Timing Chip Races
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
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.
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,569
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1851 Post(s)
Liked 678 Times
in
429 Posts
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.
That said, based on what Gl says about Pikes Peak, it sounds like it should work fine.
#28
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
Last edited by Doge; 03-27-17 at 08:39 AM.
#29
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
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
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
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?
Attachment 557487
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?
Attachment 557487
#31
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
USAC rules are quite clear. Finish is judged by front edge of front tire. What they implies for chips should be obvious.
1M1. Judging. The finish of a race shall be judged when the front tire first penetrates the imaginary vertical plane passing through the leading edge of the finish line.
1M1. Judging. The finish of a race shall be judged when the front tire first penetrates the imaginary vertical plane passing through the leading edge of the finish line.
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
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,170
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
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.
#33
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
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.
#34
Ninny
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The Gunks
Posts: 5,295
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 686 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
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.
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
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.
#36
Senior Member
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.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,569
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1851 Post(s)
Liked 678 Times
in
429 Posts
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.
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.
#38
Senior Member
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.
#39
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
#40
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
Last edited by Doge; 06-15-17 at 01:55 PM.
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
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.
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.
#42
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
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.
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
Last edited by Doge; 08-19-17 at 05:08 AM.
#43
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
Totally different dynamic than having a timed event.
#45
no cat contains
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edinburgh Scotland
Posts: 884
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 142 Times
in
75 Posts
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.
#46
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
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.
Last edited by Doge; 08-21-17 at 04:05 PM.