Slow races: why no age group ranking? why are qualification round results not published?
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
Why are slow races different in their basic rules from all other track races (and many disciplines outside track racing)?
In 3B.6.4.3, it is explicitly stated that "No age groups will be ranked". Why is that? It may have to do with the subjective nature of human judges trying to detect errors, but to me this is unsatisfactory. We have age group ranking everywhere else in track racing. In my opinion, if the results are good enough to determine who is going through to the finals, they should be good enough to rank age groups.
Also, the latest Unicon (2016 Spain) was the only one in which the new rules of Qualification and Final Rounds applied. I notice that from that Unicon only the Final results have been published. I can't find Qualification results. Again, why is that? The rules don't even say that the qualification results should not be published, and I thought that in principe all results of a Unicon are published.
It seems as if Slow races are only about the elite riders. This is not how other disciplines are handled, and for good reasons. For most competitors, Unicon would not be fun anymore if only the finals are seen as valuable.
I plan to propose that in Slow racing Age groups will be ranked, and (just to be sure) that qualification results must be published.
Please discuss.
Comment
The discussion in the rulebook committee 2014 about the new slow race rules has been very long (I think you remember Klaas) and I tried to read it again to get the reasons for not ranking age groups and possibly not publishing the qualification results.
About not ranking age groups:
To me it seems that the main reason were, that slow races are impossible to judge objectively without a technical solution and because of different judges for one age group the results would be random and relatively meaningless. An other reason which was mentioned in the discussion was, that slow races have to many competitors if there are age group awards and this takes to much time.
I couldn't find reasons for not publishing the qualification results in the discussion. I agree to you, that qualification results should be published.
I really would like to see age groups in slow races again but I think therefore we need a technical solution which allows to judge slow races objectively. We should develop, test and introduce such a technical solution as fast as possible… It would solve many problems this discipline has right now.
Comment
So we determine who can go through to the finals based on results that are "random and relatively meaningless"?
This seems unfair to me, and one more reason to pursue a technical solution as soon as possible.
Comment
Perhaps then, we should make it an optional decision of the host to use or not to use age groups in slow races. Reasons:
- To me, the essence of a competition is that all riders are ranked.
- Before mid 2019 (when the next rulebook will replace the one we're discussing now), a technical solution might become acceptable to use (I hope so), in which case I think there is no ground to not use age groups.
- A host of a (smaller?) competition will retain the option to use age groups it it fits in his programma, and his riders value to be ranked.
If at Unicon no age groups can be ranked because of the reasons you mentioned, the Unicon host still has the option to do so.
Comment
Sorry, I pressed "Send" too quickly. The last sentence should not have been there, I worked it into the second bullet.
Comment
The rules give hosts (except for Unicon, EC or NAUCC) the possibility to use age groups.
"3B.6.4.4 Options for Smaller Competitions
At regional or national championships, the host can decide to offer age groups ranking and awards, and adjust the qualification time to a lower time as needed. […]"
But in my opinion it isn't the point if we need to make it an optional decision or not. In my opinion the point is that we need a technical judging system. And if we have one there are no reasons to make age groups optional.
Comment
I would like to get rid of the exception for Unicon, EC or NAUCC.
I think I will make two separate proposals if this is possible, because we seem to agree on the publication of results, but perhaps not on the age group issue.
Comment
I have created two separate proposals but they are not approved yet.
Comment
We had a extended discussion with several members 2 years ago about age group ranking and the big majority voted against age group ranking.
In case of a technical system, the problems will still be the same: there are a lot of riders who sign in for slow races, but do not appear at the competition. So, we have a waste of judges and volunteers (volunteers are always needed, independent of a technical system like in track races ).
There are also participants who try out slow races for the first time at Unicons. So, they perform ridiculous results or they will become DQ because they fall down shortly after the start or they damage the board and the light beams because their unicycle flies away. That´s my experience as slow race director of regional championships, it happened at UNICONs too.
2 years ago Olaf wrote about the following experience:"8 from 10 riders I asked why they sign in for slow race competition told me that they just had free time then and want to see how slow they are, most of them even have no idea about the rules".
The number of these type of riders has been reduced since age groups are not ranked any more, but there are still some of such just for fun riders at unicons.
If we start again to distribute medals for casual and just for fun riders at Unicons, the number will increase again.
Slow races are not comparable with track races. For example, also in Flatland/Street or x- style age groups will not be ranked.
Comment
I disagree that the results of the Qualification round will published because of the following facts and experiences:
1. It´s a qualification round and not a age group competition:
Results of the qualification round are not comparable with results of the finals because in the qualification round the boards can be marked with tape on the floor. In addition, in the qualification round we have different judges...............
2. Let me comment the experience of Mondovi: First results of qualification round had been published, than age group medals have been given to riders who participated in the qualification round, without reaching the required qualification time ( for the final/ real competition ). So, the age group medals were given to riders with ridiculous results because the finalists were not considered in the age group ranking.
After a lot of protests, the result lists of the qualification round has´t been published online.
To avoid such situations and expectations to get a medal for 5 sec., at Unicon18 qualification results have not been published.
Comment
> In case of a technical system, the problems will still be the same: there are a lot of
> riders who sign in for slow races, but do not appear at the competition. So, we have a
> waste of judges and volunteers (volunteers are always needed, independent of a technical
> system like in track races ).
If this is a repeated experience, then the number of judges and volunteers can be reduced accordingly. You said earlier that it is difficult to find judges, so reducing the required number should be welcome.
> There are also participants who try out slow races for the first time at Unicons. So,
> they perform ridiculous results or they will become DQ because they fall down shortly
> after the start or they damage the board and the light beams because their unicycle flies
> away. That´s my experience as slow race director of regional championships, it happened
> at UNICONs too.
Such participants should drop out in the prelim rounds, where there may not be boards but markings on the floor. A board should be able to withstand a falling unicycle.
> 2 years ago Olaf wrote about the following experience:"8 from 10 riders I asked why they
> sign in for slow race competition told me that they just had free time then and want to
> see how slow they are, most of them even have no idea about the rules".
>
> The number of these type of riders has been reduced since age groups are not ranked any
> more, but there are still some of such just for fun riders at unicons.
This happens in other disciplines too. I don't see it as a big problem.
> If we start again to distribute medals for casual and just for fun riders at Unicons,
> the number will increase again.
The casual and just for fun riders won't be good enough to earn age group awards.
> Slow races are not comparable with track races. For example, also in Flatland/Street or
> x- style age groups will not be ranked.
I'm not sure about Street, but in Flatland and in X-style, there is a junior group which contains the younger riders.
> I disagree that the results of the Qualification round will published because of the
> following facts and experiences:
>
> 1. It´s a qualification round and not a age group competition:
I agree that this is true according to the current rules, but I'm not happy about it.
> Results of the qualification round are not comparable with results of the finals because
> in the qualification round the boards can be marked with tape on the floor. In addition,
> in the qualification round we have different judges...............
If the results are not fully comparable, why is that a reason not to publish them? They can be titled "Qualification Round Results" (if we use that name), and so be explicitly different from "Final Round Results".
And by the way, the effect of different judges can be largely solved once we have a technical system to check adherance to the rules.
> 2. Let me comment the experience of Mondovi: First results of qualification round had
> been published, than age group medals have been given to riders who participated in the
> qualification round, without reaching the required qualification time ( for the final/
> real competition ). So, the age group medals were given to riders with ridiculous results
> because the finalists were not considered in the age group ranking.
The qualification times are quite high. I have argued earlier that only elite riders are able to get them This is good if it is to determine who goes on to the finals.
But times below those qualification times are not "ridiculous" results. I'm sorry to say, but I don't like this elitist view of Slow Racing.
> After a lot of protests, the result lists of the qualification round has´t been published
> online.
Read 1C.17 in the Rulebook:
Results of national and international championships must be published including details such as time, distance, and total score.
I totally don't see why Qualification Round Results should not be published.
> To avoid such situations and expectations to get a medal for 5 sec., at Unicon18
> qualification results have not been published.
Firstly, publishing Qualification Round Results is different from awarding medals.
Secondly, I just looked through Unicon17 results, the last one in which Age Group medals were given out. All medalists had times much better than 5 seconds.
Comment
The proposal refers to a technical system that still doesn´t exist. I´m against the development of rules about inexisting systems.
The qualification round is not considered as a part of the competition. But it´s an offer for riders who did´t had the possibility to perform a qualification time before.
By the way, it´s not difficult to perform 45 sec.. I know riders who practice only a few times a year and reach the qualification time. It´s true that riders who train a little bit can reach this result. So, 45.sec has nothing to do with elite. Indeed, some hosts are thinking about increasing the qualification time as a special rule for their competition.
At Unicon17 nobody get a medal with 5 sec. because the finalists were considered in the age group ranking. But at UNIOEC in Mondovi all riders who reached a better result than 45/40 sec. were excluded of the age group ranking.
Comment
> The qualification round is not considered as a part of the competition.
I disagree. I do consider the qualification round as a part of the competition. Its rules are in the Rulebook. The officials, volunteers and facilities of the event are used. How is this outside the competition?
> By the way, it´s not difficult to perform 45 sec.
Again, I disagree. On 15 December last year, in the discussion "wheel size for slow races", you made a similar claim about 50 seconds. I then researched that, and estimated that less than 10% of the competitors in Slow Race (forward) in Unicons could reach a time of 50 seconds. (For more details, see my response in that discussion on 15 December.) I believe that 45 seconds is not difficult for you and perhaps for a few talented riders you know, but in general this can be considered difficult.
> At Unicon17 nobody get a medal with 5 sec. because the finalists were considered in the age group ranking.
In Unicon17, a Final was not required for Slow Race, and as far as I know, no final was held. So you can't say that finalists were considered in the age group ranking, because there were no finalists. And certainly, there was no 45 seconds rule in the rulebook governing Unicon17. But even if I remove the riders with 45 seconds or better from the Unicon17 results (which is a purely hypothetical operation!), it doesn't change the conclusion that all Age Group medalists had times much better than 5 seconds.
> But at UNIOEC in Mondovi all riders who reached a better result than 45/40 sec. were excluded of the age group ranking.
I wonder what that was based on?? Slow Race seems to be inventing its own rules here. In all disciplines that I know of, where there are age groups, EVERY rider is ranked in Age Group results. After the Age Group competition, the best riders irrespective of age, compete in the Final if there is one. But they still keep their place in the Age Group ranking. I think that Slow Race should also work this way.