Race results

Last post 08-12-2008, 12:21 AM by bikerdude. 12 replies.
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  •  05-20-2008, 10:19 AM 4945

    Race results

    First things first: This is NOT a gripe about getting results posted on this site faster or a whine about the points system.

    It's just a suggestion.

    Is contracting with a company like milliseconds  an option? Is there a way to require event promoters to get better, more accurate results?

    I see the Bear Lake results have been posted in a quick manner to the USAC website, but I see a load of errors. Including the dropping of one second-place finisher to 13th and the 13th place finisher bumped up to 2nd. Not to metion the dozens of DNP and DNF results for people I know finished the race in the main pack.

    Heck, I was once credited with a sixth-place finish in a race I didn't even compete in.

    The electronic chip timing will save a lot of headaches for promoters, cyclists and the UCA board who volunteers its time doing things like this when it really shouldn't be the hard-labor behind individual races. Or is a system like this simply too cost prohibitive?

    Maybe an item for next year's by-laws?


    I ride, I write.
  •  05-20-2008, 1:43 PM 4946 in reply to 4945

    Re: Race results

    I agree. It seems there is a real inconsistency in the way that anything is done. That is to be expected with each race being run by a different organizer, but i thought there was a protocol for posting results? It seems that it is very difficult to get results in any kind of timely manner. Am i supposed to get them here or at the promoters site or at the USAC site? Admittedly, i have things i need to get to after a race and usually can't wait around for a couple hours after the race to see official results. I understand what a task this must be with the amount of categories and riders we currently have racing in Utah right now and it is only getting bigger, but it would be nice to be able to see results within a few days.  I too have seen guys get placing that weren't there and DNF's for people that finished in the pack.  Apparently there is a battle going on over who is responsible for the posting of results. What kind of cost does a timing chip add to the entry fee of a race?  Racing most weekends, it is nice that most races are in the $25 to $35 range, but accurate and timely results would be cool too.

    With this being said, i am very grateful for what we have here in Utah. I was talking to a friend who is here for a few days and said there is no road race scene whatsoever in his neck of the woods. To be able to race 4 times a week if you want to is pretty nice. Thanks promoters and see this post as a suggestion to make racing in Utah even better.

     

  •  05-20-2008, 1:51 PM 4947 in reply to 4946

    Re: Race results

    Bear Lake did a pretty good job, IMO, of getting results out and posted. They are even on the USA Cycling results list which is nice.

    My biggest concern is seeing a lot of DNP, DNF and results like that next to people I know finished the race because I was with them the entire 52 miles.

    Again, I'm not complaining about the UCA directly. And I have no idea how much it costs to contract a race out to milliseconds. But if races with 2,000 competitors can do it, why not for a bike race with 500? The camera can sort out the photofinishes, and leave the computer to record and post times and places for the vast majority of competitors?

    Of course, if using a system like this proves cost prohibitive -- i.e. another $5 per person per race -- then it might not be worth it. 


    I ride, I write.
  •  05-20-2008, 3:01 PM 4951 in reply to 4947

    Re: Race results

    Maybe the problem this weekend was the little dinky numbers they were using.  They had to be less than half the size of a standard number.  Usually I think they are to big, especially for my wife, but these were very small.  Plus they had the sun shade up on the trailer and I think that would have blocked the camera view of any rider on the very inside lane at the finish. 

    Sports-Am tried a chip solution at East Canyon in 07.  You could contact James at Sports Am and as for feedback on that.  I don't think it worked very well.  It seemed like it could only handle one rider at a time so I don' t think a sprint finish with 5 or 6 guys crossing the line side by side would work very well.  The results posted at Bear Lake this year were by far much better than last year.  I think they had a major malfunction with the camera last year that left it pretty much useless. 

    I think it would be a good idea if a rider could protest a DNF or DNP for a day or two after the event.  Especially if they have the support of thier club president.  I don't think there is any magic solution out there, other than uphill finishes to spread the pack out.
    James

     

  •  05-20-2008, 3:17 PM 4952 in reply to 4951

    Re: Race results

    that's kind of what I wondered -- I had no idea if the chips would be effective in the inevitable group sprints.

    I ride, I write.
  •  05-20-2008, 5:38 PM 4953 in reply to 4952

    Re: Race results

    I just think this is hilarious and since we're on the subject; congrats UNKNOWN RIDER, 4th place in the masters 35+ men's!  He even finished the state crit championships twice! 
  •  05-20-2008, 6:20 PM 4954 in reply to 4952

    Re: Race results

    Results are always challenging - especially as packs continue to grow.  I think we're seeing improvements over last year, but few systems that promoters are willing to fork out the cash for around here are fool proof.

    Chips will work, but they are pricy.  Using them will probably add about $10-$20 to an entry fee, plus the risk of loosing a $75 piece of equpment that you would be responsible for. 

    No one want higher fees - no one wants added risk - but it's the price of accurate results.  The ideal system has chips, backup cameras, and a competant crew (not officials) processing data (not to mention riders wearing their numbers correctly).  This would be overkill in some of events around here, but it would benefit quite a few that have had issue in the past (including an event I recently promoted).

    Just a note that (regarding the events) the UCA governs:
    1.  the UCA calendar
    2.  publishing results received from promoters to post on the UCA site.
    Any issue with results order/content/location etc. is all on the promoter - the UCA has nothing to do with it.

    I think our best tool as riders are the UCA bylaws.  Lets face it, races that have had (scoring) problems in the past continue to grow because they have good courses and are UCA events.  The race calendar is completely packed with events so I think we as the consumers should be able to reward the well run events.  Not really the time to get into it now being the middle of the season, but maybe something to think about for the this falls big UCA meeting.

  •  05-21-2008, 9:51 AM 4956 in reply to 4954

    Re: Race results

    The Milliseconds type is not full proof either.  At the Boulder Stage Race a couple of years back, they didn't have the Stage 1 results ready prior to the next days stage.  Kind of makes it tough for a stage race not knowing the top GC riders.

    But what is happening isn't working either.  I think one promoter posted that its the riders responsibility for confirming their placing.  The is true to an extent.  But where does the promoters responsibility end and the riders responsibility start.  If we are talking about 1 or 2 mistakes out of 300 riders, I can see that, especially if you have 40 man field sprints. The promoter should do everything they can to get all the correct placings.  The promoter in question submitted results with 14 Unknown Riders.  Some of those Unknown Riders were in very small fields.  To me, that's not even trying. In a crit, the riders are going by every 1 to 2 minutes.  I would hope they could pick up the number one of those times around. Put together some results, submit them and say its the riders fault.  The issue might be the officials, scorers, etc, but I point the finger at the promoter, because they are ultimately in charge of the race and should demand more from their staff.  That's only one of many examples I could point out.  I also don't think many promoters go over their results prior to submitting them.  Before posting results, I would have to go back to the promoters several times concerning duplicate riders, incorrect license numbers, missing placings, dnf's, etc. 
     

    Riders do need to check results prior to leaving the race to verify their placings.  If you leave early, you are taking a gamble.  Problem here is the results are taking a ridiculous amount of time to get posted.  Personally, I don't even bother with some races because of previous experiences.  At East Canyon, I rode for 1.5 hours after the race, came back, got dressed, and the results were still not posted.  Bear Lake seems to hold the results hostage to get people to the beach. State Crit, they posted the top 10 and told everyone to get out of there asap.  Unfortunately, I personally have a maximum of about 30 minutes bs time after the race before I have to head back home.   I can't wait 1 or 2 hours to verify my placing.  No one should be expected to wait that long.  I don't care if the results are printed from the worlds fastest computer with the slickest software on the newest printer.  Go back to a piece of paper with our numbers scribbled on it.  We can verify our placing and go home.  After the numbers are verified, they can go back to inputting the numbers in the computer. 

    How is it that since cycling results have gone hi tech, we have longer waits and more errors than we did the old way?? 

    I hate to sound so critical of people that bust their butts as much as the promoters and officials do.  It's a thankless job.  But as a consumer, there seems to be a problem with the product.  It's interesting that this discussion comes up every year and its typically the Cat 4's and 5's that bring it up.  As new racers, they haven't lowered their expectations yet in regards to correct, timely results.  I'm glad we continue to get new blood to continue to give us prespective on what we are doing well and not doing well.

    I think the biggest thing needed is results posted ASAP to solve these issues on site, with as many riders present as possible. Not 2 hours later with no one around or 4 days later on online forums. 


  •  05-21-2008, 10:41 AM 4958 in reply to 4956

    Re: Race results

    If they have a camera taking pictures, could they just post the photos in question here and let the club presidents identify the UNKNOWN RIDERS within 24 hours of the race?
  •  05-21-2008, 12:39 PM 4960 in reply to 4945

    Re: Race results

    To show the Importance of cking results and sticking around abit, I had to run to SLC to pickup my parents at the airport,hence I couldn't wait, I got 4th in the 1-2 race but I only got 7th place prize.?

    I really do think the promoters to need to get results up,They are the ones we give our money to not UCA, But also the riders(me in this instance) need to ck before they leave or at least leave word with someone

     

  •  05-21-2008, 1:29 PM 4961 in reply to 4960

    Re: Race results

    in the cat 4s, the initial posted list was very wrong (places 5-12 were out of correct order or placed as "dnp").  we eventually had to go to the finish line and identify ourselves on the video while the person typed in our names and bib numbers.  okay, you would think that this would take care of it? today, i see that instead of 11th i am BACK in the "dnp" places.  what can we do as racers if we do bother to stay and make sure that results are correct, only to have them messed up again when posted on the usac page?
  •  05-21-2008, 2:45 PM 4962 in reply to 4961

    Re: Race results

    Ultimately it is the officials responsibility to get the results done correctly, that is one of the things they are being paid to do.  It is the promoter's responsibility to take those results and make them public by submitting them to the UCA or posting them on their own site.  A promoter does not have the authority to overrule an official when it comes to placings.  The promoter needs to have the necessary tools available to the officials to allow them to do their job, and if those tools aren't acceptable, then the officials need to step in and either not allow the event to happen, or work with the promoter to find solutions to the problems. My understanding is that the UCA has a very capable camera now, and really, there is no excuse for not getting quick and accurate results from it.  Uphill finishes shouldn't be the only answer.  How can the Boise Twighlight crit have placings 20 deep within minutes of the finish on a very fast, flat course that finishes in the dark?  Those responsible for the results have the necessary tools and know how to use them.
  •  08-12-2008, 12:21 AM 5204 in reply to 4962

    Re: Race results

    because they use timing chips properly in conjunction with cameras. They also have a very big budget.

     

    Just ask milliseconds... They know how to do things right and have seen them give excellent and quick results at several races recenty such as capitol reef classic and tour of park city. Not to mention other tri's and road races. We all have to work together to get the chips to work. New technology requires new thinking.

     

    DO NOT CROSS THE LINE WITH YOUR CHIP UNLESS YOU WANT THAT TIME RECORDED.

     

    MP

View as RSS news feed in XML

Powered by Community Server (Personal Edition), by Telligent Systems