Deltatiming

And for those saying none of the timing problems had anything to do with Louisville, who do you think decided on the timing company? Absolutely they are partially at fault for this embarrassment.

I feel awful for both the Providence and Oregon teams. Imagine something like this happening at the final four. The game is over and nobody knows for sure who won and it keeps changing.

The problem is not Delta, it is the Chronotrack bib tags. These missed, had terrible accuracy issues, and EVERY runner had to be verified from the photo finish system. Why anyone would use them for a race this important is crazy. They work great for fun runs, but National Championship meets? Uh huh.

The most reliable tags are the plastic ones that are shaped like half a credit card with holes in them for lacing them to the shoe: 100% read rate and you just have to verify close finishes.

Problems with missing athletes at D1 and D3? It's a technology failure. Thank God they had cameras too.

Krap Tags wrote:

The problem is not Delta, it is the Chronotrack bib tags. These missed, had terrible accuracy issues, and EVERY runner had to be verified from the photo finish system. Why anyone would use them for a race this important is crazy. They work great for fun runs, but National Championship meets? Uh huh.

So who is in charge of making the decision on which bib tags to use. I would assume it would be the timing company wouldn't it?

I feel bad for the kids that thought they were going to be All-Americans and found out they weren't when they were handing out awards! I was at the D3 Meet and it was an absolute mess. A coach shouldn't have to file a protest because the timing company doesn't know how to do their job. Have fun working fun runs Delta Timing you screwed up at %100 of the national championships you worked this year.

I own a timing company that uses IPICO chips. We have covered events with 4000+ athletes. I would be willing to do the event at cost with the idea of using that year to earn the trust of all those involved before charging for the service the following season(s). If my team's travel costs and per diem is covered, I would be happy to offer our services.

M Hill

Not sure how it works, but they may have a blanket contract with Delta Timing rather than one that was negotiated for this instance. They might like what Delta Timing does for track meets for the amount that they pay.

I do like the information provided (place, score, name, class, school, splits (2000m, 3215m (3 miles-3 meters), 4950m, 6910m, 5 miles (8047m)) with no misses or apparent errors. I do wish they had the times and names for the DNFs.

Delta timing has had problems for a long time. It starts at the top and their founder/owner/tyrant John Ferguson is the problem. I have used all the major timing companies for conference, regional, and national meets. They are difficult to work with, think they know everything, and will screw you financially if given the chance. I would never recommend Delta timing to anyone. Why Louisville chose to use them is beyond me when they could have chosen a dozen other groups that would have done just great. And we knew of problems with these type of bib chips many years ago. They shouldn't be used until the technology is perfected. The shoe chips are still the best and most reliable ones on the market.

I think Delta gets a lot of contracts because they underbid--and you get what you pay for. From what I've seen, they're about the worst and least reliable independent timing company out there. I'm probably biased because we do our own timing at our meets, but I think most universities with their own Lynx do a better job. But if you're running a championship or a meet like Drake, you almost have to use an independent contractor to avoid the conflict of interest charges.

Krap Tags wrote:

The problem is not Delta, it is the Chronotrack bib tags. These missed, had terrible accuracy issues, and EVERY runner had to be verified from the photo finish system. Why anyone would use them for a race this important is crazy. They work great for fun runs, but National Championship meets? Uh huh.

The most reliable tags are the plastic ones that are shaped like half a credit card with holes in them for lacing them to the shoe: 100% read rate and you just have to verify close finishes.

Problems with missing athletes at D1 and D3? It's a technology failure. Thank God they had cameras too.

The problem IS Delta...they are the timers. Your job is to time the meet. They should have used whichever chip would have aided them with getting the results right. Louisville should be embarrassed, too. They should have known that if they messed up the South Region that they would probably mess up the National meet. This should have never gotten to this point.

The main problem is the D-tag chips. No chip system is full proof but the Ipico (half credit card sized chip that ties into the shoe) is the most reliable and also interfaces with the finishlynx cameras. Why for a national championship you woiuld try anything other than that is beyond me but to each his own. All of the new disposable style chips have their problems and for Cross Country I do not see them as being reliable enough yet. We (Finishtiming) get outbid a lot by road race companies for cross country meets and we usually see the meet come back the next year after they see that cross country is not a road race and the team scoring is very important. We have used a few different chip systems and do not feel there is anything better than the IPICO system right now. To explain this a little better here is how the Ipico system works.

Runner ties the chips (1 or 2) into the shoes. They run the race and when they cross the line the chip registers into the finishlynx camera software which gives a finish time (reference point). The reason I say reference point is that you then as the camera operator then verify each runner with the camera. for example at the D3 Great Lakes Regional we ran 1 chip per runner and 2 finishlynx cameras. We actually reversed 12 different finishers from what the chip read. There are some chips that are "stronger" than others. We have seen chips pick up a couple feet before mats and others may not pick up until second mat. There is a reason you have a camera at the finish. To my knowledge Ipico is the only chip system to interface with the finishlynx cameras making it virtually impossible to miss a runner or get them out of order.

I wouldn't blame this fiasco on the type of chip used. Every system from Ipico to BTag/DTag to tear tags to the old school popsicle sticks has advantages and disadvantages. Ipico's link to finishlynx is an excellent feature, a real move forward. It really comes down to the ability and experience of the timing company.

The D2 east regional used BTags for the first time after many years with, I think, ChampionChips. I don't believe we had any problems with the results. They were posted quickly after the races ended and I don't remember any changes made afterwards.

Watching all 6 NCAA races on the feeds, even at the busiest times it didn't look to me like the finish lines had a massive density of finishers within the same 2-3 seconds. To me, it looked like any chip system should have been able to work just fine.

A question for finishtiming...You say "Ipico is the most reliable". Would you mind providing some additional info on why you feel that way. Feel free to email me offlist.

finistiming: let's not "pimp" for yourself too much here..just state the facts please..

the Chronotrack technology uses 900mhz which is a strong long distance signal but poses 2 problems: 1) 900 mhz is suspect to water(i.e bodies)...so you get a sort of swiss cheese affect on the signal especially when athletes are traveling fast and packed together..2) the signal broadcast is wider so it gives you a "window" (up to 15')so to speak of where it will read..either before or after the loop.

Ipico uses dual frequency in a lower spectrum so water has no affect at all. Since the energize and read loops are located in a single mat the read spectrum is more vertical...still for xc the chip reads should still be verified with video or photofinish...just as the rule book calls for i belive.

With two mats placed about 15' apart at the finish, and places changing from first mat to second how is the review done? Why two mats?

probably the second one is a backup in case there was a total failure on the first..camera would be used for official place verification at the finish line.

I know a little about this stuff.

Some basic facts:

-Read rate varies from system to system.

-for xc, the timer should always use a transponder on each shoe (or bib tag)

-The MOST accurate systems available are the active transponders (example: JChip or AMB)

-The most accurate transponder on the Planet is the active transponder worn on the bib. The bib tag used by Omega (AMB) has an accuracy rate within .02 seconds of photo finish

-EVERY transponder system can fail. I have been at the World Championships (active transponder) when several active transponders did not read due to interference from nearby video boards.

-For high profile races and ALL XC events, timers must verify the finishers with photo finish prior to releasing results - PERIOD.

My father once told me that the most dangerous part of a car is the nut behind the wheel!

DK,

2 issues here: accuracy in terms of where the "chip" is recorded in relationship to the finish line and accuracy in terms of hits/misses.

I own both AMB (active) and IPICO (passive)systems and hands down the IPICO is the most reliable and best bang for the buck for running.

It is true that an active system is better for high speed events but in terms of accuracy for timing purposes (in relation ship to the finish line) the AMB and IPICO are the same (as verified by FinishLynx image verification).

I hardly (if at all) use the AMB anymore. It still always misses (albeit using one transponder) but an IPICO with 2 tags on each runner is about as 100% as can be in terms of hits/misses.

Also, with the AMB transponder being $125 each and IPICO being $1 each i see no comparison.

No question about the added costs of the active systems.

The IPICO system is very accurate and practical which makes it one of the best options for XC. But I will stand by my statement that the active transponder is the most accurate out there. And I am confident that the owners/technicians of all of the transponder parent companies would agree.

Random question: The small black chips (reusable) that are circular, with a cylinder in the middle and kinda look like two back-to-back Ds: what type of system is that? From an athlete's perspective, those are the least intrusive to put on your shoes.

ChampionChip