active network espn
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community
5 Replies Last post: Oct 9, 2007 5:16 PM by NHSenior  
Click to view NHSenior's profile Legend 388 posts since
Nov 23, 2007
Login to Reply

Dec 27, 2007 12:37 AM

So, your official time didn't match your watch

I had a runner tell me after a race that her time was a few seconds off that which she thought it should be.

The following may not be true at every race, but it is a fairly accurate explanation of what goes on at most races.

The finish line clock at a race is never the official time, nor is a runners watch or an observers observation the official time. I'm sure you can understand what the later is not acceptable.

The official time at races is kept in a little adding machine like device called a TimeMachine to which either a push button or the chip recorder is connected. At most races there are 2, 3, or 4 Time Machine all running together as a back up.

After the race starts (which may not be near the finish line) the devices are taken to the finish line where the finish line clock is set to provide "interesting information" for the runner and spectators.

In a Chip race, there are generally 2 sets of finish line chip recording mats and runners have 2 feet.

The 2 sets of mats are 10 to 20 feet apart and runners often stop or slow down as they cross a finish line.

The chip system is very accurate but it is still only 98 to 99 percent accurate in that all chips will get read by the first mat. (This chips are almost never defective BTW). So that means that 1 out of hundred may not get read on the first mat and 10 in the first 1000.

It is unlikely that the same chip will fail to be read by the second mat so the chip system is almost perfect.

A finish time can vary a few seconds depending on which mat actually makes the recording (remember runners slowing down after crossing the finish line.)

Then there is the issue of which foot had the chip and which foot crossed first.

A combination of the rear foot and the 2 mat makes for a slower recorded time.

BTW, net times can only be given if there were starting line chip mats as well.

The extra expense of startling line mats is too much for most races, And runners should know that the chip system was invented so that the problems of the manually run finish are avoided, not to get net time.

Non-Chip scoring

In a non chip system, a human pushes the button when a runner crosses the finish line. When multiple runners cross together, all that is possible is for the human to do is push it twice. When a small pack crosses all within 20 feet of each other all that is possible for a human is to count the pack and as they cross and just push the button the number of times equal to the count.

The human process is further complicated because of distractions to the bottom pusher. Though the button pusher is not supposed to get distracted, people are people and when any of the following happens there are usually distracting shouts and a button push gets delayed or even miss counts the multiple runners.

People with numbers hidden, on their back or annoyingly folded so black 1s and 7s blend against dark shorts. What are they thinking.

Bandits - Bandits cause your time to be screwed up, so when the general public doesn't let bandits know they are scum and castigate them on forums or in person, you suffer.

Whether the bandit actually crosses the finish line or not doesn't matter relative to the distraction. If they cross the finish line ever ones time may be bumped down, but then results may be delayed while the timing company tries to figure out if a bandit got clicked or not. So thank bandits for slow results quite often.

People trip, punk, and pass in the chute, all distracting actions which cause manual finish errors.

Friends running back down the cross to run in with the wife, SO, or child. Remember the pack counting, that happens before runners cross the line.

It is really is so unfair that races get blamed when results have errors, most often the runners are the major cause of it.

and they there is the "well, you are the race managers, you're supposed to know what your are doing."

Well sure, it would be nice if that were the case, but most races are managed by runners just like you who are just not running today. Next week, they will be running in a race somewhere and you will helping manage a race doing your turn. Are you doing your turn?

People get a chance to manage once a year and have no practice. Hmmm, wonder why things go wrong at races.

Announcers are constantly telling runners to check the posted results BEFORE they go home. Why, because there often scoring errors that are notice the the Timing company but the don't know which way to fix things because until you tell them you are missing or incorrect they don't which record to fix.

Also, if you leave and others leave there is nobody to ask questions of about who might have around a finishing runner so as eliminate who isn't the reason for an error.

There are so many no-shows at races that having your number not show up in the results is not obvious error.

Any distance race has a 10 to 25 percent no-show rate so that is a ton bib numbers that don't show up.

When timing is done manually, it is not uncommon for a transposition to be made as the bib number is recorded. So the timing company knows they have 2 recording for the same bib which means that some other bib should have been recorded, but with dozens of number not there, who would that be.

We YOU don't check the results you contribute to the ultimate failure of you not being in the results or having you being given a time that was not yours as the management tried to "guess" who gets the times for which they have no bibs.

Can you think clearly and quickly when there is only 15 minutes to start time and the crew at water stop number 2 has not checked in to tell you they are in place and that the truck left the proper supplies and the required number of tables.,,,,,,,,,,,,,and some runner comes up, holding a cell phone and wants you to take the phone and give her almost deaf uncle detailed directions to the best place so her kids can see her run by.

What do you do?

Thankfully, some runners who registered early, are injured and can't run, often come up to ask if they can help which is great for two reasons. One is the extra help, but quite often they will seek you out after the race and tell you "wow, I never knew how some of this happened. It really is confusing at times."







http://This message has been edited by NHSenior (edited Oct-07-2007).
Click to view BillyVLT's profile Legend 221 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
1. Oct 8, 2007 4:11 PM in response to: NHSenior
Re: So, your official time didn't match your watch
I always enjoy your epistles on the art of race management. I wish there were more.

Generally, I am pleasantly surprised at how well the RDs and their staff people do at giving me an accurate time. It struck me that this must be a difficult thing to do. Now I understand a little better just how difficult it is.

I've said it before but it bears repeating: Thank you RDs and thank you volunteers!

Cheers,
Billy
Click to view Ross33's profile Amateur 29 posts since
Dec 15, 2007
4. Oct 9, 2007 4:53 PM in response to: NHSenior
Re: So, your official time didn't match your watch
I have run in a 100+ races most of which were either manually timed (using the bib rip off tags and some were simply self reported by the racers). So far there has only been a single failure to record my finish (and that chip malfunction was corrected afterwards). I want to take this opportunity to thank you and all my RDs for this amazing string of enjoyable, accurately timed races. I will admit to whining occasionally and voicing some complaints but please forgive my ignorance.

Thanks