I don't understand 2C.4.2

This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.

Comments about this discussion:


I don't understand 2C.4.2.
From the title "Penalty for Finish Line Dismounts", I have a little bit of a clue what this section is about. The text itself doesn't say anything about dismount, however. I don't understand what this paragraph tries to say. Anyone?

For now I assume it is a legitimate rule, but then it should be written anew.


That section might be outdated based on our current methods of timing. In an old-school setup, with stopwatches, the clock for that rider will stop when they cross the line. If they have to back up and remount, you don't have a correct total time for that person, so you need to fudge something in.

With electronic timing systems, I'm not sure how such a situation would play out. Would both crossings of the finish line be recorded with times? If not, you can apply the rule from 2C.4.2. Basically, the "made up" timing in that section says we know you were faster than the person that came in after you, so we gave you a quicker time than that person.

So we should see if any of that is still relevant, then rewrite from there. This section illustrates why having a rider back up and re-cross the finish line is always a big mess.


Old-school solution: use the lap time of the stopwatch. It will continue running and you can time once again.

The described method will place the riders in the correct order for that heat, but not for the overall list if there are several heats (e.g. for Age Group medals). It is quite unfair.

I don't know the abilities of electronic timing, it will vary from system to system. I have the impression that it works well in most cases. Falling on the finish line is common enough to find a good solution. Jan Vocke will know.


Hmm, Lap button! You would just have to instruct all the timers to use that button in those races where dismounting is allowed. And these would be Track races; I don't know how it would work with large groups in off-track races.

For electronic timing, we probably need to hear from people more familiar with how it works, and what the options are for collecting the data we need.

I agree the current rule is only effective within the given heat. A better solution is needed. In fact, we should probably re-visit the idea of just adding a time penalty for that finish line dismount, since all that running around stuff seldom works well. You can screw up the light beam, if used, collide with other riders, take three tries to remount (seen it many times), etc. It just sucks. If we can agree on a method for time penalties, then we have a finish time already recorded, and just have to determine how much to add on.


With electronic timing it is not a problem. The slit camera continues to run, and you can see the second time the rider crosses the finish line.


Are we still cool with the idea of making people back up and re-ride the finish line? It's so messy. But if nobody wants to figure out some kind of penalty formula, at least the slit camera can take an accurate time.


For now, I think we need to work with the backup and re-ride rule. A possible other penalty would be for next time.

I understand that with a slit finish camera there is not really a problem. Without such a camera, the idea of a made-up time is still needed. But the text is garbled and needs to be cleaned up. If I have enough time I will try my hand at a re-write. If somebody else is willing to give it a shot, that's welcome!


I also think that for now we should stay on the re-ride solution, but until the next Rulebook Committee we can think about whether there is a better one and discuss it. I can understand John's remarks as to why a re-ride is not ideally good.

As for electronic timing, I can confirm Scott's statement that when a slit camera is used, there will be no problems capturing a second time after the remount.


I have created a proposal, now that I understand what 2C.4.2 tries to say.

In the process, I have changed quite a bit:

1. I have clarified the situation in which 2C.4.2 is applicable. This was the original purpose of this discussion and proposal.

2. I have described a few other ways of deriving the actual finish time for the unfortunate dismounting rider, that would be fairer than the original calculation.

3. I deleted the word "Penalty" from the title. Indeed, with the calculation of the finish time in the original rule, the rider receives a penalty that is dependent on the time of the next rider, as well as on the timing system's inability to record the proper finish time.
I think it is utterly unfair to give the rider a penalty that depends on these factors outside his/her control. The rider is punished enough by the time lost through the backup, remount and re-ride process.


It looks great. I would only recommend changing "backup" in the first sentence, to "back up".


Done. I must have been thinking of "Thou shalt backup".


"Thou shalt backup"

Is that one of the Ten Commandments of computer use?  :-)


At the risk of diverting too much, but it's too funny: it's from a cartoon where Moses descends from the mountain carrying the Stone Tables with the Ten Commandments, and then drops them so that they shatter to pieces. A lightning bolt strikes down from the clouds and a loud voice proclaims the Eleventh Command "THOU SHALT BACKUP!"

Copyright ©

IUF 2018