just a guess is that purple's chip is on her left wrist... the one that goes forward when she falls.
Pinks chip may have been on her right wrist, which was at mid backswing.
just a guess is that purple's chip is on her left wrist... the one that goes forward when she falls.
Pinks chip may have been on her right wrist, which was at mid backswing.
Alternate Reality wrote:
just a guess is that purple's chip is on her left wrist... the one that goes forward when she falls.
Pinks chip may have been on her right wrist, which was at mid backswing.
what would a timing chip have to do with anything?
Chips will do weird things. Sometimes one will scan from farther back, and have the finish order wrong. Camera backup should have straightened that out tho.
Chip timing is not accurate!!! One chip might be read ahead of the line and one beyond it. Unless they had a photofinish camera (and they surely should have for a championship) they are stuck with what the chip says - and no, not "chip time" or net time but time from gun start to chip finish. The only really accurate chips are the ones with batteries inside but those are expensive.
That grabbing, shoving stuff is incredible too. How did that not trigger a DQ? Don't they have any officials in Toronto?
Weird race all in all.
Also a Kenyan elite broke her femur running into an age group runner and tripping over streetcar tracks in the road. What the heck!?!
Purple is coached by Dave Thomas from U-Guelph he coached the secret "Arm-Bar" tactic to his boys 3,000m last winter and here she almost pulls it off.
#YOU-GO-GIRL
#speedriver
#DST
radiowaves wrote:
Chips will do weird things. Sometimes one will scan from farther back, and have the finish order wrong. Camera backup should have straightened that out tho.
And if my auntie had bollocks she'd be my uncle.
What's your point? I repeat - what does a timing chip have to do with who took 2nd and who took 3rd in a race?
Observation:
No transponder system in the world is accurate enough to determine a finish like that.
This is the main reason to have photo finish to determine place for the money winners.
Plus, it's hard to tell if there is actually a distinct finish line. The rule requires a line 5m - 30cm in width that is a contrasting color to the road. If there is one it's lined up under the finish line gantry that would make it difficult to also align a photo finish camera (unless there was a cut out in the side of the finish line towers).
Many of the top races that have finish line structures actually have the finish line just in front of the towers to allow for photo finish or the cameras are mounted in the towers.
Without photo finish you would need actual judges (officials) to decide the order of finish - which there does not appear to be any.
This whole discussion about timing chips and transponders is completely irrelevant for elite runners. The organizers got it wrong. Fatuma Sado clearly reached the finish line ahead of Sharon Cherop, and should have been awarded undisputed second place. Sharon Cherop could have been disqualified, but that's up to them. Very odd decison.
Excerpt from the IAAF Road Race Handbook — Pg 196 RULE 240
Note: For road races and road walking events, the official time will be the time elapsed between the start gun and the athlete reaching the finish line. However, if an athlete crosses the start line after the start gun, his time elapsed between the start and finish line can be made known to the athlete but will not be considered as official time. The order in which athletes reach the finish line will be considered as the official finish position. 196 RULE 240
OK, this is even more bizarre than I thought. The organizers quote IAAF Rule 240 on their website, but I cannot actually find that section in IAAF official documents. Still the order of the finish determines athletes placement, at least for the elites.
D. Katz wrote:
Observation:
No transponder system in the world is accurate enough to determine a finish like that.
This is the main reason to have photo finish to determine place for the money winners.
No, that's not the main reason there's a photo finish. Transponder chips are a new invention compared to photo finish photography and they have nothing to do with determining placing in races. The reason there is finish line photography is to determine who crossed the line first, 2nd, 3rd, etc. Chips are not necessary in a race - races didn't have them until recent years. They're used now in large road races for the masses to get more accurate times when starting from far back but they don't factor in awarding prizes.
Anyway, why are we talking about timing chips? They have nothing to do with this discussion over who finished in which position.
Transponder timing is one of the three methods of timing recognized by the IAAF (Rule 165) and therefore by default - determines place. Everyone in the industry recognizes the short comings of transponder timing and will (should) use photo finish to determine the order of finish for the critical places. Rarely is photo finish used to determine age group awards. So at the end of the day without any other back ups (photo finish, video,or judges), the order of finish determined by the transponder timing system is valid.
Do you know who D. Katz is? He literally wrote the book on road racing. I think his opinion is rather valid.
crete wrote:
D. Katz wrote:Observation:
No transponder system in the world is accurate enough to determine a finish like that.
This is the main reason to have photo finish to determine place for the money winners.
No, that's not the main reason there's a photo finish. Transponder chips are a new invention compared to photo finish photography and they have nothing to do with determining placing in races. The reason there is finish line photography is to determine who crossed the line first, 2nd, 3rd, etc. Chips are not necessary in a race - races didn't have them until recent years. They're used now in large road races for the masses to get more accurate times when starting from far back but they don't factor in awarding prizes.
Anyway, why are we talking about timing chips? They have nothing to do with this discussion over who finished in which position.
This is just regarding the OP statement ...
"the timing just somehow has Cherop 0.04 seconds ahead."
This is not part of the argument about who should be 1st or 2nd.
indeed wrote:
Do you know who D. Katz is? He literally wrote the book on road racing. I think his opinion is rather valid.
No, no clue. There's a book on road racing?
Race winners are decided on the gun, not some chip. End of Thread. Only a short book needed on that subject. More like a pamphlet, I guess. Did he write the pamphlet?
sdfgsdgfsdg wrote:
OK, this is even more bizarre than I thought. The organizers quote IAAF Rule 240 on their website, but I cannot actually find that section in IAAF official documents.
What document(s) are you looking in?
Did you try the IAAF Competition Rules (http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=a3588664-5eff-49c2-977a-4665a12c19bf.pdf&urlslug=IAAF%20Competition%20Rules%202014-2015) that do have a rule 240 on Road Races?
"A member of the (IAAF) Technical Committee since 2003, David Katz has served as Technical Delegate, ICRO, Technical Director, Meet Director, athlete, surveyor and coach. He was Technical Delegate for the 2014 IAAF World Indoor Championships and the 2010 IAAF World Junior Championships and has been selected in the same capacity for the 2016 IAAF World Indoor Championships. He has been ICRO for three IAAF World Half Marathon Championships and International Road Course Measurer at the 2012 Olympic Games, as well as road course measurer at the 1984 and 1996 Games. He will again be an International Road Course Measurer at the 2016 Olympic Games."
There seems to be some confusion. Many people think that chip timing is always "net timing". The transponder (chip) is RFID technology that identifies a specific frequency (chip ID) at specific locations (where ever the timing mats/antenna are located - start, finish, split points).
"Net times" can be provided when there are mats/antennas at both the start and finish BUT nearly all race only use the "gun time" to determine the top winners.
Many timers (including myself) use transponder timing (Chip) timing for all of their races but do not use mats at the start for the smaller ones - especially if there is a wide start. Obviously all of the results are "gun time".
It appears that this discussion is all about the "gun time" provide by the Chip
I didn't write that....but thank you :)
WeRun519 wrote:
Purple is coached by Dave Thomas from U-Guelph he coached the secret "Arm-Bar" tactic to his boys 3,000m last winter and here she almost pulls it off.
#YOU-GO-GIRL
#speedriver
#DST
We defend our style of running 100% We were just defending our space, when pushing and cutting off the other OUA athletes.
Purple joined are Speed River club earlier this year and has been a great fit. She also knows about defending her space, but with Dave's help she's taking her space defence to new heights.
Roll River!
There are so many badly ill-informed posters on here that it is a refreshing change to hear from someone who knows what he's talking about.