I like it but think it would be a logistics problem for the race director, not to mention you would be forcing someone to go beyond the advertised distance of the event, which might open lawsuits in the event that someone is injured, etc doing the penalty.

The best solution is to wait for Active RFID like they used at Tour de France to indicate position and vital signs at any give point on the course. Just need Championchip and other chip companies to get it out. We use passive RFID today in races, The active RFID would record your position relative to time and any other racers at any given time you are wearing the chip. Then penalties can be awarded based on your time you violated the 20 second zone for passing, etc.

The technology is here. Its just not being applied to Ironman yet. You cheaters had better start learning how to ride solo.

This was mentioned in some other thread. "The loop of shame" was an 800M loop that you had to run around "X" number of times after getting off the bike but before you could go on the run.

Makes sense to me.

I'm also thinking that simply blasting drafters with a paintball gun, although dangerous, would probably be a more effective method of crowd control.

~Matt

Other sports have "penalties" like this, biathlon where you may have to ski an extra short loop (like a 400m track) when you miss your shots.

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

Option 1 seems pretty good; kind of like having a penalty lap rather than sitting in the penalty box. However, I don't think the 2 year ban will fly. The reason is the inherently subject nature of the drafting call. You will get a situation such as this:

Racer A is riding along and gets passed by Racer B. Racer A lets Racer B get 7m in front before "resuming" his ride. They immediately come to a hill, and Racer B slows dramatically, while Racer A keeps a good pace. His pace is good enough to throw him into the drafting zone right away, but not enough to pass within 20 seconds. If this happens three times in a race, it doesn't seem to me that Racer A deserves a two year ban, but maybe I'm wrong.

At some point I'd like to see little GPS units added to the timing chips. Then, in real time, the officials could watch little dots representing each racer go over the course on a computer screen. They could see packs form and dissipate. They could know where on the course everything was happening (aid stations, hills, special needs) and dole out penalties appropriately. That would be cool. I wonder what the cost of that technology would be?

-C

---

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

like the penalty loop in biathlon when you miss a shot. I think if people knew they had to go extra distance they might think twice.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

The loop of shame would be more effective. It has never made sense that someone who very well might save 15-30 minutes of biking/running time due to drafting gets to rest for 4 minutes. I think more running, no resting is a great option.

I also like the paint ball idea..

---

*********************
Jacob

Here's another option that is low cost, low tech:

Start draft marshals on bicycles at 15 minute intervals for the 2 hour window that every begins the bike ride. That would only require 8 marshals.

As they see packs ride by, they observe and record numbers. Maybe have the draft marshals go at a moderate 20 mph pace and wear strips so that when a pack rides by, they are forced to breakup.

On the other hand, maybe put the draft marshal in normal athletic wear and let them quietly observe. Even getting on the wheel of a pack to make sure they differentiate between the lead rider and the cheaters.

But, I think putting 8 bike riding marshals on the course would help catch the cheaters. The bike riding marshals would also know when no one is benefitting from being in the draft zone. Like when climbing or in heavy traffic, etc. Continue to use the motorcyles for postion fouls and littering fouls.

The current problem has nothing to do with lax penalties, it has to do with lax enforcement of the existing penalties. My guess is that if they called the penalties under existing rules the problem would largely go away.



Styrrell

---

Styrrell

I have one problem with this. Where ya gonna find dudes that can keep up with Norman, Reed, Faris etc for 112 miles AND continuosly sit up and ride one handed to write down numbers. Sounds like alot to ask a biker.

Now maybe something quiet and stealthy...like a segway.

~Matt

I have the tendency to agree with you. I think the RD's are just plain afraid of pissing people off. They'd rather let alot of drafters go than penalize one person that may have not been drafting.

Honestly a ref is likely not going to ding a MOP'r/BOP'r that happens to stroll into someone else's draft. This year at IMWI they were telling people in the MOP/BOP that they were a bit to close and break it up. I think that is a decent approach for most cases as I don't think many are purposefully drafting.

I've only had one experiance with a aggressive drafter in an IM, and that individual ended up with 12 minute of penalties. I have however seen large groups that "Appear" to not get dealt with.

The amount of penalty, I still like the run it off idea. Should be a public loop that people can see. Time is maybe not a big penalty, but humiliation is an excellant deterant.

~Matt

Fraid I don't like it for the reason Shanberg said. I thought IMUK had a great system (8m wait in T2 for two offences, They remove your T2 bag from the hook if you do it three times - game over). You weren't told on the bike when you were getting busted (although if you knew you were cheating and a guy rode past on a scooter peering at your number then I guess you could presume). The problem there was enforcement there were just not enough marshalls out there. I saw a scooter (the same one) twice in 112 miles and I'm not fast

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

I'm just casually familiar with Active RFID, but to me it looks like the chief benefit to it is that the RFID id number can be read at up to 100 feet or so, whereas passive is only readable within a few feet max. So you can put active RFID antennas out at various places on course, and be able to tell when athletes went passed that spot and were somewhere within a max 100 radius. But it still won't tell you who was drafting who.

Using GPS for general location on course, to be able to tell where there's large clumps of athletes, would work fine if you put a pricy GPS/radio on bikes, and didn't have to worry about hills blocking signals, which happens all the time. But even if you used, it still wouldn't help give out penalties. Although GPS is quite accurate, it still has sufficient inaccuracy in it that it can't be used to make a valid drafting call of whether rider B is drafting rider A.

The base technology doesn't exist today - you still need a body to make a call.

Running the loop= Humiliation + using up the energy they saved...

---

*********************
Jacob

I was really looking at this from an age group perspective, but there are many club riders that can hammer a century and keep up with them. Heck, the state timetrial riders in my area don't even participate in triathlon. I think they could find the people to do the riding. I'm not saying they need to stay on them the entire ride. With a 15 minute interval between bike riding marshals, there might be enough to observe, Plus, if they are in normal athletic apparel, the fast riders will have to assume everyone is a marshal...

I'm all for big penalties for cheaters. As I said in the thread I started on this topic yesterday, I'm infuriated by them. I don't know how much I agree with the huge penalties though. Not because I don't think blatant cheaters deserve them. But as many people point out, with the number of people they allow on these courses, we all know you can sometimes try as hard as you can to avoid drafting, yet sometimes technically break the rules.

I was nervous as hell about getting nailed at both of my IM's. (at Lake Placid) I was conscious every mintue of trying to make sure I stayed within the rules. You end up with a group of folks around you - so you accelerate to try and stay ahead. Then they pass you back, you're counting bike lengths while softpedaling to make sure you are out of the zone, then two more come up on you and put you in their zone, etc. It's nuts. You end up just going backwards through the field for minutes at a time and losing alls sorts of speed to try and protect yourself.

I was bummed both times as I headed to the penalty list worried I was going to get a time bump. (I didn't) But the point is unless the officials are extraordinarily well trained, spend a lot of time watching each individual situation (pretty much impossible given the # of riders) and use DISCRETION, which often times I don't think they do, I'm sure many people doing everything they can not to cheat could get hit with big penalties, which would be as unfair as the real cheaters getting away with it.

Applying technolgy to drafting is the best way to a practical solution. Beyond your idea of monitoring the computer and dispatching refs accordingly, I can envision software that would instantly analyze the data and assess penalties. This would allow the luxury of redefining violations to allow for incidental infractions that would not be penalized. If, in fact, we can "see" every competitor during the entire 112 mi, we can evaluate evasive action, incidental fouls and formulate a virtual judgement of intent.

And a big Yes to running penalty loops. Also, suspensions are in order -- maybe not for repeat offenses in the same event, but if found repeating at some multiple of events.

I agree with the active "tracking" system using RF. Something like IR would be good, but it would be too easy to just cover up with your hand or gel or something. Every competitor gets a transmitter and a receiver zip tied onto the front and back of the bike. If you are within too close contact for more than 20 seconds, then you get a penalty.

The problem is that RF doesn't distinguish between side by side and front to back, meaning there could be no mor e staggering. But that would probably be for the best.

RFID technology is getting cheaper and cheaper. Eventually, this kind of system would really be the best way...

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Active RFID can be read within millimeters and hundreds of yards away. Therefore, you could tell who is in front and who is behind when someone is drafting. The technology has been here and is being used in numerous industries. The chips record the info, not passive mats or readers. That's what differentiates them from passive. They record info and are activated any time they are around another chip.
When an athlete crosses the finish line, all historic info is downloaded from the active chip to the scanner.
Only barrier right now is the cost of the chip. Just need it to come down to the $35 mark like the passive chips are.

How would you solve left/right problems?

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Great solution. It should be 3miles run for the first... 6miles for the second. Could use this also for other distances... 2mi/4mi for half iron distance. 1mi/2mi for "international & sprints."

The draft marshals should start using digital cameras/videos. So when they make a call, they've got the proof. We all know that a single photo doesn't always show if someone is drafting. Maybe they could do a 2-4 photo sequence to show forward progress (or lack of if they're drafting).

I quite like the first two parts of option 1, not too big on the suspension, and 2 or 4 miles seems like a lot, maybe 1 and 2. How about:

Strike 1 - Extra mile.

Strike 2 - Extra 2 miles and lose eligibility to qualify.

Strike 3 - DQ on the spot (can not complete the race, wait for SAG to take you back).

And don't hide the penalty miles behind transition or something - put it right out in front of the spectators, about a 400m loop, so the drafters have to run by everybody several times. Leave the paintballing to the spectators. One of my regular 1/2 IM courses has the 800m penalty (2 laps on the track) but it's off behind the school, so the penalty gets run off in private. At this race, it's strike 2 and your out, but I like the three strike variation better.

[reply]Only barrier right now is the cost of the chip. Just need it to come down to the $35 mark like the passive chips are.[/reply]

Well, they could start with the pros. Would only need about 100 chips, even in Kona. And, if WTC got them they could be made available to every IM race, making the cost somewhat less prohibitive. They could be scanned after T2 so penalties would be known before the end of the race. Then, it oculd be expanded to age groupers. To be eligible for Kona slots an age-grouper must have the chip on the bike.

I don't think anyone cares if the 13-17 hour folks are "drafting". How much could it be saving them time wise at those speeds?

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

If you've got first hand knowledge of Active RFIDs, then I apologize; I just know what little I've read on the web. But I'm wondering if it's a common misconception about its capabilities, like GPS. Even though GPS is highly accurate for it's initial design purposes (locating troops, and targeting bombs to their target), it's still is too inaccurate to measure the distance between two bikes - it might say there was drafting when two bikes were legal, and not say there was even though one bike was in the zone.

Do you know how two RFIDs tell the distance between them? If it's something like IR, don't you need an unobstructed line-of-sight contact? If so, then where would the sensors need to get mounted so that it would be able to detect bikes in a 360 degree location? And will a shielded bag block sensing for active tags, like are done for passive tags?

Then you get into the situations where being too close is legally ok - exiting and entering transition, arould aid stations and accidents, when there's lots of vehicles and bikes have to slow down/bunch up for safety. All though would have to get figured into there somehow.

Francois, it's a great idea to make people feel real pain over position violations as for the avg 12 hr athlete, a 2-5 min time penalty makes not much diff in their overall time. I mean if you are gonna run close to 5 hrs then why not rest up for 5 or 10 mins on the bike anyway...it is gonna be a long day no matter what.

BUT...adding a more staunch penalty would not fix the problem that I had at IMFLA a few years ago...getting caught (and I mean caught and not able to move off at risk of veering into traffic) behind huge packs and being the one who gets the call. I am not a stellar cyclist and can not just ride to the front but in 15 years of racing have never drafted on purpose and I have done consistent 10-11 hr IMs so I am not a slouch. I am bothered when I see athletes cheating but I am really racing for myself and nobody else--let 'em cheat if it makes their day--but what gets me is to get a call when I have no intention of drating and know the rules too. For this reason I am not racing the big races these days. I get just as much out of doing Duke Blue Devil, etc.

chip