Two chips were used. The rules were explained to the coaches. Yes coaches are responsible for checking runners for violations and gear. A kid from your town perhaps?
Two chips were used. The rules were explained to the coaches. Yes coaches are responsible for checking runners for violations and gear. A kid from your town perhaps?
sarah palin invitational no doubt!
Her is a solution to the "lost chip" nonsense:
USATF should issue each runner a chip that must be embedded in their torso. The chip will be registered with their USATF # and would be valid for all events. This would ensure that timing will be done based on the torso crossing the line.
We had a runner pass one of our girls in the chute and we lost the championship by one point. It would have prevented that... Still the chip and video should be used. No one should ever be DQ's for a faulty chip. Officials should still have to rip off the tag and cross check the results.
Computers malfunction...
We're pretending like it's just in one far-off state that this happens... the state of Michigan does this too. Ridiculous.
I also have to question the quality of the timing system with chips. I agree that the "foot" is not the key component.
I also don't know if the chips are sensitive enough to record the _exact_ moment that the chip crosses the mat. While many road races have been spot-on, time wise, a handful have been off--from a few seconds to more than 15. Unless there is a laser beam involved, I am skeptical.
Have enough seasoned volunteers and a camera -- cross country is supposed to be simple and neat -- you don't have a race with 5000 runners for goodness sake!
In Illinois, we have been using 4 mats for the finish line timing, with instructions to the runners to run hard past all 4 mats. Not sure what happens if the first mat picks up one chip, and the 4th one picks up someone else's chip, despite what order the runners physically crossed the imaginary finish line?
Back in my day, we had to fight into a single chute for position.
...And we LIKED it!
@ Witness,
It's not just Alaska. It's rampant in high school xc.
Good Old Days wrote:
I raced in the 90s, there was none of this chip stuff, and things ran just fine.
Yeah and we waited weeks to get results, if ever.
I don't know about other states but where we run our meet it is fairly muddy and to be honest people lose their shoes all the time. That would really mess up the system if you are going by chip timing.
A video of the finish is here, at 1:45 into the video:
http://www.ktuu.com/sports/ktuu-sports-xc-state-championships-100210,0,2766543.story
After looking into the National Federation of High Schools rules, and information from an uninvolved expert on chip timing, it appears the NFHS and meet officials had too much trust in the precision of the chip timing.
In the NFHS rule book, it allows for places to be determined by the chip timing system. The kicker here, though, is that the written rationale behind it is that chip timing is so accurate, recording the foot crossing the line should be no different than the torso. Well, this is one example that it may not be. The NFHS should rethink this.
The officials did not have a video at the finish, but there were finish judges. I wasn't there, but from what I heard, the finish judges originally called it in favor of Ms. Northey. 15 minutes later, the officials saw that the chip timing determined Ms. Bethea as the winner. Ms. Bethea was soon after announced the winner.
It's been reveled that both runners' chip time were the same down to the 0.1 second. According to the uninvolved chip timing expert, the system cannot be more accurate than that and within 0.1 seconds, the system is quite random at ordering finishes - sorting alphabetically to last name for example.
So it appears that the chip timing was not accurate enough to determine a winner in this case. If the finish judges' call is also not definitive in retrospect, the result should be a TIE.
rundanrun220 wrote:
In Illinois, we have been using 4 mats for the finish line timing, with instructions to the runners to run hard past all 4 mats. Not sure what happens if the first mat picks up one chip, and the 4th one picks up someone else's chip, despite what order the runners physically crossed the imaginary finish line?
Back in my day, we had to fight into a single chute for position.
...And we LIKED it!
The second through fourth mats are there as back-ups. All results at the state meet in Illinois are double-checked with video and then posted for coaches to double check before they are finalized. The torso, in Illinois, is still the determining factor and officials can and have changed finish positions based on video evidence.
I never really liked the single chute thing, especially when it got so backed up that you couldn't race to the finish line.
hooba dooba wrote:
Good Old Days wrote:I raced in the 90s, there was none of this chip stuff, and things ran just fine.
Yeah and we waited weeks to get results, if ever.
Not in my Ohio high school or college races, had full results before done warming down and stretching, maybe you're talking road races or something.
Kinda weird maybe they should have kids put the chip on their singlets not their shoes. As far as DQ'ing the girl who lost her's thats ridiculous. Chip timing should be a back up for accuracy of timing large groups but it should not be used to DQ a girl that everyone knows got a place. The timing is the race organizers problem it shouldn't be the problem of the poor kid just trying race.
I remember in high school when we raced with chips (i.e. state, and two other really big meets) that if it came down to the line, don't lean, put your foot across the line.
Texas uses timing chips @ Regional and State XC meets..this is the one time our coaches tell us to step through and not lean..getting exact results in 15-20mins is great specially for scoring..
I wonder why the chips on the bib numbers has not caught on, i thought that was great..keeps from fidgeting with your laces..
hooba dooba wrote:
Good Old Days wrote:I raced in the 90s, there was none of this chip stuff, and things ran just fine.
Yeah and we waited weeks to get results, if ever.
In the mid to late 80s and early 90s, I produced results within 15 minutes after a cross country race. Using stopwatches and tick sheets on clipboards, with pull tags.
Should always be done by torso first. The chips are there so you can get results fast an accurate but you need the high speed camera there for the photo finish. Shame on a state meet for not paying enough money to have the right equipment.
info wrote:
Should always be done by torso first. The chips are there so you can get results fast an accurate but you need the high speed camera there for the photo finish. Shame on a state meet for not paying enough money to have the right equipment.
So, what about state meets that never use any of these 2 methods? I know there are some out there.
...the bottom line....
1) NFHS needs to change rule regarding chip timing to be the same as NCAA, USATF and IAAF..that is, final placing and verification is done on torso.
This ends the issues of lost chips and close finishes that could change team scoring.
2) chip timing should be used as a tool.
it eliminates the human error of messy chutes and stringers with pull tags --which quite frankly you are giving the most important job (keeping those pull tags in order) to a meet day volunteer. I have never gone thru a season where at least one hasn't been dropped and they all go blowing in the wind.
3) chip timing is safer. i have seen many instances where athletes have taken headers into chute posts and /or almost been decapitated with ropes when chute changes have taken place.
An open chute is not only safer but less stressfull on all.
If an athlete collapses at the mat, meet workers just drag them away..
4) chip timing enahances spectator experience [if the right timing company is involved]. with the ability to send data such as athlete splits and team split scoring to scoreboards, announcers, internet and text messaging.
5) if there is technology available to make it easier, safer, greener and more enjoyable for all why not use it? Especially if NFHS can adjust their rule accordingly it will make it that much better.
Finally, chips on the bib are getting closer BUT still not as accurate as an FAT verification and may never be in our life time. Therefore having NFHS adjust their chip rule to coincide with NCAA/USATF/IAAF makes more sense.
ALSO, disposable chips cost more. An additional couple of thousand dollars for a meet director (in addition to the normal service fee) is alot of money.
Good luck.