I’ve been thinking about the whole GTG vs. USAT rules issue. It seems that GTG wants to keep IM races “real-time” (no finding out after the race that you were penalized 4 minutes, and lost your podium spot), while USAT is looking for safety (don’t pull people off the road in the middle of the race) and fairness (penalizing all 20 people in a draft pack, not just pulling over one person). So, here’s my solution…
Give the motorcycle officals PDAs while out on the course. When they catch a person (or 20 people) drafting, they do not have to pull anyone over, they just enter their race number(s) into the PDA. This info is wi-fi’d directly back to the timing mat computer system. Now, when each athlete completes the bike leg, and runs over the timing mat, a penalty-free athlete will hear the usual happy little chirp, and can continue on to T-2. An athlete who has been penalized for drafting hears an ugly-ass BZZZZZ, and must head to the sin bin. While in the bin, officials have 4 minutes to check the database and determine whether the athlete must serve 4 minutes, 8 minutes, or is DQ’d.
I know, a ton of problems and technology that would need to be worked out. You would need to make sure that athletes cross the end timing mat one at a time, to distinguish the different sounds. What about non-draft penalties? There would need to be a way to count those, and BZZZZ only someone who has three. What if someone gets their third penalty on the run? Officials on the run course would need PDA access to that database, so they could see if the penalty they give is the third one. It also does not solves USAT’s desire for an appeal process post-race.
So, not the perfect solution, but might it be a potential solution, with amendments and technology?
Why not give the official a megaphone and yell out “Drafting Penalty - competitor 254”? That would mean the official could notify the entire pack that they had drafting penalties without pulling them all over.
Seams much simpler to me and achieve the same goal.
There is no way the stand downs work to really enforce drafting. It is not a practical nor fair solution when they need to give out more than one at a time.
I like the megaphonbe idea, but why not give the ref a BB gun and he can shoot out the offenders rear tire. It should take atleast 4 minutes to change a tire.
I was assuming that, after on-site notification, the athlete gets the 4 minutes tacked onto her/his time a la USAT. The difference is that the athlete is informed at the time, so knows that 4 mintues will be added and can plan accordingly. One doesn’t need a bullhorn either, just a yell and a waive of a yellow card or something similar so the athlete gets both audible and visual noticfication.
Again, GTG’s current stand-down process is: Disruptive - on a crowded course I cannot imagine a marshall be able to actually get into the mix enough to pull many people over **Impractical **with pack drafting - this is at least as prevalent/visible as one person behind another, and definitely more demoralizing to the other racers’ experience Unfair - when a ref stands down more than one person at a time the second person processed has to wait for the marshall to locate, communicate, collect info and then move to the next guy waiting. This happened to me at IMLP and it took 33 seonds to get to me. The second person has a harsher penalty than the first. While I had already Q’d for Kona, there are definitely people who miss qualifying by that “2nd person in line” time penalty. So that experience runs counter to the idea that the stand-down is more fair for some one trying to qualify because it gives them information. Because of that, the standdown process hurts the people who the new rule is trying to help. Stopping 4 minutes in the “sin bin” is actually a welcome break, if you have to take it. You get to take off your shoes and helmet at a leisurely pace and plan for a more efficient transition, use the bathroom, have some water, stretch and and get your legs transitioned into running mode. I would say that can actually reduce your time by several mintues, if not many minutes, on the run. Hence the event has a different profile for those penalized and those not. TV coverage doesn’t matter - oops, sorry to burst anyone’s bubble, but there is such limited TV coverage in the sport that the need for a time equalizer to show the winner is not a factor. The sport has grown tremendously faster than TV coverage, which tells you it is a participation sport and not a spectator sport. Few people watches this on TV and that won’t change. So worry about the very infrequent occurance in IM evets where the first over the line is not the winner isn’t a factor for the TV “problem”. (see Kona 2004).
Great comments, reggiedog. The GTG system certainly is disruptive and unfair. Unfortunately, I believe that GTG simply will not back down on their demand that a “real-time” race occur. It is not just the winner who wants to cross first, it is every person who legally beat anyone else in front of them on the race course. So, if a sin bin is a necessary evil, how do you make that work? If you are not going to pull people over to make a physical slash on their number, it seems the timing chip system is the only other way to identify individual racers.
Great comments, reggiedog. The GTG system certainly is disruptive and unfair. Unfortunately, I believe that GTG simply will not back down on their demand that a “real-time” race occur. It is not just the winner who wants to cross first, it is every person who legally beat anyone else in front of them on the race course. So, if a sin bin is a necessary evil, how do you make that work? If you are not going to pull people over to make a physical slash on their number, it seems the timing chip system is the only other way to identify individual racers.
Sharon
Interesting points -
For the pros, I think that there’s no question about wanting them to cross the line in their true order. That way, there’s no confusing TV coverage, time clocks in pictures are correct, etc. So, for the pros, use standdowns/marking, followed by a penalty box, extra laps, or whatever. Put the most experienced referees up with the pros.
As for the age groupers, I’d say having them cross in true order is just a nice-to-have, but we can live without it. With all the edits that happen, it wouldn’t affect the 5 minutes of age grouper TV coverage that is put together in a collage. Write the numbers down without standdown, giving a chance for post-race review, and add time on to the final results. I’d bet that many are not surprised when they find a penalty posted at the end of the race. The only down side I see is that the finisher picture may have a time 4 minutes faster than the official time, but most won’t complain about that!
What you describe for age-groupers is exactly the current USAT rules. However, this is also exactly why the GTG broke away from USAT – they will not back down on this. I’m trying to come up with a solution that will work for both USAT AND GTG…
How 'bout this to make a drafting penalty “hurt” –
Draft marshals with PDAs wifi-ing in the race numbers of offenders. Megaphone is a nice touch, but no one gets pulled over.
Numbers get “slashed” as competitors EXIT T2. No “sin-bin rest stop”. The time penalty is served at the LAST aid station on the run. Anyone coming in with a slash pays the price less than two miles from the finish.
A little bit mean – yes! But the real intent is to keep the bike course moving, and move the penalty assessment to the part of the course where it’s safer to stop people.
Even meaner would be to let them get in sight of the finish line and the crowds before they are stopped so they can be jeered for cheating whilst they serve their penalty (whether its in the sin bin or an extra run loop) - or would that be classed as cruel and unusual punishment ?