The 12m rule has been beaten to death, but Range Ranger and it’s amazing tech has added another dimension to the debate
I watched the Cairns bike yesterday. I thought the broadcast was great. Cameras showed a lot. I feel the guys tried to stay the legal distance back. It was cool seeing the Race Ranger lights in action. It was great to see the refs calling penalties. Chapeau!
But I realized that as great as Race Ranger is, specifically for IM, it’s a draft optimization tool. It allows a racer to sit 11m behind a wheel and take advantage of a huge draft all legally. You used to have to sit back a bit more just to stay safe. No longer.
At 20m it would be an draft prevention/enforcement tool. At 12m, it’s a draft optimization tool.
One one hand Joe just needs to learn to swim. On the other, to chase that draft optimized pack must have been brutal.
Come on IM, make the pro series 20m.
Enforcement, or lack of (PTO) is a whole other conversation.
I got to watch this first hand as the male pros flew past me in Boulder last weekend. Far back of Foley, a four of 4 or 5 were in pursuit. The flashing lights certainly helped them keep find a 12m limit.
My only problem with a 20m is the ability to pass a a big group and not slot in somewhere. When one gets to the speed that the pros are going and how evenly matched they are, fairly passing a group of 4 or more would be extremely difficult.
I agree that 20m would be a better number to prevent drafting, but 12m might be a better distance for pro racing.
Rule changes are really slow in any governing body.
I said from the beginning that race ranger was going to help people “draft†no matter what the legal distance is (12m or 20m). I personally struggle to know exactly what 12m looks like and typically error on the side of caution and ride at say 15m. Give me race ranger, and I’m now more comfortable finding where those limits are.
Not saying race ranger is bad as I think there are more pro’s than con’s with the system.
Edit: If we want IM to bring in the 20m draft rule, then we are going to have to talk about reducing entries. If it’s just a pro rule, that’s a little easier to do. For AG’ers, that’s a little bit of a bigger problem.
it’s funny to me that for 40 years most have been asking for some sort of way to measure the distance between riders. There was a very crude way in the long ago of using cones or road markings…But for the last 25 or so with the advent of gps, it was thought that was the holy grail and a few attempts had limited results, but now we have RR. And it is pretty close to perfect, but now the complaint is that it is allowing riders to actually ride within the rules?? And getting whatever advantage that provides??
Well BREAKING NEWS here, yes there is an advantage to riding with a 12/20meter group, even if there is no draft effect(due to side winds or other factors). There has been and is an advantage to being near anyone in triathlon, in all 3 sports. And there is a massive draft effect int he swim, but not for the leader of course, so that person is always screwed. There is a pretty good draft effect in the run, certainly a great pacing one to sit on a group or single runner. And there is a very small draft effect sometimes on the bike at 12/20m, but certainly a pacing advantage regardless…
This is the sport of triathlon, it was never meant to be completely draft free and now we have a mechanical way to enforce the distance between riders. This should be celebrated and not now picked apart. The 20 meter rule creates its own set of problems in the race, mostly making it almost impossible to pass 6 to 15 riders without some sort of infraction. We have seen many riders fall afoul of this and it just hampers the actual racing that makes it exciting for the fans and racers. 12m makes it easier for riders to move around and make moves, but even there the learning curve is still being tested by the larger groups.
I think it is time we get off the notion that there is no drafting in triathlon, and use the new technology to keep the races fluid and exciting. Still need a human to make the calls because intent still needs to be decided and I do believe there are gray areas where that person can keep the race fair, while still keeping the integrity of the ride intact…
Your concern/question/argument is baed on the faulty premise that riding at 12.1 meters equals drafting. It does not.
By definition, “drafting” means remaining within the draft zone for longer than 25 seconds. The “draft zone” is 12 meters long, that’s it. Thus, anything more than that for any length of time by definition is NOT drafting.
Whether the “draft zone” should equal 12 meters or 20 meters is a different question.
I’d rather they go to a time-based gap system (ex. 2sec.). Everyone has a watch/head unit, and you can use any mark on the road (cone, road sign, crack, etc.) to judge. For remote monitoring, there is no issue with foreshortening on video feeds. Also, the time system allows closer spacing going up climbs (where the slower speeds reduce the draft effect) and mandate greater spacing on fast descents.
I’d rather they go to a time-based gap system (ex. 2sec.). Everyone has a watch/head unit, and you can use any mark on the road (cone, road sign, crack, etc.) to judge. For remote monitoring, there is no issue with foreshortening on video feeds. Also, the time system allows closer spacing going up climbs (where the slower speeds reduce the draft effect) and mandate greater spacing on fast descents.
Would time differential work the way you want when athletes are climbing into a strong headwind? It’s airspeed that influences drag while ground speed influences the time differential in regards to an athlete’s position. Strong headwind on a climb give one a high wind speed while the climb as well as the headwind produce a low ground speed and bigger time gap for a given separation. At least that’s how my old brain looks at it.
I’d rather they go to a time-based gap system (ex. 2sec.). Everyone has a watch/head unit, and you can use any mark on the road (cone, road sign, crack, etc.) to judge. For remote monitoring, there is no issue with foreshortening on video feeds. Also, the time system allows closer spacing going up climbs (where the slower speeds reduce the draft effect) and mandate greater spacing on fast descents.
Would time differential work the way you want when athletes are climbing into a strong headwind? It’s airspeed that influences drag while ground speed influences the time differential in regards to an athlete’s position. Strong headwind on a climb give one a high wind speed while the climb as well as the headwind produce a low ground speed and bigger time gap for a given separation. At least that’s how my old brain looks at it.
No simple system is going to account for wind conditions (the distance-based one doesn’t either). The time-based system has the advantages of accounting for ground speed changes, and generally being easier to measure. It also eliminated the accordion/bunching problems as riders start a hill and have to slow way down to maintain gaps.
To your point, the time-based system will provide more “legal” drafting advantage climbing into a headwind (but less with a tailwind) than distance-based.
Thought there should have been way more penalties at T100 San Francisco but the podcast Van Riel & Smith did was thoughtful. It’s very hard to not slip into draft zones going uphill/downhill/cornering/etc. Smith was mad that people didn’t get called for slotting in but thought referees showed good common sense not calling penalties where it was unavoidable.
I don’t think IM refereeing is consistent & I think the penalties basically take you out of the race. Race Ranger lets riders know what is going on but refs still have to see the violation & call it. So they stick with the blue card (5min) because they don’t want people to be tempted to draft until they’re caught. It would be good if they called more frequent penalties & maybe if you could serve them on the bike instead of calling it the second someone enters a draft zone & then they get 5min & their race is over.
Interesting topic because I don’t like drafting but I think the penalties are tough on pros who need to piece together a living.
So, would you prefer IMs inconsistent drafting enforcement or PTO’s complete lack of it?
Interesting that so many people heralded the PTO as pioneers for their use of Race Ranger and condemned IM for not doing more to fix drafting. Yet the PTO has never had a drafting penalty called in any of their races and IM is actively using RR to assist with drafting enforcement. Yet even then somehow IM is still taking more grief for drafting than PTO.
Yet even then somehow IM is still taking more grief for drafting than PTO. //
You make a valid point, but I think people may be thinking that if you fudge in PTO you might be at 18/19 meters, and if you hold the line in IM it is 12m. SO in a practical sense the PTO does keep the riders further apart, not withstanding the lack of calls…
While I do see your point I think it can more likely be attributed to people just love to fling hate at IM. I suspect if IM extended their draft zone to 20m people would crucify them for not solving slotting in. Then they would bring up the moto drafting. Then it would be women pros getting screwed bc the line of male pros is a mile long at 20m so they would be ridiculed till they moved the women’s start time, then they’d get grief for the AG start moving back and BOP AG finishing in the hottest part of the day… and on and on and on cycle would go.
To mingle this up a bit, the one race that Sam Long struggled on, was the one that was essentially draft pack legal the entire race. Far more than the prior T100s. Yes, I know the hills and turns etc, but with the average speed of 40km/h or more there’s plenty of draft advantage those front racers could have received putting extra strain on the already rough course.
That said, I agree with you that the race ranger just allows optimization of drafting. If IM could sort it out, all RR enforced races should be 20m as you say.
That said, using RR as a draft zone calibration tool has obvious dangers if the officials are calling a clean race as happened in Cairns.
To mingle this up a bit, the one race that Sam Long struggled on, was the one that was essentially draft pack legal the entire race. Far more than the prior T100s. Yes, I know the hills and turns etc, but with the average speed of 40km/h or more there’s plenty of draft advantage those front racers could have received putting extra strain on the already rough course.
That said, I agree with you that the race ranger just allows optimization of drafting. If IM could sort it out, all RR enforced races should be 20m as you say.
That said, using RR as a draft zone calibration tool has obvious dangers if the officials are calling a clean race as happened in Cairns.
The rule is the rule. I don’t see how one can blame athletes or RR for “optimizing” if it keeps them within the allowed limits. The reality is that before RR, the fair / conservative athletes were indeed probably further away than the rule allowed but, conversely, (many) others were playing with fire. At least it puts everyone on a level playing field.
Agree, all pro races with RR should be 20m.
I wish it would be the case for AG but not practical; the 12m/no slotting in rule is already a struggle if not impossible on some courses.
Yeah I walked in a circle around this because I think there should be more penalties but that the penalties should be shorter in duration & be allowed to take on the run. I think I’d take IM’s inconsistencies over PTO’s lack of penalties at this point. I just appreciated the sentiments PTO athletes had about using common sense where applicable. I don’t want to see athletes tossed for small infractions. But 0 penalties in a race with a lot of drafting/slotting in isn’t it. There needs to be some consistency in how to use Race Ranger.
Idk if I totally buy that Race Ranger allows all athletes to better draft (& that that’s a bad thing). That’s a two way argument imo. Strong riders could have been pushing the drafting boundaries to get themselves back into races. The Sam Long example works both ways. In Miami & in Singapore, he was able to ride to the front of the race (yes, 20m) but he also didn’t drag anyone up with him. Strong riders previously brought more people to the front with them. That tells me Race Ranger is doing something. The opposite happened in San Francisco, where there was more drafting & nobody was able to get away. Skipper couldn’t get to the front of Cairns. Maybe some of that is legal 12m drafting. Maybe he has drafted more in the past to bridge up or just didn’t have the power on the day. He talked about recent struggles in his latest YouTube video. I don’t think he’s in peak form. You also had a winner who put ~6min into everyone in the last 1/3 of the bike leg. Skipper bridged up to everyone else. Maybe someone was just better to be able to do that.
Yeah I walked in a circle around this because I think there should be more penalties but that the penalties should be shorter in duration & be allowed to take on the run. I think I’d take IM’s inconsistencies over PTO’s lack of penalties at this point. I just appreciated the sentiments PTO athletes had about using common sense where applicable. I don’t want to see athletes tossed for small infractions. But 0 penalties in a race with a lot of drafting/slotting in isn’t it. There needs to be some consistency in how to use Race Ranger.
Skipper couldn’t get to the front of Cairns. Maybe some of that is legal 12m drafting. Maybe he has drafted more in the past to bridge up or just didn’t have the power on the day. He talked about recent struggles in his latest YouTube video. I don’t think he’s in peak form. You also had a winner who put ~6min into everyone in the last 1/3 of the bike leg. Skipper bridged up to everyone else. Maybe someone was just better to be able to do that.I have read somewhere that the PTO have said drafting penalties (if ever they are given) will be 3 minutes, not 5.
On Skipper in Cairns, he couldn’t catch Burton because the latter was riding so fast! As you say. And despite a hard bike, Burton ran it home ahead of Currie who had a run true to form (just wasn’t as fast as his 2:37 aberration last year here). Skipper, in good conditions, ran sub-par. But he had had a hard hard bike, finally bridging to the rest (bar Burton) with 10km to go. https://stats.protriathletes.org/race/im-cairns/2024/results https://www.trirating.com/ironman-cairns-2024-analyzing-results/
I agree that I prefer IMs application over PTOs complete lack of penalties but also agree that IM has some opportunity to improve. 5 minutes for a 70.3 is a death sentence and doesn’t seem proportional to the crime. I’d like to see that adjusted also agree that the ref should continued to have discretion for those common sense moments (steep up hills, 180 turns, first kms out of t1 , etc).
The catalyst for those further changes will be people actually getting penalties and creating debate about how they are applied. Refs in all other majors sports have their calls wildly scrutinized both internally and by the general public. That leads to better application and amendment of the rules.
Say Marc Dubrick and Sam Long are doing a HIM tri battle. Marc comes out of the water 3min before Sam. In order to close the gap, Sam needs to put 30extra watts for the duration of the HIM to catch him. Is that fair ? I’d say so.
Let’s say Marc is now working with 3 guys at 12m. Sam now needs to put an extra 60watts to catch them. Is that fair ? I’d say not.
At the speeds the guys are going now, 12m is a big draft benefit. RR has helped optimize the use of thet 12m benefit.
I am 1000% for RR
I think they should do a proper assessment of what a fair draft distance is. Hint, I don’t think it’s 12m
They should program RR to that fair distance
They can do tweaks to RR such as detect decelerations/low speed and give some slack in situations like that
They should rely way more on RR and call all penalties.
12m is a big draft benefit. RR has helped optimize the use of that 12m benefit.
I am 1000% for RR
I think they should do a proper assessment of what a fair draft distance is. Hint, I don’t think it’s 12m
They should program RR to that fair distance
They can do tweaks to RR such as detect decelerations/low speed and give some slack in situations like that
They should rely way more on RR and call all penalties.Sitting that distance back, in ‘blue’ gives >10% saving in watts. It must be better/fairer for there to be an electronic aid to help athletes not draft (stay >12m back) than leave it to athlete’s estimates (plus a margin to stay on the right side of accompanying moto refs).
If RR allows that safety (from penalty) margin to be decreased, then, as you say, let’s go for 15m, for Pros only.
I think you ascribe greater capabilities to what is in scope for RR than is possible/practical.
Not sure what you mean by ‘rely way more’ but if you mean every red flashing should result in either a pass(in time) or a penalty, then that’s far too red and white for me. When riders are in ‘steady state’ riding along a straight road that’d be fine, but as soon as we have turns and 180s and significant dips in a rolling road or significant climbs, refs need to exert human common sense. Let’s bear in mind in all those circumstances, the draft advantage is transitory and minimal: the follower is often disadvantaged because they are having to brake and accelerate
I still don’t get the cutting in thing and RR makes the spatial separation clear.
Riders A, B and C riding along, with B and C not in draft zones (so B is more than 12m behind A). Let’s assume they are all in RR blue (12m-14m for IM races).C overtakes B. Once their wheel is ahead, they are not in A draft zone (A’s RR still shows blue: neither B nor C are <12m) so no obligation to go on and pass A.The obligation is on B to drop back out of C’s draft zone within time allowed.Riders A, C and B riding along.
Could someone explain, in this simple scenario, why C merits a penalty? If Rider B is Smith, will he be shouting at Mignon ‘do not cut in’? “Monsieur, vous ne comprenez pas!”