just think it then puts all the responsibilities on the athletes who you know are racing while having to make these decisions.

Especially if it’s one where an official messes up, I’d like for there to be an opportunity beyond “DQ” to say “you made a bad call”. Now it’s well you want to make that stand you have to really risk it.

I just think it’s unnecessary as sometimes the refs do in fact mess it up. And this rule will affect more athletes who don’t have coaches and video evidence to go back on as there are many more non supported itu races than the big boy WTCS and World Cup events etc.

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

Last edited by: B_Doughtie: Dec 3, 22 5:25

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [B_Doughtie] [ In reply to ]

Dec 3, 22 8:46

Post #9 of 16 (1192 views)

B_Doughtie wrote:

- Protest/Appeals sections entirely re-written (the big change here is clarification, that a penalty cannot be protested if it's served, so athletes can either serve it, or take the DSQ and protest and hope to have the call overturned) and clarification of the differences between protests and appeals

---

I think I understand the mechanics of this decision being they don't want to give time back and then get into the business of predicting how that would have changed the race, etc. But I'm kinda against a setup where you serve your penalty it means you can't appeal. I get it, they don't want 2nd to lose by 8s and 2nd did a 10s penalty so now 2nd "won"...So I dont know a better solution necesssarily, I just don't like that it seems it's "all" on the athlete.

Massive lack of natural justice in this procedure.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [B_Doughtie] [ In reply to ]

Dec 5, 22 5:51

Post #10 of 16 (1142 views)

B_Doughtie wrote:

What I don’t like is not being able to protest an official’s decision (unless you risk a DQ). Like we have plenty more of events that athletes have ti decide on the fly with no help whether the penalty is just or not. And granted it’s only really 1 out of 100 that is even questionable. I just think it then puts all the responsibilities on the athletes who you know are racing while having to make these decisions.

Especially if it’s one where an official messes up, I’d like for there to be an opportunity beyond “DQ” to say “you made a bad call”. Now it’s well you want to make that stand you have to really risk it.

I just think it’s unnecessary as sometimes the refs do in fact mess it up. And this rule will affect more athletes who don’t have coaches and video evidence to go back on as there are many more non supported itu races than the big boy WTCS and World Cup events etc.

Some very reasonable points. To offset some of this (and in the wake of a famous penalty being given to the wrong athlete (Kirsten Kasper in Abu Dhabi) costing her podium spots), the addition of the letter codes next to the penalties on the board (two new codes next year for bike and run conduct) is meant to help the athlete/coach figure out what the penalty was for, to make a more informed decision. Secondly, you're right, athletes without a coach on the side are at a greater disadvantage because they have to rely on their own perspective on a call, rather than a second opinion whether to serve or protest. That said, typically you would need evidence of the call being wrong in order to get a penalty overturned, so unless you had photos or videos showing that it was a wrong call, or really strong witness testimony, usually the result is loss of $50. I see the perspective of World Tri too, in that if someone serves a penalty, then protests, results are tentative, podiums are potentially delayed while the jury meets, and even if the athlete is proven right, no time can be removed, so nothing changes from a results perspective. I know that it's no consolation, but believe me the officiating teams will debate calls, watch the replays, and determine whether or not the right call was made after the fact.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [Trauma] [ In reply to ]

Dec 5, 22 6:27

Post #11 of 16 (1114 views)

since it was brought up a few times now ,that there is no change in times. i did speak to somebody in the know, who confirmed to me that wild and lee could both have been given a joint gold medal at commi games, the rules would have allowed for it. i am afraid i cant explain anymore exactly how, but it was possible. i think if the head referee would have wanted to go this way.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [Trauma] [ In reply to ]

Dec 5, 22 6:44

Post #12 of 16 (1091 views)

I just kinda want the athlete to have the ability to say “wait a minute you messed that up”, because now I think the risk is waaaay to high so that then it becomes the official essentially shoulder shrugging unless they take a initial DQ.

This past summer at the World games. When I was leading team USA our 2 gals got DQ’d along with 75% of the womens field because of the poor course signage / management. I knew they were t going to take off the DQ because of the whole “athlete needs to know the course”.

But we paid the fee to appeal and get in front of the jury. And it almost wasn’t even about making it right because I knew they weren’t. It imo was about having a conversation and looking them in the eye and basically saying “these athletes deserved better”. And the officials were as embarrassed by the whole issue as anyone and I knew they weren’t going to change the results.

But that 90 mins of athlete appeals that let the race “take” the upset feedback was good. So sometimes it’s not a matter of fixing the result as much as “we have to do better” type of conversation.

Again I’m really only talking about 1 in 100 calls, but I just don’t like the new process, I just think it basically removes any responsibility from the official.

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

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [pk] [ In reply to ]

Dec 5, 22 6:46

Post #13 of 16 (1087 views)

pk wrote:

somebody in the know . . confirmed to me that wild [sic] and lee [sic] could both have been given a joint gold medal at commi games, the rules would have allowed for it. i think if the head referee would have wanted to go this way.

" i think if the head referee would have wanted to go this way" I bet they would! Alternatively maybe the head referee wanted this to 'go away'.

Off topic: The video footage of Wilde with his hand on his helmet strap while the bike was being racked surely would have been available to the Head Referee and with no evidence that the helmet strap had been unfastened the Head Referee should have done their job and nixed their referee's on-the-spot decision/judgement. If in doubt, don't penalise.
Super important when the affected athlete is in direct competition with a home athlete, as well.

Re: New Worl Tri Rules [pk] [ In reply to ]

Dec 5, 22 13:44

Post #14 of 16 (1033 views)

pk wrote:

since it was brought up a few times now ,that there is no change in times. i did speak to somebody in the know, who confirmed to me that wild and lee could both have been given a joint gold medal at commi games, the rules would have allowed for it. i am afraid i cant explain anymore exactly how, but it was possible. i think if the head referee would have wanted to go this way.

While a joint gold may have been possible the head ref couldn't have made the call. The head ref made the initial call on the penalty (other officials may report a violation, but nothing is posted until the head ref agrees with the penalty). The joint gold may have been a possible outcome from the competition jury (chaired by the technical delegate, who rule on the protest, as a neutral body to the field of play decision), but it didn't happen. Either way, looking at the new rules, it appears that for a situation like Wilde, no doubt moving forward it would be a penalty, since now you can't touch the buckle until the bike is racked.

Re: New World Tri Rules [Trauma] [ In reply to ]

Dec 5, 22 14:20

Post #15 of 16 (1012 views)

I don’t like the shoe rule. Triathlon has always been innovative. Would not be surprised if they start using UCI bike rules.

Re: New World Tri Rules [vonschnapps] [ In reply to ]

Dec 6, 22 5:32

Post #16 of 16 (965 views)

They have used UCI bike rules for a number of years but with very limited exceptions, with an approval process for the safety of non-traditional bicycles (i.e. beam bikes that don't meet the UCI definition of a bicycle). They also don't mandate the UCI approved frames, however those frames are automatically legal, but as long as a frame without the sticker conforms to the rules, they'll accept it... They have also used the UCI Wheels list for years as well...

Their standard position is the starting point for the tri rules are the World Athletics/UCI/FINA (and FIS in winter tri) rules for each discipline, and then the World Tri rules capture the nuance of multisport.

I don't have a strong opinion on the shoe rule, in terms of stack height. Aesthetically I agree with it, because many of these super shoes are fugly, but performance-wise, there's a trade off between stack and ground feel, and the more material there is between the athlete and the ground, at some point that's going to dampen the force exerted... I do get the prototype rules though, while we know that manufacturers can game the hell out of it, the spirit of the rule is in the right place, that every athlete should have fair access to the same equipment, rather than only some who have partnerships with the right companies.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.