USATF Chip Rule Hellp: Robbed of Victory

That doesn't make any sense. Why should a person who either won or came in second (depending on what system you want to use) not belong at the line? Why would the first person who crossed the finish line be slowing people down by starting up front?

Dipshit. If someone expects to be running 21 minutes, they should seed themselves on the line, ahead of people running up to 6 minutes faster. What, do you think a road race starting line is 800 meters wide?? Retard.

So who should have started in front then? Or should everyone have started way behind the line? I mean, if the OP shouldn't have been on the line, then no one else should have either.

Good god you are f***ing stupid.

How many people do you think can fit across the line? More than 6? Look at the results. The OP wasn't slowing anyone down.

All I know is that I race those who are around me and it pi55ed me off when a race put some guy ahead of me in the results based on his chip time. He wasn't even in my age group.

ABSOLUTELY NO AWARDS SHOULD EVER BE GIVEN BASED ON CHIP TIME. AWARDS SHOULD ALWAYS BE GIVEN BY THE PLACE YOU FINISHED IN THE RACE REGARDLESS OF HOW OLD YOU ARE!!!

Bum wrote:

In road races, the etiquette is to self-seed. That means that the 21 minute 5k-ers should GET THE HELL OFF THE START LINE. The person who started 13 seconds back was probably in the right spot, while you were up front, slowing people down.

I don't feel one bit sorry for you. If you want to win, run faster. And get your ass back where it belongs.

Did you actually take a look at the results?

Did you take a note of the times run by the first 5 or 10 finishers?

Exactly how far back should a 21 minute 5k runner have started in that particular race?

Keep up the pressure on them and things will change.

$250 diff btwn 1st and 2nd for a 5k !

think im running in the wrong region of the country...

a nice payday to get screwed out of.

yes it is up to the RD to determine to use either gun time or chip time - unless it an official USATF championship race then USATF rules gun times will be used for all cash and prize awards.

most of the big races will tell you to self seed and that gun times will be used for overall awards and chip for age groups this 5k only had 600 and really no depth. the other runner finished a couple places back overall but took 12 seconds to cross the start line? she had to self seed behind quite a few freaking slow runners - only the top 25 broke 24:30 !

also the winner was 17? she shouldnt be taking cash anyways which is maybe why he didnt stick around (maybe she took the cash and bolted before the awards presentation!) if not they should have giving you the top prize

anywho's I seen in the past where times were screwed up and the timing company didnt hand out prizes without trying to resolve the issue using a backup system and/or photos to verify where someone finished relative to other runners. here you all you needed was a photo showing the other runner lined up next to you at the start

with cash on the line for overall the timing company should have someone manually recording the top finishers as a backup plan.

a journalist wrote:

You need to understand how chips work (and I am not an engineer so someone else can probably explain all the deficiencies in chip systems better).

Why do they have two mats at the finish?

Why are the two mats 3 to 4 feet -- sometimes 6 feet -- apart?

Was there rebar in the street beneath the finish?

Did they have chips on both feet?

There are many reasons why chips don't work, or fail to register, and why they often read the chip up to 2-3 feet BEFORE the mat and possibly several feet behind one of the mats.

Thankfully new technology is coming that is much, much better.

Mats can read chips from as far as ~1m away. They will respond to the mats as quickly as 10 times per second. Generally, you collect all the responses and use software to filter out all but the LAST response from the chip at the start mat (and any split mats) and the FIRST response from the finish mat. This means your chip time *could* based on ~2m shorter than the race distance as measured by wheel. (Keep in mind that your foot with the chip on it could be 18" away from your chest depending on your stride and body position.)

HOWEVER, while the chip *can* be read as far as 1m away, this is not always true. The orientation of the chip in relation to the mat matters. (AFAIK, this is because the chip is powered by a magnetic field emitted by the mat. The induction loop in the chip charges a capacitor which powers the transmitter when discharged.) If the chip is at an angle to the mat, the effective range is reduced because the inductor won't produce as much power. This is why you have a backup mat.

With a backup mat, there's a very good probability that the chip will be <20 cm to the mat at some point near the finish line, close enough to charge it no matter which way it's facing. When you add the body position, transmission range, and backup mat uncertainties, the chip time is accurate to ~5m or 2s for even a slow runner (33 min 5k).

Also, some chips are defective. While a good RD checks all chips prior to issue, runners are likely to let their dog or child chew on the thing, submerge it in mud, or bash it against a rock. This is why elites wear two chips, because if real prize money or an Olympic berth is at stake you don't want it all resting on a mass produced piece of electronics that cost <$1 to make.

Scott, of course you're a much better journalist than I am (ha, ha, I crack myself up).

So, I'll try again.

If you're claiming chip timing is inerrant, you are positively wrong.

It frequently makes errors - more precisely, does not read - and if you time races, like I do, or host national championships like I have (four in five years), then you know you need at least one backup system and often two.

The current technology is unreliable.

I'll try to be both simple and give a full explanation at the same time, while accounting for my non-technical background.

Chip timing requires proper positioning of the chip as it rapidly moves through the magnetic field at the finish line.

The chip - which contains a transponder and an electronic coil - does (theoretically) send a signal when it arrives within the magnetic field created by the mat (or mats).

The mats have two antennas, one creating the magnetic field and one to detect the signal from the chip and collect the ID number. If one fouls up, the system is fouled up.

What can go wrong? Plenty.

* Disruption or surge in the energy supply to the mat.

* An inactive chip.

* Rebar in the street, or metal in the finish line structures, interfering with the magnetic field.

* Foot is too high off the ground when passing the mat.

* Etc.

Of course, select timing, cameras and even pulling tags can resolve missed chips.

How many people does an average race miss? How often does the backup mat 6 feet beyond the finish catch the time instead of the main mat? How often does the chip only trigger when it first enters the magnetic field, say 3 feet in front of the finish line?

You may not realize, but the timing companies are always making corrections/additions that go unnoticed to runners and even astute members of the media such as yourself.

The error rate for a typical chip timing system is in the 1-7 percent range. The new D-tags have a higher error rate, and can exceed 10 percent, but hey, they're cheap!

It's an imperfect system, run by imperfect people, in an imperfect world. But for so long, it's all we had.

That you didn't know this just means you weren't paying proper attention.

looks like you were ahead of her at this point in the race..

if this is near the finish

and she did finish after #1918 then she would be about 10 seconds behind you.

Looks like this pic of you finish has her behind you

surprised they didn't roll down the money anyways..

and looking at this pic that i think is from early in the race... the girl behind her in the green shirt is #1252

who finished 75th in 27:58 so she might have well indeed started way back and worked her way up...

Bear of Bad News wrote:

Maybe they should introduce a similar idea to chip timing in other sports. I mean, why should a running back who starts the play 7 yards in the backfield have to get the whole way to the goal line just like a wide receiver who starts right on the line? They can do it just like this guy's road race and decide after the fact whether or not the player actually crossed his personal imaginary goal before he was tackled. That wouldn't take away from the game, would it?

Well, look at the Winter Olympics. The vast majority of the events the timing system is exactly like chip timing. It's not logistically possible to race anything but the clock. Tour de France, it's overall time plus penalties, so you have no idea what the guy next to you is doing overall but you reel them in anyway (or maybe not). Your particular example is totally bogus because a score in football has nothing to do with how fast the person advances down the field. At least try to contain your straw men to those that actually have something to do with racing.

This has nothing to do with chip timing directly anyway. We've had wave starts for years before chip timing, and often the rule of the day was unseeded runners who registered late were in the last wave. Your time was adjusted based on the wave you were in and your award was presented based on TIME. Seeding was used to mitigate overall, but it wasn't perfect. Bloomsday had 4 different starts and 8 different start times. They did a great job seeding bu you had no idea who you were racing when you were out there and a sub-seed could have overtaken an overall or a seeded masters. The point is the race director had to make a decision how to handle the issue IN ADVANCE.

If you noticed my other posts you should have ascertained I'm really not that big a fan of chip timing. My point is when it's deployed for timing race directors are inclined in many cases to use it as the end and all and runners that are expecting to win money or other awards need to make sure they understand that or NOT REGISTER. Whining after the fact just isn't going to do a damn bit of good and trying invoke a USATF rule is a total waste of time 90% of the time.

I also pointed out there many cases where party at the other end of the timing lottery feels just as aggrieved as the "winner". Since that argument is considered valid by many race directors also you can't simply say "well the first person across the line is more of a stud-muffin". You may want to reconsider that attitude for races that offer an early start for walkers. No rule that they walk.

I hear from event organizers all the time that want chip timing because it's "better" but there's absolutely no consideration for what that means. Looking through the race site and posts in this case I'll be willing to bet at this point the RD said "do everything by chip time because it's more accurate" without even a moments thought to what that meant. This is exactly why I feel people that may finish "in the money" need to understand the rules before they register. Yes, one should be able to assume that the world is rosy but this is the exact example it's not.

After the fact it's really not fair to say the person that "finished" 2nd was a cheater or did anything wrong in their eye, so the RD certainly isn't going to make a change in plan at that point. Also the fact is the RD makes the rules and if you don't like them tough titties, which goes back to my point about knowing them before the gun.

Dear employee numero uno,

Learn to fckng write using the English language. You work for a 'news' website for chrissakes, let alone that Cornell thingy, oh yea, diploma, hanging on your wall.

Oh, and dude who started the thread: you ran the same time as a girl. You don't deserve the prize money anyway. Quit your whining.