gl98115

Seriously, folks. This is a hill climb up Pikes Peak that ends at 14k+ feet. There will be no bunch sprint for the finish line. The overall winner last year won by 16 sec at an average speed of 10.1 mph, and probably going much slower at the finish. In most of the categories, riders were minutes apart.

topflightpro

Chip systems are great for helping to list the field in order. It's especially useful in crit fields when everything blows up, half the field is lapped, and no one really knows who is where. Also, scoring a race, even with a camera, is incredibly difficult - numbers are obscured by other riders, light reflects off numbers so they are misread. Chips help reduce some of that, but it's still not a perfect system.

That said, based on what Gl says about Pikes Peak, it sounds like it should work fine.

Doge

16 sec in an hour is pretty close.

While I expect solo finishes, a strategy to just hang on and sprint at the end is a real one.

The race is in the 3rd year and I expect non-climbers don't enter and there may be more like riders than in year's past. Another thing that makes it a different USAC National Championship race, is other than the U23s it mixes pros and amateurs. If all those I've heard talking about it show up, do, then junior will likely finish by himself somewhere not first. But if the group stays similar to prior years, a strategy of sticking to last year's winner's wheel and going for a sprint seems as a good option.

We have not pre-run this course. I hear from locals that who is fast low may not be high and those fast high may not be low.

Doge

Another from San Dimas this weekend - P1 uphill TT.
This is about 1/3 the distance of Pikes Peak and 1/4 the time. No where near the altitude.
Is there any reason to think that if this were a mass start race these riders would finish apart?

SDSRP1.JPG

gl98115

They will cross the finish line in a dead heat holding hands singing "Kumbaya". Far behind the winner.

Doge

From Chief Referee on a hill climb race (response today):

Me: I wanted to clarify this is a road race, so first over the line is the winner even if 2nd over line has a lower chip time (so maybe they started behind).

Chief Referee:[winner is] by your chip time

bitingduck

When I was promoting track races the chip people tried to sell us a chip system. The sensor loops are very large, and certainly not uniform at the left and right edges. I asked about their ability to distinguish finish order for riders an inch or so apart front to back. No response. A properly aligned line-scan camera at 1 kHz costs about the same and gives you results that comply with the rules with less uncertainty.

Doge

I keep hearing, there won't be a sprint, riders will be far apart.
I tend to think so on this race as it is no big deal.
But having seen my share of <1sec differences, I'm not so sure.
Also - simple strategy if truly doing chip (if it worked).
Start behind, let group yet 10 yards, do a flying start and catch up. Then mark the top rider and roll in 2nd and win.

That is the obvious way to go until the rule protest - as chips are not in the rules for winning and they don't/didn't pick-up the start just right.


Junior suggested I not take this further, but as I sensed - there is rule fabrication. This race does not matter. The next one does.

globecanvas

I don't do hill climbs but here's the word from a buddy who does lots of them. Some hill climb races are mass start, first across the line wins; some hill climb races are individual time trials where everyone has their own start time; some are mass start chip timed which is basically a TT where everyone is on the road at the same time. Chip timed races tend to have lots of participants so it could take minutes for everyone to get across the starting mat, though fast guys are always staged at the front. In a race like that everyone knows they are TTing and it would be totally normal for the guy rolling across the line 2nd to win the race.

rubiksoval

Don't feel that's in the true spirit of competition, but the rules are a bit silly and seemingly allow for such. Definitely a bummer if it came down to a sprint and the guy in the second row lost but won. I definitely see that argument.

gerundium

The way they do it here with crits this wouldn't work. they don't take a net time but just the finish order of the last lap. During the race it's used to keep track of lapped riders and such.

topflightpro

The one hill climb race I did was a timed event, but it was a mass start. So, the timer started when they said go, and your time was when you crossed the line.

BUT, there weren't hundreds of people in the event. Maybe 50, so we aren't talking a major difference to getting over the line between teh first and last guy.

This is very different from large running events and even some large bicycle events, where one can be lined up almost a mile from the starting line. (No, I am not exaggerating when I say almost a mile from the starting line.)

And I'm glad to see that Doge has instilled some sense into Puppy.

asgelle

I'm sure he said it; I'd like to know he he justifies it. USAC and UCI have run into myriad problems from officials at races and the organizations at headquarters changing and making up rules as they go only to face challenges when they contradicted the published rules. As far as I can see, this is another example of that.

Doge

If they make new rules outside of established ones you get weird stuff.
I didn't think it in the spirit of true competition when Micheal Fey read the America's Cup rules and built a bigger faster boat - and took the Cup for the Kiwi's. And then Connors reply with a Cat...
So I think they need it clarified, or in line with USAC.

That thing that "bothers" (not really, just get tired of hearing it) me is hearing from both promoters that it will never come down to a sprint. This is a mass start race. There are guys very skilled at pacing themselves on these climbs that are very experienced. It only makes sense to take a newbie and have them stick with the experienced rider - and attack at the end. That could easily lead to finishes where the chip time is suspect.

Doge

Makes total sense for that. Then the winner is over the line first. Junior's used chips in many races. I've never had both promoters - 2 in 2 races (one Nationals) and the Chief Ref (in the local) say it was the chip time to determine the winner.

gl98115

Here are the results from the race under discussion:

https://coloradospringssports.org/fil...NC_8_14_17.pdf

The winner won by a minute and twenty two seconds. The closest category finish was 1.5 seconds. Not seeing all the tire width bunch sprints that were predicted. Guessing the chip timing system worked just fine.

Doge

No it really didn't. This was RR and any chip time determination would not have stood. Winners were determined by place. The promoter was wrong. He may not know he was wrong, as it didn't matter.
Phil went off and there was some marking, holding back just like any other RR as they positioned for placing. Times were reflective of a RR, not a TT, as it was not a TT. It was not about time at all, rather placings as it should have been.
Good news it this got settled way before the race.

And yea, since my post we've had some placings in fractions of a second.
Chips are not yet determiners of races.

There was a camera and judges on the line.
Capture.jpg

Doge

To explain the dynamic a bit more - rides in 4,5 and 6 in open were in site of each other. 5th was behind and caught and passed 6th on a downhill and maintained. Every time 5th tried to catch 4th would pick it up a bit, so all 3 settled into more of a tempo pace to maintain position, not time.

Totally different dynamic than having a timed event.

Radish_legs

Chips are required for the two major weekday crits in DFW. No chip, no race.

Yep

This thread went on way longer than it needed to. Chip timing is NOT used like Strava. They don't take your finish time minus your start time. They use the time you crossed the line to place riders. I've done plenty of races where they also had a camera for really close finishes. It's handy for placing riders as far down the field as you want. No controversy here.

Doge

The controversy was the promoter giving inaccurate rule information, and my listening to them/being prepared for rules-made-on-the-fly, which do happen. I shall never again 1st ask the promoter about rules (unless I think that is somehow to my advantage). The chief referee also backed up the promoter when seeing the email from the promoter that said chip time was to be used to determine time. This was all months before. Day of event - there was no controversy.