And who goes and gets the dibber box at the end of the day? Him? http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...VbYTz_pcTwrfXo
Printable View
And who goes and gets the dibber box at the end of the day? Him? http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...VbYTz_pcTwrfXo
Not very helpful LFF.Quote:
Originally Posted by L.F.F.
If you had any experience of involvement with race organisation, you would know that there is a world of difference between; sitting static as a summit CP marshal for a couple of hours; and nipping up to a summit, popping an SI station into your rucksack then jogging back down again.
In the days of the Scottish 4000's Duathlon, with a team of 4 marshals, we were able to site the SI stations on all 9x 4,000ers, set up a 2x manned CP in the Lairig Ghru and sweep the running section of the course whilst recovering the SI stations.
Without SI it would have required at least 10 marshals, not to mention that those on Macdui & Cairngorm would have had something like 5 or 6 hours between first and last competitors through.
For the record, I really like the dibber system and think they're a great idea. As a runner they're quick and easy, and provide you with instant splits at the end of the race, not to mention the added safety aspect mentioned before. What's not to like?
i will second that Rob. look at the three peaks. instant splits and time and position as soon as you have gone over the line. cant beat it. safety, nothing to beat it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Furness
I'd imagine how mapping and GIS are advancing by the day, one day we'll be able to track everyone in a race by location. It won't be too long before technology enables cheaper systems to relay location back up to satellite to be downloaded on laptop in nice warm place. For longer races this could also be a good thing for supporters to watch. I know it's done in some Long Distance American races, but think it's still an expensive system at the mo.
Kilo to go use a sticker (of some kind) on the cycling helmets and I think mats for their sportives, just passover and ping, you're registered on a distant laptop. No dibbing required/
Technology is moving so fast that soon we will have much easier options to monitor runners and their progress. Now if this enables races to continue, I will be all for it.
As one of the '2x manned CP' marshalls in the S4D I think it's fair to say that SI worked well on that event, obviating the need for marshalls to stand out on the tops for hours, but there have been many good points made on this thread on the "other side" of the argument. Many people, me included, see technology as an intrusion into something that has always been a simple low-tech sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by wheezing donkey
We like the sport to be low-tech and we like it to be low-cost, so there is bound to be resistance to something that lands you with a bill because you lost a bit of high-tech equipment that many would say has no place on the fells in the first place.
I can see the advantages of SI but part of me thinks a big attraction of fellrunning is the stripping away of all the technology and getting back to basics. The advent of technology can't be stopped, especially when it brings safety benefits, but we should at least stop and say "whoa, do we want this?"...
Hopefully some of those whose lives she saved will have read this thread and offered to contributed to the cost of replacement.Quote:
Originally Posted by John Lloyd
I can't believe cost is even an issue..Quote:
Originally Posted by Toreador
I'd rather have a good run in the rain, lose £30 on the dibber.. then spend £50 in petrol and not race due to a race called off for bad weather..
Sounds like they've had a whip round so probably the best outcome.. couldn't see how the RO or SI should be expected to cover the costs, some RO's lose money in races without paying for such replacements..
I suspect that dibbers cost £30 to replace because if they were a couple of quid nobody would take care of them and we would lose loads.
Not sure if I have been unlucky or I am sweating more with age but I have had the glue come a part on the "indestructible paper" on both the LAMM and three peaks this year. Luckily just spotted that it was not on my wrist within 10 metres and recovered it both times. I would echo the comments that the split times are really useful to look back on and review the reality of the race and not your own perception. The LAMM this year I know from checkpoint data we lost 20 minutes on all our rivals on one short 1.5km leg. Obviously won't mean I can go back and win next year but should help me learn about route choice and nav.
Orienteering is already there with live GPS tracking of the big races.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive
Runners carry a transmitter, and their position / route is displayed in real time on the competition map.
You can basically follow the whole race as the runners progress, see their routes, watch them find or miss control points, gain or lose time on other runners.
Its only put on in major / high profile races, European Champs in June, World Champs next month, a big Swedish race series, big relays.
Here is the Mens Final in the middle distance race at the recent European Champs in Sweden.
Click and drag the map (or zoom in / out) to find the start triangle (which is over on the right)
Click on the play arrow top left, wait about ten seconds and the first runner will set off, then the second.
This replay is speeded up but gives a clear idea of the capability.
http://www.tulospalvelu.fi/gps/20120517EOCMidMF/
I usually put mine on a cord around my neck or clipped to the side pocket of my bumbag. I've never trusted either the finger strap or the glued wrist strap. Cag/gloves/lifa on and off a few times or scrambling about or a fall during a race could dislodge either I think. Although I like having the splits short of a reliable radio/relay system linked to race control I think the traditional bread tags are probably the best practical method to help marshalls keep a real time track of who has gone through checkpoints. I know they still have to physically record numbers but using tags means they can check there and then if they have any doubts or when a sudden large group arriving makes recording individual numbers problematic. Where dibbers are used I think there should be a compulsory dib at the start line to aid confirmation of who has actually started the race, not just the first checkpoint.
I'm pretty sure they had it at a day of the Scottish 6 Days last year for the elites... shown on a large screen it was an entertaining watch. I was tracked on day 2 of the OMM in 2010. When I rang my girlfriend on the drive home she thought I was still in the middle of Dartmoor. To be fair, I think the technology's improved a bit since then.Quote:
Originally Posted by andy k
Its funny how dibbers are being justified as a way of tracking runners, should they go missing or lost. I'd say the main reason for dibbers is to give accurate splits and easily record that the runners have gone the right way and not cheated. Marshall points in races are primarily there to ensure that runners have visited all the right places too.
For sure marshalls counting runners through and/or dibbers help track down runners but there is still huge scope for a runner to get lost in huge tracts of land regardless of their last dibbering and checkpoint. Lets face it the race has to be finished quite a while before any runner is assumed lost and search parties sent out.
It's "marshal" unless you mean Arthur Marshall and I can't see him getting up to the tops of any hills these days.
Hope this helps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MarshalQuote:
Originally Posted by Spelling Bee
This isn't practical is it? For a "fair" start, you'd need a dibber box for every runner at the start line!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
The way the system works in mass start races is that everyone who registers is accounted for on the system with their dibber number and the system timing is started when the race starts (i.e. the SI bloke presses a button on his laptop when the race starts which encodes the start time to the system) - the registration should be the confirmation of who actually starts the race. If someone fails to start for whatever reason after registering, then they would need to go to download and confirm this with the registration/SI team.
This is the same reason why most fell races don't send out numbers and do EOD - you have a clear knowledge of who has started the race. If someone collected their number at a fell race and didn't start for whatever reason, they'd need to report to the RO as soon as they could anyway
Dibbers should give a more reliable count - it's possible for a marshal to miss count or miss someone's number because it's covered up with a jacket.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
But you are correct about runners going lost. The argument here is that you would get a quicker count back to Race HQ - the marshal brings the box in off the hill after all runners have passed (to their knowledge) and downloads - straight away you get a count and exactly who has passed the CP.
But yes, it may still be some time before said lost runner is reported lost.
Or as happened to me once (and I'm surprised doesn't happen more often) - the number's under a jacket, you shout it out, and they mis-hear (13 or 30? etc)Quote:
Originally Posted by fozzy
Fozzy - I didn't mean as you start but as you get to the start - just a bit more reliable than assuming everyone who has taken a number did actually start the race. Graham Arthur at Jura this year corralled everyone before the start and made everyone put a bread tag in a bag just before the off. Still not totally foolproof but I thought it was a good idea. I'm still not convinced about how effective or fast relying on boxes to be brought down off the hill and downloaded at the finish would be. Imagine a marshall on Kirkfell in Ennerdale - after the last runner goes through they might have a two or three hour trip back to the finish by which time the leading runners may have been back for a good few hours. If marshalls on a checkpoint are able to contact race control during the event and either they or race control queries a particular runner or numbers the box wont tell them unless they can access it there and then. They will have their written list which may or may not be accurate depending on conditions etc, but they could physically check their bag of tags. The alternative would be boxes linked electronically to race control, fine if it works which it may well not on lots of race checkpoint locations and a disaster if you are relying on it and it goes wrong which sods law says it will sooner or later.Quote:
Originally Posted by fozzy
I still think simplicity rules - writing down numbers and backed up by tags.
That's what race registration is for - everyone collects their dibbers (or registers their own) and this indicates that the person is going to run the race. I think it's very odd to have to hand a tag in to say you've started - if you've registered on the morning of the race and collected your number, it's usual to start the race! On the rare occasion someone doesn't start after registering, the onus is on them to report to registration/download and say as such, as is the case if you decide to drop out enroute and DNF - bans have been handed out to people for not doing this I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
You have also taken perhaps the most extreme example here, but ok. Assuming your 2/3 hr estimate is correct (which isn't necessarily true - it is possible to drive to Wasdale head and walk from there, although admittedly still a long drive), it won't make any difference whether the marshal is taking numbers on a piece of paper or using a dibber box - the marshal would still have the 2/3 hour walk back to race HQ and the first runners would still be back (as is the case in the majority of long fell races I suspect - the front runners will be in well before the back markers get to the later CPs). In your example, the marshal on Kirk Fell has no way of knowing under any system whether a particular runner has got to say, Red Pike, gone through the CP, but then say along High Stile, decided to drop out and so heads back into the valley and back to HQ.
The tags system is an extreme Luddite version of the SI system in my opinion as well - it doesn't allow monitoring of numbers on the hill (is a marshal going to sit and count all those tags on the hillside - of course not!) and so is therefore merely a system of determining whether a runner went to a certain CP - and a slow one at that - the SI system takes seconds to upload. Even in a race with smaller numbers, it would take hours to manually register each individual labelled tag against a list of runners. The system is also not completely reliable - what happens if someone drops one out the bag?
I grant you, the SI system is not completely foolproof (no system is), but the boxes are extremely reliable - orienteering events have shown this - the boxes are often out in all weathers for 24hrs+ and you have the possibility if it's required for "live tracking" via radio controls if required, or, as I've said before, I am sure the system could be developed whereby a marshal plugs his smartphone into the box and it immediately downloads an accurate count of the number of runners that have passed and even a list with times. Again, not foolproof, but quicker and easier than the alternatives in my opinion.
To me the argument against using technology in fell racing/running is a Luddite view - you all seem to have this "sepia-tinted" view of the sport, yet how many of you wear the latest fell shoes (even walshes have changed over the years to new materials, although I admit the design is virtually the same), how many of you have the latest lightweight gore-tex jacket, running tights, shirts etc.....
What happens if you can't get a signal?Quote:
Originally Posted by fozzy
I don't understand your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishy
If you can't get a signal for "live tracking" then you're in the same situation as a marshal stood in the place with no mobile phone signal, and so the box is still an extremely effective way of monitor who has reached the CP (and easier than the tag system or writing numbers down) - just without the live tracking you have wait until the box is back at HQ to download the data - in the same way that the marshal would have to bring a written list or a bag of tags back to HQ, only when you get there, the SI box takes seconds to download the information, rather than having to transcribe all the information from soggy bits of paper or by spending hours counting tags
The boxes themselves are autonomous and don't require any particular signal to operate - only if you require the live tracking for the info to be available instantly at HQ or more widely
This thread is rapidly becoming like the Intelligent Design v Evolution debate.
The ID people see a tiny hole in the Evolution argument and drive to drive a bus through it, claiming that the one flaw overrides the whole wealth of evidence for evolution, rather than looking at the huge, gaping holes in their own argument.
I am not saying the SI system is perfect, nor has anyone claimed it to be, but it is a better system than tags, writing numbers or anything else. Yes, it's not going to be useful in some races (especially some short races - too many people, too close together, but then again your marshals aren't out as long), but it would be in a significant majority of cases.
If you objectively weigh up the benefits, and get this "anti-any change whatsoever" view out of your heads, you will quite clearly see this.
Just like MRT's do when marshalling at an event and relying on radio contact .... set up a hill top radio-relay point that all CP's have contact with and which, itself can contact race HQ. Exactly what Bowland Pennine MRT do when manning the remoter CPs on the Fiendsdale race.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishy
I like your choice of argument, evolution v intelligent design but I suspect its you thats putting faith in the god of technology while us luddites prefer to rely on more basic methods!Quote:
Originally Posted by fozzy
I was actually thinking that dibbers could represent an evolution in the development of fell running. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
And there is nothing basic about the theory of evolution!
Before long everyone, including fell runners, will be compulsorily injected with a micropchip that can be read by scanner and tracked by GPS. These will be used by supermarkets to take payments - this already happens in some places I believe, and of course by the govt to monitor and control increasingly desperate and volatlie populace as human society crumbles. On the upside... ROs will be able to use them to track runners in races.
What makes you so sure it hasn't been done already, Grouse?Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouse
This post has been brought to you by courtesy of the Illuminati.
The mgt
Has Fellhound had anything to say about these here dippers being used in fell races? :closed:
..... and everything we buy and the wrapping/containers it comes in will be bar coded and if we dispose of it irresponsibly .....Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouse
I'm by no means "anti SI" but being a simple kind of soul, I do like to try and keep things simple. Against this, only yesterday after the Darren Jones Clougha Pike race we had a glaring case of where the runners themselves do not assist with keeping things simple. The RO and I were certain that all 125 competitors in the main race were safely back ( all numbers listed [ out & back ] by marshals at various locations including start & finish ); but having cleaned up in the chapel schoolroom, we opted for a belt and braces approach driving out in all directions from the X-roads to see if there were any cars still parked up. We spotted one car that was not parked directly outside a property and noted its registration number. Back to the RO's and a cuppa whilst perusing the entry forms to see if the vehicle belonged to one of our runners. Some chance! Only about 30% of the forms contained a vehicle registration number. If competitors want the basic methods to work ( and RO's not to resort to technology ) then please use the basic methods.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark G
We don't all drive to races.
Granted; but 30% of 125 = 42.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouse
Anyone who was at Clougha Pike will tell you that there were far more than 42 cars parked along the lanes, probably well in excess of 200. That would include juniors ( many of who came two families to a car ).
You'd be lucky if 20% of the entry ( 25 ) did not come by car. Some of those who car-shared did indicate who they had travelled with. One cyclist even left a brief description of his bike. Still leaves a big majority who "couldn't be bothered" to use a basic / non-technical safety feature.
Someones started another thread about counting runners at the start - similar to my suggestion about dibbing at the start. It does occasionally seem to happen that people register and fail to start for whatever reason.
So what could be done is to have a start dib to get into the starters area (which could be taped off) and then still start the times en masse as is done currently. Best of both worlds.
This exists with SI. At the prestart in orienteering there is a check box. This serves three purposes
- If you have not cleared your dibber the check box will not respond
- It ensures that no one starts before their alloted time , useful for interval starts in orienteering / mountain navigation races
- But it also gives an accurate list of everyone who went through the start. After the last start the box can be taken to the computer and downloaded.
When the box gets back from the first check point, you download it, the software then gives you your list of missing runners.
You can do the same with each checkpoint box. You are, as with paper based system, waiting for the marshalls to return. You can get round this radio based units - though I am not sure how succesful they are over several miles with big hills in the way.
this is exactly what they did at Welsh 1000mQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob Furness
is didn't stop a few people ducking under the tape well away from the dib-box and forming up on the start line though - it needed the RO to announce (more than once) "HAS EVERYBODY DIBBED IN THE START AREA BOX?!" for the culprits then to sheepishly troop back to it