Divebrian

Ok, this had a positive outcome, so it's more of a rules clarification for the future. This was on a 333 m track where the 200 m line is after you exit turn 2 and just past the beginning of the back straight. It was a two up sprint and one person was the designated lead out (we'll call him rider one). First lap, rider two just stayed just behind rider one's back wheel, on his right up against the rail. Rider two was close enough that he could keep an eye on rider one, but far enough back that he was keeping his options open. As they started to exit turn 4, it became obvious that rider one wasn't going to go for a flying lap as he stayed high and slow. As they came out of turn 2, rider one still stayed really high and picked up just a little speed, but not winding up for a sprint speed, so rider two let him get just enough gap that he could control things and started his sprint...rider two jumped and got in a couple of pedal revolutions by the time rider one realized and started his wind up. Rider two reached the red line of the sprint lane midway down the back stretch and was on the black line about 5-10 meters before entering turn 3. Rider one took a little less aggressive line than rider two that put rider one crossing the red line and entering the sprint lane at the beginning of turn 3. Rider two was on the black line when rider one started to cross the red line into the sprint lane, at this point, rider one's back tire was about 2-3 ft in front of rider two's front tire, but rider two was going faster.....rider two went into collision avoidance mode, pulled up just long enough to create enough space that he could make a hard move to the right without hitting rider one's rear wheel. Rider two got back on the gas and had enough power to goover the top of rider one and take the win.

Had rider two held his line and kept on hammering, there would have been contact. So my question is, was that a perfectly legal move on rider one's part or a possible grey area tactic to get a win? I honestly don't know if rider one was aware of rider two's position or not, if he was trying to intimidate rider two or not or if he even had a clue what happened....hard to tell what's going through someone's head during a race.

As far as I'm concerned, rider two had control of the sprint lane and rider one did not have the speed or necessary clearance to come down on rider two, but I may be wrong...that's why I'm asking. Not pointing fingers, just trying to use this as a learning experience and gain more knowledge.

queerpunk

It's hard to say without video, but whoever gets there first gets it. Sounds like Rider 2 got there first. 2 got to the lane first but was behind 1, so that makes it an unusual situation. But, based on how the rules are written, it sounds like 1 encroached and impeded - albeit from the front instead of coming over the top.

jfiveeight

Essentially, this was against the rules.

3.2.044 A rider passing on the right of his opponent, who is in the sprinters’ lane, may not
crowd him or cause him suddenly to reduce speed.
He crowded him by moving over without ample room and speed.

3.2.045 A rider starting the sprint outside the sprinters’ lane may not drop into that lane if it is
already occupied by his opponent unless there is a clear cycle-length lead.
2-3ft is not a cycle-length, let alone a "clear" cycle-length

https://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/R...-E_English.PDF

carleton

I don't know.

The phrase that was left out of the story is that, "the trailing rider tried to dive under the leading rider and the leading rider dove as well".

Divebrian, I'm fairly certain that you were the trailing rider that dove under based on how the story is being told, right?

jfiveeight, those rules are generally for the mass start races. For sprints, they may be interpreted differently. For example, the same situation happens here:

(skip to the 1:30 mark)


Notice how Hoy (leading) is watching over his right shoulder "guarding" Bos' move over the top. When he loses sight of Bos (trailing) Hoy immediately dives down to the left (to guard his left) WHILE STILL LOOKING RIGHT. That is a trained response...and the right one.

Basically the tactic is:

- If you are gonna pass me, you will have to do it on the right where you have to climb the track and go further around.
- If you try to pass me on the left, I will block you with my bike.

queerpunk

the rules that jfiveeight quoted are right from the Sprint Race section of the rule book.

last night i figured that Rider 1's actions were a sprint lane violation, but this morning, I don't think that they were - Rider 1 entered the sprint lane well clear of Rider 2, regardless of the speed differential.

However, there are other rules under which it could be considered a violation. I'm not an official, but say I was running an informal sprint session and had a copy of the rule book in my hand. If I thought the move was flagrant I could point to these two rules. One could argue that dropping into the lane in front of somebody, at a whole bunch less speed, could apply.

3.2.041 Before the last 200 metres line or the start of the final sprint, riders may avail themselves of the full width of the track but must nevertheless leave sufficient space for their opponent to pass and shall refrain from any manoeuvres that could provoke a collision, a fall or cause any rider to ride off the track.

3.2.042 During the final sprint, even if launched before the last 200 metres, each rider shall remain in his lane up to the finish, unless he has at least a clear cycle-length lead and shall not make any manoeuvre to prevent the opponent from passing.

jfiveeight

The Hoy vs Bos example occurred before the final 200m, which is where a lot of the rules are more concrete/enforced. From what I understand in Divebrian's case, they were already in the final sprint. The rules I quoted were specifically from the Sprint section. Doesn't mean I still can't be wrong, just going with what I have seen.

Hoy tried to cover that move because he lost to Bos doing the exact same thing in the first heat.

gl98115

That's probably the most ignored rule in the book. I've never seen a rider relegated or warned at local or elite competition for entering the sprinters lane with less that a "clear" cycle-length, as long as wheels weren't actually overlapping. 2-3 feet is a wheel diameter, which is plenty of room for the following rider to respond.

carleton

jfiveeight, the sprint it not necessarily engaged if the riders are inside of 200M of the finish. 200M has absolutely nothing to do with a Match Sprint.

TV broacasters like to time the last 200M of a Match Sprint to let the viewers know how fast the riders are going, but to the officials, the 200M mark means nothing. It is only relevant in the time trial.

"when the sprint engages" is and has always been a judgment call. Is it when the first guy hauls azz? The second? Can the sprint be engaged when both riders are above the stayer's line? Most officials are like, "I know it when I see it." Granted, most match sprints don't have any issues and it's obvious. But, other times it's a judgement call. That's why officials are in place. That's their job, to interpret and judge.

In the Hoy/Bos clip I presented, Hoy could have been relegated for pushing Bos off the track. Bos could have been relegated for being off the track (notice that he restrained himself from passing Hoy). But, the officials simply "let them race". That was a long time ago. Not sure how the UCI would call that race these days.

Also, local tracks have varying degrees of enforcement. Some tracks are really strict and allow no drama. Others allow sweeps, headbutts, chops, etc... and say, "If it ain't rubbin' it ain't racin'"

Divebrian

You aren't the first to make an incorrect assumption concerning myself. I was riding around the infield cooling down from the race I just won, in which I took a flying lap....figured I would eventually meet the winner of the race in question if we both kept winning, so I was trying to figure out each ones tactics. Rider one was smaller and turned out not to be the fast little roadie hoping to turn in a long distance flyer, it turned out his tactic was to wait as close to the finish as possible to spin up his small gear. Rider two had a bigger gear and was more of the flying lap type guy.

I ended up racing rider two and kept the pace relatively high throughout the first lap to discourage him from taking too long of a flyer....I was good with one flying lap, but I didn't want him going from the gun. I ended up winning...but it brought me to the thought that I could have easily been rider two in the scenario in question. I want my sprint started by the beginning of the back stretch and would go early on someone trying to hold off to the last minute.

In the scenario,both riders came from up on the rail and crossed the whole track to enter the sprinters lane, they weren't starting at the stayers line. There was about a 15-20' gap between rider one and two when they both set similar trajectories to the sprinters lane. Neither made an aggressive cut and rider two made it there faster and was fully occupying the sprinters lane and got in one or two pedal revolutions before rider one's front wheel touched the red line to enter the sprint lane. Rider one probably got in one or two more pedal revolutions before his back wheel crossed the red line and then another one or two revolutions before he reached the black line....very different from the Hoy/Bos video. In other words, it wasn't a fast, aggressive dive...it was just the continuation of his trajectory path. As I previously stated, I don't know what was going through rider one's head or if he even realized rider two was there. Maybe he thought he was further ahead.....

Either way, it doesn't really matter....my question was pertaining to who would have been assessed fault and how would the results stand if there was contact and one rider went down. As I said, I could have easily been rider two...easily enough that you assumed I was.

carleton

If there was contact, who would be at fault would honestly be a tossup...and in that case, who ever made it back first wins.

I say that because it is a legit tactic to block the trailing rider if they are doing maneuvers. There are several ways that a leading rider can impede a trailing rider, for example by letting his front wheel inside of your rear wheel and slowly pining him to the boards. This is an advanced/pro technique will freak out beginner and intermediate riders and when done right. The leading rider will hold the trailing rider up there indefinitely then dive off taking the optimal line gapping off the trailing rider and leaving him a not-optimal line. If the trailign rider hits the brakes and backs-off, then that's the cue for the leading rider to haul azz for the win. That maneuver begins by impeding the trailing rider.

Also because you say that it could be that the leading rider simply may not have known what the trailing rider was doing or his pace.

kkxaq

It should be notes that the clear cycle lenght is from front wheel to front wheel. This means that if that there is 2-3 feet from the back wheel to the other rider front wheel there is plenty of space.

dunderhi

I'm a new track official (only 8 track days thus far), but all of the senior officials that I have worked with thus far, have hammered the same message into me: safety first. Sprinters may not think that way, but officials do. Passing on the left in sprint without the ability to do it very quickly is not a safe move. Given your description, rider two should have expected rider one to move into the sprint lane at some point within the last 200m and he should have sought to pass rider one on the right from the very beginning. IMHO, if there was an accident, rider two would have most likely received the blame.

bitingduck

I've seen it enforced at the world cup level on down to local racing. We had the luxury of seeing world level racing and officiating at our track and we tried to enforce consistently with that (I have no idea if they still are, but probably since it's mostly the same officials) since we had riders moving up to that level and riders at that level showing up for local races. We also had regular contact with officials who were UCI international officials, too, and sometimes would have them officiating locally.

Rider 2 should certainly expect Rider 1 to drop in on him and plan accordingly, but the converse is also true - Rider 1 should have expected Rider 2 to already be there, and probably should have had his head turned around like Linda Blair and seen it. If Rider 2 is there first, even from behind, and even with Rider 1 also headed for the lane, Rider 2 owns it. (EDIT: And if the rider wants to appeal to the 2-3 feet gap, I'd go with Queerpunk's impeding rules. If Rider 1 drops in to the lane in a way that impedes Rider 2's progress, it's a violation, even if he had 2-3 feet. If Rider 1 had tried a kilo and failed and was just noodling in the lane with plenty of time for 2 to see, then it wouldn't be impeding)

A separate point is that Rider 2 did the right thing by going around and winning anyway. You often see someone sit up and protest rather than racing it out. Even if you think you were fouled, the best thing to do is race it to the end like you mean it -- if you win, the protest is unnecessary, and if you lose you can protest. If you sit up you'll probably be deemed to have stopped racing and have your protest rejected unheard. A similar thing goes with being lapped - don't go to the top of the track and wait for them to come around, you may be pulled. Ride tempo at the black line and accelerate up to the speed of the pack as it comes around to catch you.

dunderhi

Maybe USAC's rules provide some insight into where the bike length measurement starts.

From the 2017 USAC rule book:
2F(d) If the leader is riding above the sprinters line, he or she shall make no abrupt motion to keep other riders from passing and may make no move to the right (whether abrupt or not) that could have caused a fall or that exceeds 90 cm. (same as the width of the sprinters lane). Following riders may pass on either side. The leader may move to the left into the sprinters lane only if the trailing edge of the leader's rear wheel is ahead of the leading edge of the front wheel of the following rider [relegation for foul riding]. There is no penalty at the finish if the lead rider accidentally drops below the measurement line or even onto the blue band.

Next weekend, I will be officiating with an International and three National Track Commissaires, so I will try to get their opinions on this scenario.

The chief ref will more than likely motion you to move up track before the field laps you. Depending on the ref, you might actually increase your chances of being pulled if you stay low.

bitingduck

Implicit in the stuff in red is that the lead rider is moving faster than the trailing rider. If the lead rider is moving slower, even if the rider isn't overlapped, the lead rider is likely to get relegated for interference. If you're not up to speed and you drop into the sprinters lane onto a faster rider because you didn't look, it's just dangerous riding.

Not down here. You'll more likely hear from the announcer to stay at the black line and ride tempo. When I ran the riders meetings before racing we'd remind people not to go to the top and wait.

tobukog

+1. The rider in the lane owns it unless the lead rider is going faster, or at least equal, to the trailing rider. Of course this all changes if you give the trailing rider sufficient opportunity to react and go over the top. But if you drop in my lane while I'm going 60k and you're going 50, you're going to get a serious chewing out regardless of officials or not.

dunderhi

I think it is less of an implicit assumption and more of a desirable state. I think the implicit assumption is that the riders are at nearly the same speed, but being that the sprint is on, somebody is likely trying to overtake. Our scenario has the lead rider up to final sprint speed, he just wasn't as fast as the second rider on the track. Maybe I'm picturing this sprint differently from other folks, but with a 2-3' gap, I'm not sure why the second rider backed off vice moving up track to overtake without incident.

Since we will have a another sprint competition next weekend, I will have plenty of opportunities for more questions.

Okay, if that is how your riders are instructed, but I think the risk to the entire field passing a single rider on the bottom of the track is higher than if that rider got out of the way and jumped back into the back of the field. I also think it's rare that a lapped rider can accelerate and integrate into the front part of the field from the bottom of the track.

Up here, the chief ref instruct riders who are about to be lapped to move up track to get out of the way. If they didn't get out of the way in time, then we tell them to stay on the bottom and hope the 20 or so racers in the field are paying attention to the slower traffic at the bottom.

bitingduck

If #2 is on the black line moving faster than #1 and then #1 comes down a couple feet in front of him, closing the door, #2 has limited options, depending on the speed difference and how fast #1 is moving down track. Because #1 is already above and to the right of #2 (he's 2-3 feet ahead and at the red line), he's already in the line that #2 would need to go around without backing off. So #2 can keep going forward at speed and either get chopped and land on the deck (I've seen this happen), slide under and hipcheck #1 (also seen this happen, possibly risking relegation depending on where the officials are watching and what they notice), or back out and go around. If he's that much faster, which he apparently was, he can take option 3 and win and not have to protest, but rider #1 should get talked to after the race.

The problem with taking option 2 is that officials often notice the reaction (the pass under and hip check), not the initial infraction (sprinters lane infringement) that caused the rider to have to react and go under, so the second rider might get relegated if the officials weren't in a position to see well and don't have a camera on it.



It's always safer if the rider being passed holds their line and just gets passed. Trying to get out of the way, especially on a shorter track, leads to the possibility of getting into the way of someone else. If the race is going full bore, or is already broken into a couple pieces, you might head up track just as an attack is taking off and the attack will come up on you going half their speed. The overtaking riders are usually committed to their line before the rider being overtaken even knows they're about to get passed - trying to get out of the way usually leads to a lot of yelling and sometimes some contact.

I've been on both sides of trying to move up out of the way as breaks take off, and once you've been on the passing side of it rather than the being passed, it's clear why it's better to hold your line at the bottom of the track.

If the 20 or so riders aren't paying attention enough to pass a slower rider safely, they have no business racing. The racers' eyes are in front, and the eyes of the rider being passed are also in front (unless the rider is a duck, in which case they do have binocular vision in back, too), so it's safer to make the passing riders be responsible for the safe pass.

bitingduck

If we change the setup of the scenario, you'll see why the rider in front has to be traveling at the same speed or faster to not be foul riding.

Suppose rider #2 is in the sprinters lane going full blast with a lap still to go, and rider #1 is in back and decides to come around. Rider #1 has a lot of speed, but doesn't have nearly as much gas as he thinks, so he gets his 2-3 foot gap while outside the sprinters lane and blows up completely. Rider #2 is the world kilo champion and is still speeding up. If blown up rider #1 (with his 2-3 foot lead, but slowing down like he's got a parachute) then moves into the sprinters lane in front of #2 what call are you going to make?

dunderhi

As I posted previously, I will be working a sprint competition with International and National Commissaires next weekend, so there's not really much point in arguing every little detail of the scenario from an official's perspective today. Based on what I read into the scenario, I stated how I would call it as a new official (also as an experienced racer.) Much more experienced officials may enlighten me otherwise. For example, at the last sprint competition I was the back-straight assistant ref and I reported a sprinters lane violation to the chief ref (Nat Comm) and it was determined to be inconsequential, thus a non-call. So, what do I know at this point in my officiating career?

It all depends on the timing of the pass. If the rider is paying attention to the officials, the rider should be waived up the track long before any potential impedance to the oncoming field. If the rider is oblivious to the officials and what is going on during the race, then the rider needs to stay buttoned down on the bottom of the track. The danger in the field passing this rider is the potentially significant difference in speed and that if the field is 3-4 riders a abreast, the riders at the stayers line may not be aware or concerned that the riders beneath them are dealing a much slower rider. I've seen a slower rider take out the back third of the field. I've never seen a rider at the top of the track take out anyone.

Wait a minute... isn't that basically what I said about the sprint?

bitingduck

On a shorter track with a fast field, or with a broken up race there is often no good time. If 20 riders 3-4 abreast can't pass a slower rider how do you ever run a miss-and-out? I promoted a lot of races and raced a lot of races, and I don't think we ever had an issue with a slower rider at the bottom of the track being passed. People trying to get out of the way was a much bigger problem. If a dropped rider looks oblivious to the race they should be getting a whistle and a wave off the track, followed by a call from the PA if they miss that.


Dropped rider getting passed should be holding their line and the passing riders are responsible for safe passing. The dropped rider isn't in contention for anything, and if they're just riding in circles are easy to pass.

In the sprint situation that we've been discussing there are specific rules for when riders can move laterally in order to have a safe and fair sprint - if the slower outside rider (rider #1 in the original situation) suddenly impedes the progress of rider #2 via a sprinters line violation, rider #1 should be relegated. Rider #2 should still (and always) try to pass safely. Edit to add: the situation in the sprint is like a "swoop and squat" on the freeway, where a driver moves in front of another car and slows down, leaving the rear car with little option but to run into them. The sprinters lane rules are designed to make it safer for the inside rider once the sprint is engaged.

gl98115

On a short steep indoor track, you may be right. But on a big shallow outdoor track, there is plenty of time between when you get dropped to when you get caught from behind to move up track. If you can't safely move up track, then you don't need to be racing. Or riding on the track at all.

gl98115

Where did the OP say that Rider #1 slowed down once entering the sprinters lane?

bitingduck

"rider one's back tire was about 2-3 ft in front of rider two's front tire, but rider two was going faster.....rider two went into collision avoidance mode"

(he didn't have to slow down for it to be like a swoop and squat, he just had to be moving enough slower that rider 2 had to slow or swerve to avoid him)

bitingduck

And when people get into that habit and then move to a short steep track it gets ugly.