Des Hanlon Memorial, March 23 2014, Carlow

wav1

buffalo wrote: »

In 2012 I successfully appealed the points awarded for a certain Dunsany GP. Comm on the day wanted to award only first 3, but distance was recorded as 51km+.

I got my points a couple of weeks later, being just outside the top three.

Sure theres points for the first 15 in a ''classic like that''

fixie fox

fortis wrote: »

..... This didn't happen with Martin O Loughlin (though perhaps that was an admin error due to the closeness of the races) ...

People should be clear on the rules on this. It is the riders' responsibility to keep track of their points and upgrade voluntarily if necessary. So, if I get a result today that puts me over and I want to race tomorrow, then I inform the Com. before the start tomorrow. Comms. and the upgrading officer are volunteers (I think) and they can't be expected to be up to date with the 'admin' every day.

duffyshuffle

slow wrote: »

A3 racing is proper racing thanks to the young fellas. If you can't beat them, you shouldn't be A2.

From what I've taken from it, people aren't saying that they'll win every race if the juniors weren't there and that they'd be A2 straightaway but that they want to race against A3s, the level that they are at.

Im only new to it, but it seems like:
- A2s bunch is too small for their own races to be held
- A3s races have Juniors mopping up points so A3s can't increase the A2 field sizes with promotions up
- A2s have to race with A1s all the time, causing the jump from A3 to A2/A1 to be way harder
- There's no A2 bunch for Juniors to race in, because there is a bottleneck in the A3s and there is effectively no A2 group to race with

It seems the A3 and A4 groups are big and getting bigger, but then everyone says that this is the peak of racing numbers and lots will fall off from here on in.

ragazzo

duffyshuffle wrote: »

From what I've taken from it, people aren't saying that they'll win every race if the juniors weren't there and that they'd be A2 straightaway but that they want to race against A3s, the level that they are at.

Im only new to it, but it seems like:
- A2s bunch is too small for their own races to be held
- A3s races have Juniors mopping up points so A3s can't increase the A2 field sizes with promotions up
- A2s have to race with A1s all the time, causing the jump from A3 to A2/A1 to be way harder
- There's no A2 bunch for Juniors to race in, because there is a bottleneck in the A3s and there is effectively no A2 group to race with

It seems the A3 and A4 groups are big and getting bigger, but then everyone says that this is the peak of racing numbers and lots will fall off from here on in.

In reality it is the A1 grade that cannot sustain a racing programme. That is why the A2 riders are usually combined with A1. No race organiser is going to run a race for 10 or 12 A1's.

There are plenty of A2 riders and more than enough to run separate races for the grade. Check entry lists for any races that prohibit A1 riders for evidence of this. ie Gorey 3 Day etc.

Many A2 riders don't seem to turn up and when they do they fail to score points as the A1's mop these up. Hence lack of upgrade opportunities for A2 riders and the scenario continues. Stand alone A2 races would help to solve the problem moreso than throwing Juniors into A1 races. Obviously this is not happening because organisers feel let down when less than 20 A1 riders sign on and combine A1/2 as a result.
Experience teaches a harsh lesson.

CI can legislate all they like but until the A1 problem is sorted, the other categories will suffer. A2 is probably carrying the cross on this one.

Gorey should see a few upgrades unless the pesky juniors rob the points again.
Then we can start this thread all over again!

duffyshuffle

ragazzo wrote: »

In reality it is the A1 grade that cannot sustain a racing programme. That is why the A2 riders are usually combined with A1. No race organiser is going to run a race for 10 or 12 A1's.

There are plenty of A2 riders and more than enough to run separate races for the grade. Check entry lists for any races that prohibit A1 riders for evidence of this. ie Gorey 3 Day etc.

Many A2 riders don't seem to turn up and when they do they fail to score points as the A1's mop these up. Hence lack of upgrade opportunities for A2 riders and the scenario continues. Stand alone A2 races would help to solve the problem moreso than throwing Juniors into A1 races. Obviously this is not happening because organisers feel let down when less than 20 A1 riders sign on and combine A1/2 as a result.
Experience teaches a harsh lesson.

CI can legislate all they like but until the A1 problem is sorted, the other categories will suffer. A2 is probably carrying the cross on this one.

Gorey should see a few upgrades unless the pesky juniors rob the points again.
Then we can start this thread all over again!

Ok I thought it was an A2 issue not A1 re: numbers

morana

slow wrote: »

There must have been some kickings given out in the Hanlon yesterday given the grumpy comments. As my mother used to say when I threw a bedtime strop: "He's tired".

And tired those juniors are today after 120km yesterday. For Dunbar & O' Brien it's a third big weekend in a row after racing trips to Holland & the UK.

A3 racing is proper racing thanks to the young fellas. If you can't beat them, you shouldn't be A2.

They were back in school today. First and second are Leaving Cert students. If you upgraded them, are you suggesting they'd ride the 160km Hanlon? Training for a 4 hour race is a totally different ball game. It's 6 months to the Road Worlds, not 6 weeks.

MOL tweeted earlier in the year that the CI system would only give him an A4 licence as he had a club competition licence last year. Any 47 year old who comes back and gets upgraded in effectively two weekends - fair play. And as wav1 pointed out, contrary to previous allegations still on this thread, he broke no rule (Mods???)

I understand a lot of ppl here are protective of juniors but I think I am right in thinking that the Worlds RR is the ultimate goal for our elite juniors. This event last year was 141km in length! Having Rai TV at home I regularly see the italian juniors doing events 120km + over rough terrain. Now there is a junior bunch but they are able for it.

If juniors are winning week in week out its doing them no good to keep them at levels where they are dominating. Just my opinion.

wav1

this debate will go on and on time after time and always will have divided opinions from us all,but FWIW i personally think its about right for now.
There isan Irish junior team riding the tour of the north at easter [with A1s etc] and the NRPT junior team are taking in a stage race in Belgium at easter.Thats plenty enough for them this side of the leaving imo and should leave plenty of points and upgrading opportunities available at gorey,so at least we shouldnt be fighting about it in the week after easter.
Also i know i said it many times and it has been knocked back time after time citing lack of equipment etc to take the results but the rider who was 7th in A3 race in Carlow should have got 10 pts as he was 1ST a3 and continue right down till you find the 10th A3.That way A3s will be happier and moving through the system.

manwithaplan

hammerheadjack wrote: »

Junior /A2 over the 115Km distance might have been better for the race yesterday. Three laps of that circuit is too much for any Junior and many A2. Of the huge field of A3 that started, I'd estimate that only 30 actually finished..20% of the field...many of them Juniors. I'd imagine a lot of the A3 would have pulled out after the first lap having nothing to race for.

There was actually a very decent bunch together at the finish. Probably 40+. That includes a few from the higher cats that were mopped up along he way but excludes the 5 in the break and fast Eddie. Probably a similar proportion of the field that finish a spring classic.

petethedrummer

Handicapping. Every point over 15, 100 grams goes on the bike.

Inquitus

petethedrummer wrote: »

Handicapping. Every point over 15, 100 grams goes on the bike.

Eddie Dunbar needs to get himself to Halfords!

fortis

wav1 wrote: »

this debate will go on and on time after time and always will have divided opinions from us all,but FWIW i personally think its about right for now.
There isan Irish junior team riding the tour of the north at easter [with A1s etc] and the NRPT junior team are taking in a stage race in Belgium at easter.Thats plenty enough for them this side of the leaving imo and should leave plenty of points and upgrading opportunities available at gorey,so at least we shouldnt be fighting about it in the week after easter.
Also i know i said it many times and it has been knocked back time after time citing lack of equipment etc to take the results but the rider who was 7th in A3 race in Carlow should have got 10 pts as he was 1ST a3 and continue right down till you find the 10th A3.That way A3s will be happier and moving through the system.

Hi Wav

I think you hit the nail on the head there i.e

"lack of equipment etc to take the results"

Transponders or something like that would rectify the whole points thing. It would also makes things much easier for CI and the race organsiers as there would be no ambiguity, results would be automated. Out of interest, why is it constantly knocked back? Cost? Inability to understand or use it? Apathy? Other sports using chip timing extensively, it adds a little bit to race entries but not much. It would certainly seem the solution to an issue that doesn't seem to have an easy resolution right now.

Also I'm aware that MOL was incorrectly assumed to have raced A3 when promoted, I apologise. I think a lot of people made the same mistake however. When they published the rankings they should have put "promoted" or something next to those that were.

Koobcam

You could easily put transponders in the numbers that CI give out with licenses. Plenty of events already where timing chips are used, and any event I've ever done with timing chips, they are somewhere in/on the numbers. Race organisers could keep a stock of chips available at races for people who'e lost/damaged theirs or haven't gotten their race numbers yet. Pretty simple and not especially difficult to implement, though probably you'd have to train people, so maybe keep a 'traditional' system as backup. Might increase costs a bit. This would make promotion of places A3s altogether more feasible.

buffalo

Video of the A4 sprint:

ericzeking

You would need to check all the numbers before the start to make sure they are working properly or you'll have a whole new raft of problems. You would also still need cameras for stage races as timing chips just won't work when giving group times.

I don't see why in a world where a 30 euro phone has a video camera in it that Cycling Ireland can't have a standard finish line set up with a half decent camera... 4 kits, one for each province...some initial capital investment required which I would have thought would be pretty small in this day and age but alot of headaches and torment quickly dispelled.

fortis

ericzeking wrote: »

You would need to check all the numbers before the start to make sure they are working properly or you'll have a whole new raft of problems. You would also still need cameras for stage races as timing chips just won't work when giving group times.

I don't see why in a world where a 30 euro phone has a video camera in it that Cycling Ireland can't have a standard finish line set up with a half decent camera... 4 kits, one for each province...some initial capital investment required which I would have thought would be pretty small in this day and age but alot of headaches and torment quickly dispelled.

The numbers check thing is easy from what I have seen, you hold the chip to the transponder, it either works or it doesn't.

Riders would have to take a share of responsibility too to ensure they don't lose the chip or whatever, but that depends on the technology. I know in foreign events you are issue with a chip for the year (tri not cycling) and you bring it to each event and it is registered per event (they hold it against the scanner setup at registration, logs to a database). So this would be done per event same as signing on.

The chip could be on bike, shoe, integrated in the number..

Would also make timegaps etc etc easier to relay accurately, even be possible to follow races live (probably unnecessary)!

The technology exists and is being used. Lots of companies worldwide do event timing. So why not use it? If it's cost, explain why (the costs, how they are divided between race organisers, CI and the rider and the reason why it is deemed too expensive). If it's apathy then that's another matter. Has it been even looked at? If it was dismissed why?

Koobcam

fortis wrote: »

The numbers check thing is easy from what I have seen, you hold the chip to the transponder, it either works or it doesn't.

Riders would have to take a share of responsibility too to ensure they don't lose the chip or whatever, but that depends on the technology. I know in foreign events you are issue with a chip for the year (tri not cycling) and you bring it to each event and it is registered per event (they hold it against the scanner setup at registration, logs to a database). So this would be done per event same as signing on.

The chip could be on bike, shoe, integrated in the number..

Would also make timegaps etc etc easier to relay accurately, even be possible to follow races live (probably unnecessary)!

The technology exists and is being used. Lots of companies worldwide do event timing. So why not use it? If it's cost, explain why (the costs, how they are divided between race organisers, CI and the rider and the reason why it is deemed too expensive). If it's apathy then that's another matter. Has it been even looked at? If it was dismissed why?

Yes, the key point here is that the tech is there and it's not new either. One thing I don;t know is the costs involved and this may be an issue but I reckon it's just as likely that apathy would be the prime reason for timing chips not being used. Cycling is still a pretty 'traditional' sport and attitudes can be hard to change.

Plastik

They used timing chips at the Wexford 2-day late last summer and it turned into an absolute farce.

fortis

Plastik wrote: »

They used timing chips at the Wexford 2-day late last summer and it turned into an absolute farce.

Most new technology is initially disruptive because people don't understand it properly and take time to get used to it. I'm sure with some lessons and a bit of practice it could be done properly.

It works in the big tours!

It depends on the type of technology being used. It should at least be considered. It works fine for very large events like marathons etc with more stringent requirements (1000's of people, split second timing). I'm sure on the continent in place like Belgium where cycling is very popular it is used and companies provide that service.

lennymc

They use timing chips in cx, and its fine but there generally aren't sprint finishes in cx. The other sports like Tri dont have sprint finishes. When I asked about using them for road racing the guy said that they should be fine, however, if one person on the far side of the road crosses the line just before a person on the other side, the signal from the rider nearer the computer has less to travel, and as a result can be picked up by the computer first, giving an incorrect result. AFAIK in big races, the photo finish camera is the primary means of identifying who came first, with the chips just recording a time, but am open to correction on that.

Chips Lovell

I assume that all of these proposals, whether they're on what races juniors and vets should be doing or introducing timing chips, are going to be brought to the next Cycling Ireland AGM?

fortis

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I assume that all of these proposals, whether they're on what races juniors and vets should be doing or introducing timing chips, are going to be brought to the next Cycling Ireland AGM?

Well Vlad, from what Wav has said on this previously it has been raised before at AGM's but has been dismissed

But I guess the reasons from dismissing it should be clear. Is it cost or apathy? Or just not suitable?

Chips Lovell

Why don't you ask at the AGM?

ragazzo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I assume that all of these proposals, whether they're on what races juniors and vets should be doing or introducing timing chips, are going to be brought to the next Cycling Ireland AGM?

Assuming the posters are CI members.
It should be a busy AGM. Great to see all this interest. Enough on this forum alone to solve all the problems and implement new ideas and technology across the board.
Move over Jack the traditionalist, here come the ideas people.
Can't wait for next year!

fortis

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Why don't you ask at the AGM?

I intend to. I'm just saying it has been raised before. So it's not a lightbulb moment. And things like that should be constantly analysed and not just because someone asked at an agm anyway. There is no reason why changes couldn't be introduced mid season. Or proposals looked at seriously.

Chips Lovell

See you there so.

quozl

lennymc wrote: »

When I asked about using them for road racing the guy said that they should be fine, however, if one person on the far side of the road crosses the line just before a person on the other side, the signal from the rider nearer the computer has less to travel, and as a result can be picked up by the computer first, giving an incorrect result. AFAIK in big races, the photo finish camera is the primary means of identifying who came first, with the chips just recording a time, but am open to correction on that.

Sounds highly dubious and I think your man was waffling. Electrical signals in wires travel at almost the speed of light. Which coincidentally is exactly what is being measured with a photo finish camera!

The same problem actually applies to the photo finish camera - the light coming from the further away rider has further to travel to the camera and thus if two cyclists cross at exactly the same time the further away cyclist theoretically would be shown to have come 2nd in the photograph.

Which is all nonsense of course as over those sort of distances we don't have the timing resolution for it to make any difference anyway!

lennymc

fortis wrote: »

Or just not suitable?

lennymc wrote: »

When I asked about using them for road racing the guy said that they should be fine, however, if one person on the far side of the road crosses the line just before a person on the other side, the signal from the rider nearer the computer has less to travel, and as a result can be picked up by the computer first, giving an incorrect result.

If a chip timing system can give a result that is not representative of who actually finished first, then is it suitable for road racing?

fortis

quozl wrote: »

Sounds highly dubious and I think your man was waffling. Electrical signals in wires travel at almost the speed of light. Which coincidentally is exactly what is being measured with a photo finish camera!

The same problem actually applies to the photo finish camera - the light coming from the further away rider has further to travel to the camera and thus if two cyclists cross at exactly the same time the further away cyclist theoretically would be shown to have come 2nd in the photograph.

Which is all nonsense of course as over those sort of distances we don't have the timing resolution for it to make any difference anyway!

Well the timing is done by radio waves which do travel at the speed of light, but anyways it's not a physics discussion! Such permutations have been considered and worked out already.

At the finish line in these systems there is a finish line camera. Which is pointed perpendicular to the line. So it just needs to determine which wheel came across the line first. The transponder takes care of who was there.

You can often see this at sprint finishes in the big races or indeed in horse racing

lennymc

I just responded with what I was told by a guy who operates them for a living, and that he suggested they might not be suitable for road racing.

edit - a link from cyclingtips.com.au
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2011/09/electronic-timing-systems/

petethedrummer

fortis wrote: »

You can often see this at sprint finishes in the big races or indeed in horse racing

Yeah, everyone would have to have the transponder in the exact same place on their person/bike or there would be arguments in a tight finish. And people would find ridiculous ways to mount the thing further and further forward. I suppose the location could be nailed down.

quozl

lennymc wrote: »

I just responded with what I was told by a guy who operates them for a living, and that he suggested they might not be suitable for road racing.

I understand, I wasn't arguing with you, just saying that the reason he gave you is nonsense. He may well be right about them not being suitable but not for the reason he gave you. Randomly I've got a MSc in Physics with Imaging technologies (for medical purposes) being half of it. The reason he gave makes no sense but there may well be other perfectly good reasons for why it's not suitable.

fortis

lennymc wrote: »

I just responded with what I was told by a guy who operates them for a living, and that he suggested they might not be suitable for road racing.

edit - a link from cyclingtips.com.au
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2011/09/electronic-timing-systems/

Nice one lennymc. So there are problems (principally cost).

But anyway it is good it is being discussed (albeit on a forum). There might be alternatives. Maybe not, maybe it's not a runner right now. But at least it is being discussed.

Interesting to see other cycling federations have embraced it (cost non withstanding)

maloner

Doubtless there's ways to sort out the technical side of things, but is everyone willing to pay a couple of euro extra, or more, per race? I suspect not.

Inquitus

fortis wrote: »

Nice one lennymc. So there are problems (principally cost).

But anyway it is good it is being discussed (albeit on a forum). There might be alternatives. Maybe not, maybe it's not a runner right now. But at least it is being discussed.

Interesting to see other cycling federations have embraced it (cost non withstanding)

The cost to the club is approximately AU$5000-AU$8000 for the ETS decoder equipment, laptop and detection loop

Surely CI have the bandwidth to arrange for one of these per Province at a cost of @ €4k each? CI racing members provide a 125 euro deposit when they are given a transponder, and they get money back should they cease racing based on €25 for each complete season of expected life remaining.

lennymc

Inquitus wrote: »

Surely CI have the bandwidth to arrange for one of these per Province at a cost of @ €4k each? CI racing members provide a 125 euro deposit when they are given a transponder, and they get money back should they cease racing based on €25 for each complete season of expected life remaining.

What happens then when there are multiple races on (the ras, conflicts with local races) or races in different ends of the province, or equipment fails etc.

Personally I am a big fan of transponders, and have used them before when racing motorbikes, but those ones cost about 300 quid to buy, and that cost was absorbed by the competitor. There are only 4 circuits in Ireland, so not as big an issue setting up the timing systems at the circuits.

For some people a deposit on a transponder may not be much of an issue, but, for others, it could be a deal breaker. The cost of a bike, racing gear, transport, race fees, licence etc. can be enough without the added cost of a transponder. It may just be too much for some. I would imagine that if CI had to invest tens of thousands in timing systems, the cost of the licences would also increase. Ultimately it could be bad for the sport. If you were the parent of a child who wanted to race for example, why would you encourage your child to take part in cycling, when they can go down the road and play football or gaa for a couple of quid.

buffalo

petethedrummer wrote: »

I suppose the location could be nailed down.

Nobody's nailing anything to my bike!

Inquitus

lennymc wrote: »

What happens then when there are multiple races on (the ras, conflicts with local races) or races in different ends of the province, or equipment fails etc.

Personally I am a big fan of transponders, and have used them before when racing motorbikes, but those ones cost about 300 quid to buy, and that cost was absorbed by the competitor. There are only 4 circuits in Ireland, so not as big an issue setting up the timing systems at the circuits.

For some people a deposit on a transponder may not be much of an issue, but, for others, it could be a deal breaker. The cost of a bike, racing gear, transport, race fees, licence etc. can be enough without the added cost of a transponder. It may just be too much for some. I would imagine that if CI had to invest tens of thousands in timing systems, the cost of the licences would also increase. Ultimately it could be bad for the sport. If you were the parent of a child who wanted to race for example, why would you encourage your child to take part in cycling, when they can go down the road and play football or gaa for a couple of quid.

Cycling isn't a cheap sport, to send my son out racing, if he is interested, in the next couple of years will prob set me back around a grand in equipment, an additional expense of 80 eur (thats AUD150 in yoyos) over 5 years isn't going to break the bank.

lennymc

that's based on your particular circumstances, but what about the family who isn't working, has a couple of kids who want to race etc. Cycling doesn't need to be prohibitively expensive either.

Anyway, who won the des hanlon?

petethedrummer

buffalo wrote: »

Nobody's nailing anything to my bike!

Mine*'s going in the back pocket of a junior.

(*my transponder)

Ryath

buffalo wrote: »

Nobody's nailing anything to my bike!

6 foot length of 2*4 sticking out the front with a few protruding nails might be useful in stopping guys cutting across you in sprint.

Either that let the riders who enjoy riding into oncoming traffic take up jousting.

Inquitus

lennymc wrote: »

that's based on your particular circumstances, but what about the family who isn't working, has a couple of kids who want to race etc. Cycling doesn't need to be prohibitively expensive either.

Anyway, who won the des hanlon?

Sadly a second hand kids road bike is going to set you back a minimum of 400 yoyos, new nearer 800, that's not to do with anyone's circumstances that's just the facts of the matter. Add in the rest of the gear and you are getting on for a grand.

Cycling is prohibitively expensive almost by definition when compared to GAA, Soccer etc.

ROK ON

Most bizarre thread direction ever.

Any way well done to all those that took part in the race as opposed to the debate.

ragazzo

Inquitus wrote: »

Cycling isn't a cheap sport, to send my son out racing, if he is interested, in the next couple of years will prob set me back around a grand in equipment, an additional expense of 80 eur (thats AUD150 in yoyos) over 5 years isn't going to break the bank.

The equipment being the bike, I presume. Add clothing, licence fee( depending on age), travelling expenses to races, sign on fees etc and your costs soon add up.
Winter spin coffee stops with your son will also double in cost.
Then he will need new wheels and a bike upgrade. Double the costs for two children racing.
It all adds up and if money is anyway tight then transponder costs could be the straw that breaks the camels back.

All that just so the 20th rider in A3 can gain some upgrade points.
Sounds like an expensive way of organising upgrades. Probably cheaper all round to just tick the box!

fortis

lennymc wrote: »

What happens then when there are multiple races on (the ras, conflicts with local races) or races in different ends of the province, or equipment fails etc.

Personally I am a big fan of transponders, and have used them before when racing motorbikes, but those ones cost about 300 quid to buy, and that cost was absorbed by the competitor. There are only 4 circuits in Ireland, so not as big an issue setting up the timing systems at the circuits.

For some people a deposit on a transponder may not be much of an issue, but, for others, it could be a deal breaker. The cost of a bike, racing gear, transport, race fees, licence etc. can be enough without the added cost of a transponder. It may just be too much for some. I would imagine that if CI had to invest tens of thousands in timing systems, the cost of the licences would also increase. Ultimately it could be bad for the sport. If you were the parent of a child who wanted to race for example, why would you encourage your child to take part in cycling, when they can go down the road and play football or gaa for a couple of quid.

Surely it could be put out to tender by CI (a large organisation), the costs explained to members, and then at the AGM it could be voted on whether it is deemed acceptable or not? Tenders and bids are how most things like this are done in most businesses and organisations

At the moment it seems the answer is just a flat "no" with no explanation of why not (unless someone from CI come on here and explains why it isn't being considered) other than "it's complicated"

Would agree on the costs, cycling is not a cheap sport and the barriers to entry are high. Mind you the fees for most races have increased 50% this year (€15 as opposed to €10) and I haven't heard many (any in fact) complain. It's still very good value imo. So perhaps there is leeway for a slightly higher charge to accommodate some kind of timing. Who knows.

Anyways like I said, it's good it is at least being discussed

MichealD

Good to discuss alternatives to the photo finish camera but the one event that I am familiar with that used timing chips - Wexford 2 Day - last year was an unmitigated disaster results wise. An event that was great in every other way - good courses, plenty of marshals and great racing - was let down by the company providing the chips and results service on every stage and sent Micheal196 back to pen, paper and photographs!

fortis

MichealD wrote: »

Good to discuss alternatives to the photo finish camera but the one event that I am familiar with that used timing chips - Wexford 2 Day - last year was an unmitigated disaster results wise. An event that was great in every other way - good courses, plenty of marshals and great racing - was let down by the company providing the chips and results service on every stage and sent Micheal196 back to pen, paper and photographs!

That's why a tender based system is good. They come in, setup at a race and prove their system works accurately (in parallel you do things way they have always been done so you are not reliant on them). If not - they are out of consideration. This could be done on a rolling basis with no upfront cost to CI or the clubs for a season and the best system is then chosen. It would take time, but shouldn't it be considered?

I think were it to be introduced (big if), it would probably start with the bigger races (nationals for example) and then trickle down to smaller races eventually.

lennymc

fortis wrote: »

Would agree on the costs, cycling is not a cheap sport and the barriers to entry are high. Mind you the fees for most races have increased 50% this year (€15 as opposed to €10) and I haven't heard many (any in fact) complain.

Races in Leinster are priced from 12 euro to a maximum of 15 euro, in line with the Leinster ruling at the AGM last year. Lucan gp was 12 euro sign on. Other races were 15 euro sign on.

Pawlie

Jeremy Kyle would sort all this hoolabaloo out,

wav1

MichealD wrote: »

Good to discuss alternatives to the photo finish camera but the one event that I am familiar with that used timing chips - Wexford 2 Day - last year was an unmitigated disaster results wise. An event that was great in every other way - good courses, plenty of marshals and great racing - was let down by the company providing the chips and results service on every stage and sent Micheal196 back to pen, paper and photographs!

did hear that ok,but the problem there was it was a stage race and it was giving crazy time differences etc.On a one day race this wouldnt be a problem at all as its just actual finishing positions we are after and the time thing is more or less irrelevant.

morana

ragazzo wrote: »

Assuming the posters are CI members.
It should be a busy AGM. Great to see all this interest. Enough on this forum alone to solve all the problems and implement new ideas and technology across the board.
Move over Jack the traditionalist, here come the ideas people.
Can't wait for next year!

Move over Jack...easier said than done. in fairness, and I know you were jesting, Jack is in favour of anything that makes the sport better.

again I say it I was heartened to see GMCI post here but would like an official CI presence to take note and discuss at board meetings etc.