Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

financial penalites for drafting

Options
  • 10-09-2013 10:30am
    #1
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭


    I was thinking the only reason people started to wear a seatbelt in Germany was the introduction of a penalty for not wearing one .

    Would that be a good idea for triathlon? (on top of time penalty)
    It would help to fund draft marshals, and we could have more of them, which I think is crucial.
    Could TI enforce the rule ?
    I guess 40 euro would be a fair amount or 100 euro if there is video evidence .
    What would be the pros and cons ?


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    hf4z6sqo7vjngi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,454 ✭✭✭hf4z6sqo7vjngi


    Do you want to drive people away from the sport? Financial penalties is not the way to sort the problem. Stronger time penalties and name & shame is the only way to go.


  • Options
    #3
    elvis jones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,197 ✭✭✭elvis jones


    peter kern wrote: »
    I was thinking the only reason people started to wear a seatbelt in Germany was the introduction of a penalty for not wearing one .

    Would that be a good idea for triathlon? (on top of time penalty)
    It would help to fund draft marshals, and we could have more of them, which I think is crucial.
    Could TI enforce the rule ?
    I guess 40 euro would be a fair amount or 100 euro if there is video evidence .
    What would be the pros and cons ?

    So if you draft you have to pay more than you paid to enter the race if it is for example a sprint ?

    How do you make people pay ? Employ a dept revocery agency or clamp their bikes in transition:rolleyes:

    Sorry Peter but i think its a crazy idea.


  • Options
    #4
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    peter kern wrote: »
    I was thinking the only reason people started to wear a seatbelt in Germany was the introduction of a penalty for not wearing one .

    Would that be a good idea for triathlon? (on top of time penalty)
    It would help to fund draft marshals, and we could have more of them, which I think is crucial.
    Could TI enforce the rule ?
    I guess 40 euro would be a fair amount or 100 euro if there is video evidence .
    What would be the pros and cons ?
    Only if youre talking about people who make money from triathlon (pros and winners).

    For an everyday joe taking part, its complete overkill. People would just move to unafililiated races with no risk of fines.


  • Options
    #5
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    Griffin Scrawny Mouthful wrote: »
    Do you want to drive people away from the sport? Financial penalties is not the way to sort the problem. Stronger time penalties and name & shame is the only way to go.

    last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.


  • Options
    #6
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    peter kern wrote: »
    last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.
    In the case of a car, its policed extensively, and those using a car have no choice but to drive. Triathletes have a choice which races to enter, or whether to do them at all.

    How would you propose TI administer and collect the fines?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    sconhome
    Registered Users Posts: 5,468 ✭✭✭sconhome


    peter kern wrote: »
    last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.

    Driving a car is very often a necessity for people to go about their daily business, so its easy to force compliance.

    Racing a triathlon is a matter of choice for many and financial penalties just won't be enforceable. Like, who carries cash or card during a race?

    I'd be in favour of motor bike referees carrying cattle prods and just tazing offenders. The subsequent road rash would serve as a reminder that drafting is against the rules & spirit of triathlon. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #8
    hf4z6sqo7vjngi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,454 ✭✭✭hf4z6sqo7vjngi


    peter kern wrote: »
    last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.

    There is no comparison between the two. One is the law the other you are trying to impose a fine on something whilst for the large part of competitors is supposed to be fun. As i said it would drive people away from the sport, start a poll on here as i am sure i am not alone on this one.

    Radical changes are required but i just cannot see fines being one of those changes.


  • Options
    #9
    MrCreosote
    Registered Users Posts: 2,320 ✭✭✭MrCreosote


    How about a financial reward for dobbing in drafters?

    Less stick, more carrot.


  • Options
    #10
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    I think what Peter is doing is saying that the penalty needs to be draconian.

    I disagree with the financial aspect but a drafting penalty should ruin your race. 10-20 minutes for a sprint or olympic. Second offence being a DQ.

    Also a drafting penalty in one race (time or DQ) should count as a "first offence" in the next 4-5 races.

    Once the punishment exceeds any gain, or could, then it stops.


  • Options
    #11
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    Oryx wrote: »
    In the case of a car, its policed extensively, and those using a car have no choice but to drive. Triathletes have a choice which races to enter, or whether to do them at all.

    How would you propose TI administer and collect the fines?

    could be like you pay 1 day license you just pay online , you get a drafting penalty so you have to pay the fee before you enter the next race no paid fee no race.
    Easy to enforce as every person that registers has to swipe in on race day.
    admin costs very low but it would give TI more money for draft marshalls. Its a fact draft marshalls cost money and somebody has to pay for them, its all good shouting we need more marshalls if we dodnt come up with ways to pay for them.

    and if it drives the people away that draft would that be so bad. I thought thats what we want a clean sport.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    Also a drafting penalty in one race (time or DQ) should count as a "first offence" in the next 4-5 races.

    yes great idea but hard to administer so again some money has to come in to pay for administration.


  • Options
    #13
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    peter kern wrote: »
    Also a drafting penalty in one race (time or DQ) should count as a "first offence" in the next 4-5 races.

    yes great idea but hard to administer so again some money has to come in to pay for administration.

    can be done programmatically. People are allowed to continue. Results filtered through software that flags "fat aaron got pinged two races ago, pinged again DQ" and then the results are printed.


  • Options
    #14
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    I like it dave.
    but again I think we need more marshalls to do this job. 2 marshalls for 350 people is like the proverbial drop on the hot stone.


  • Options
    #15
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    MrCreosote wrote: »
    How about a financial reward for dobbing in drafters?

    Less stick, more carrot.


    Please tell me more how you think that would work.


  • Options
    #16
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    peter kern wrote: »
    I like it dave.
    but again I think we need more marshalls to do this job. 2 marshalls for 350 people is like the proverbial drop on the hot stone.

    I agree completely. John Cunniffe (very solid guy on the TI council a few years back) had some excellent formulae for calculating maximum numbers given specific course profiles that above which drafting was unavoidable. I venture a guess that this are no longer considered.

    What he also had was the idea, and prototype implementation I believe, of static video camera analysis for drafting.

    Unfortunately the likes of John are long gone.


  • Options
    #17
    sconhome
    Registered Users Posts: 5,468 ✭✭✭sconhome


    tunney wrote: »
    can be done programmatically. People are allowed to continue. Results filtered through software that flags "fat aaron got pinged two races ago, pinged again DQ" and then the results are printed.
    peter kern wrote: »
    I like it dave.
    but again I think we need more marshalls to do this job. 2 marshalls for 350 people is like the proverbial drop on the hot stone.

    To operate this would probably require tagging of TI member numbers with a penalty points type system. How would it operate with 'unlicensed' racers or ODL's?

    Back to discussing a tiered approach where relaxed rules in non-sanctioned 'fun' races and strict, strict approach in sanctioned events for 'serious' triathletes ?


  • Options
    #18
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    amphkingwest wrote: »
    To operate this would probably require tagging of TI member numbers with a penalty points type system. How would it operate with 'unlicensed' racers or ODL's?

    Back to discussing a tiered approach where relaxed rules in non-sanctioned 'fun' races and strict, strict approach in sanctioned events for 'serious' triathletes ?

    ODL numbers (well strings technically) generated as a hash of the firstname + surname + DOB + phone

    Every time you apply for one you get the same one


  • Options
    #19
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    AKW I think drafting is a health and saftey hazerd and applies to all levels regardles of serious or not serious athletes.


  • Options
    #20
    BennyMul
    Registered Users Posts: 1,173 ✭✭✭BennyMul


    silly thought
    Could TI not enforce the use of a GPS system for the bike either purchased or rented when getting a lic.
    This could track the location of all cyclists on the course and identify if drafting is occurring (with margin for error of course)


  • Options
    #21
    sconhome
    Registered Users Posts: 5,468 ✭✭✭sconhome


    peter kern wrote: »
    AKW I think drafting is a health and saftey hazerd and applies to all levels regardles of serious or not serious athletes.

    I do agree with you Peter. Its the solution is the problem.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    BennyMul wrote: »
    silly thought
    Could TI not enforce the use of a GPS system for the bike either purchased or rented when getting a lic.
    This could track the location of all cyclists on the course and identify if drafting is occurring (with margin for error of course)


    how much would that cost? who would pay for it, the honest people or the once that get cought?
    is it reliable ?
    I think I have seen a device like that a few weeks ago so I think it is possible but again it will need more people to enforce it and somebody has to pay for it and I think it should be the people that infringe the rule not the once that dont. (its an incentive not to draft)


  • Options
    #23
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    amphkingwest wrote: »
    I do agree with you Peter. Its the solution is the problem.

    The solution, and the problem, come from lacking in testicular fortitude.
    peter kern wrote: »
    how much would that cost? who would pay for it, the honest people or the once that get cought?
    is it reliable ?
    I think I have seen a device like that a few weeks ago so I think it is possible but again it will need more people to enforce it and somebody has to pay for it and I think it should be the people that infringe the rule not the once that dont. (its an incentive not to draft)

    Technically I'm not sure its possible at a non-prohibitive cost.


  • Options
    #24
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    amphkingwest wrote: »
    I do agree with you Peter. Its the solution is the problem.

    than it might be better to keep the thread focused on the essential,
    ie the solution to the problem and not widening the problem. Serious and not serious is a totaly different subject i would think.

    So what do you think is the solution and who will pay for it?


  • Options
    #25
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    Dave Ireland as a small nation might be a good place to bring a world wide system in place.
    Maybe Itu could give a grant.
    We are only 5 days away from threads on the forum what draft festival the worlds were.


  • Options
    #26
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    peter kern wrote: »
    Dave Ireland as a small nation might be a good place to bring a world wide system in place.
    Maybe Itu could give a grant.
    We are only 5 days away from threads on the forum what draft festival the worlds were.

    The problem with GPS as a technology in this application is its accuracy
    Typically its around 5m best case.

    Thats 50% of the draft zone.

    If two athletes were drafting and the GPS receivers were both out by 5m in the same plane then the system would not flag them as drafting.

    Likewise it could flag false positives.

    I had previously though of range limited RFID style chips enclosed in the ankle bracelets with some sort of proximity detecting chip but that could be bypassed by wrapping the ankle bracelet in tine foil or something.


  • Options
    #27
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    5m is too much i guess 2 m the max tolerance ? So it seems like we are some years away from that. Still Ireland or newzealand would be great countries to test a new sytem when the time is ready.

    Then it does boil down to.
    Soccer at least 3 referees for 22 player
    triathlon usually 2 draft marshals for 350 athletes.

    so 1 in 7 for soccer ( in big matches i guess they have 5 so 1 in 4.5)
    and roughly 1 to 175 in triathlon for drafting if you include head refery 1 to 115 .My appology i know the numbers i produce are likely incorrect- and i focus on drafting and not crossing a white line by 5 cm- but we get the picture that there is little marshelling on the course in comparasion too other sports.


  • Options
    #28
    BennyMul
    Registered Users Posts: 1,173 ✭✭✭BennyMul


    peter kern wrote: »
    than it might be better to keep the thread focused on the essential,
    ie the solution to the problem and not widening the problem. Serious and not serious is a totaly different subject i would think.

    So what do you think is the solution and who will pay for it?

    Regardless of the solution, the members will pay for it either directly or indirectly. there is a cost associated either technology or a number of marshals.

    I am mindful of the constraints over the GPS accuracy, and do like the idea of the proximity sensor, if functional would be cheaper and more accurate than GPS, providing they are non-tamper proof.


  • Options
    #29
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    yes it will cost and thats why i would like- as much possible- that the people that infringe pay. And I would say the higher the penalty the more people will think about if they draft and that would mean we need less marshalls, to get fairer races .
    And using Daves thinking we could give one infrigement free of charge( ie only a time penalty) for every 6 races or so, Inthis way we also rule out human error for a wrong drafting call- in which case the penalty probably needs to be 100 euro for the 2nd call within 5-7 races and 2oo euro with video evidence.

    But the bottom line is somebody will have to pay or we need to go draft legal as the current system has failled.


  • Options
    #30
    BTH
    Registered Users Posts: 3,075 Mod ✭✭✭✭BTH


    tunney wrote: »
    I had previously though of range limited RFID style chips enclosed in the ankle bracelets with some sort of proximity detecting chip but that could be bypassed by wrapping the ankle bracelet in tine foil or something.

    This, if at all possible (I have no what RIFD is), is the only semi realistic solution. Fines arent going to happen. And presumably if you wrap your chip in foil it'll not be picked up my timing mats either, so policing that shouldn't be particularly difficult.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    BTH wrote: »
    This, if at all possible (I have no what RIFD is), is the only semi realistic solution. Fines arent going to happen. And presumably if you wrap your chip in foil it'll not be picked up my timing mats either, so policing that shouldn't be particularly difficult.

    To be honest old school tech (ie none) and brutal penalties that are enforced will do it. Its the softness of the penalties and the enforcement that is the problem

    (Fully expected to get done in Blacksod regardless of what I do. Last time I b1tched about drafting (2005/2006) I got pinged despite not drafting "to teach a lesson". Oh the joys of a judgement call not being appealble.)


Advertisement