Counting runners at the start.

[IainR]

Strange. I've been running races for over 30 years and, other than the BOFRA races already mentioned, I am struggling to recall a single occasion on which runners have been counted on the start line in the way Lefty describes.

Yeah most was probably wrong, but its quite a common, I assume its also done as part of the kit check in others.

There was none at the Trog, and not at shorter races, but at long or medium races it seems pretty common.

[nobbut a lad]

I think the fact that Lefty, with all his experience of both competing in and organising races, thought it worth commenting on suggests that it isn't a particularly common practice or perhaps Lefty and I just both run the same races where it isn't done.

[Stolly]

For checkpoints it would be really, really useful if runners used FOUR safety pins, one on each corner and didn't fold their numbers. trying to pick a number off a curled up piece as someone runs past ain't that easy. Some numbers are folded up so small that it makes it difficult to pick out the number - it's far easier to read the number off a large white background (I couldn't care less about hiding the sponsors name - that's another argument). Putting numbers on your leg is another problem as invariably they have been folded - see previous point and they also tend to be worn on the side of the leg, again making it more difficult for the check point marshalls as the runners go past. Maybe a sign warning of an impending checkpoint would warn people with jackets on that they need to undo their jackets / get ready to shout their numbers out?

Runners who put their numbers on THEIR BACKPACKS should simply be barred from every race ever! :w00t:

Sorry Dom but its all about style for me and buggar all to do with practicality - a folded number on my shorts is the only way that I can possibly do it . In my defence I always use four pins, do try and make the number visible, do shout out my number and rarely need to wear my waterproof leggings that would cover the number up.

[IainR]

Don't they do it at Jura, Peris has a proper kit check and possibly a count, cader the same, the ben has the tag system, goatfell similar corraling then kit check/count, the 1000m peaks did this year, its certainly not uncommon...

re number on shorts.. mine almost always goes on the shorts as I tend to run topless a lot. Road races it probably goes on my vest more, but I tend to shout my number out. I tend not to fold if there are sponsors on it.. depends how its fitting on..

[DrPatrickBarry]

There was none at the Trog, and not at shorter races, but at long or medium races it seems pretty common.

I have not experienced a count on The Trigger/Tanky's or the Edale Skyline. The Trigger I would have thought was particularly important with it being a Linear and over some pretty remote moors.

I understand that the first checkpoint is very early on The Trigger so the chances of somebody disappearing on the run up the track along side the reservoirs is pretty remote, but still...

[GeoffB]

...Runners who put their numbers on THEIR BACKPACKS should simply be barred from every race ever! :w00t:

Like the one at the Trog on Sunday. Felt quite sorry for my daughter screaming 'NUMBER PLEASE' as they all appeared out of the mist at Mill Hill!

Don't they do it at Jura, Peris has a proper kit check and possibly a count, cader the same, the ben has the tag system, goatfell similar corraling then kit check/count, the 1000m peaks did this year, its certainly not uncommon...

Jura - yes, herded into the pen where you give your first tally. Pretty sure they were counting at Peris too. One year at Wasdale they were using tallies and dibbers.

[fozzy]

Ah, so the "simple" system championed by so many on here, is flawed, so it seems - no accurate count at the start, trouble reading race numbers, inaccurate counting of runners back in...Hmmm, wouldn't it be a nice if there was a system available where each competitor had to "dib" at each CP and the start and finish, oh hang on minute, there is!

[Mark G]

Ah, so the "simple" system championed by so many on here, is flawed, so it seems - no accurate count at the start, trouble reading race numbers, inaccurate counting of runners back in...Hmmm, wouldn't it be a nice if there was a system available where each competitor had to "dib" at each CP and the start and finish, oh hang on minute, there is!

Didn't you just argue against my suggestion to dib at the start on another thread?
I dont think we can place complete faith in either system but if a technical system goes down for whatever reason there frequently seems to be little that can be done about it, at least in the short term. If for example a box 'failed' for some reason - or got lost, broken, or worse still worked intermittently. a) nobody might realise until they needed the info and b) if they did realise there is probably nothing they could do to interrogate it if they needed to. I suppose a likely scenario would be marshalls on a checkpoint needing to know that all the runners had come through, or being asked if number 'xxx' had come through because he or she had not arrived at the next control. At least with a paper system they are likely to have their 'best effort' which might not be absolutely correct but would be a good basis for making some initial decisions.
The best solution is probably to have both. The paper system provides a basic easily accessible source of reference and the dibber system provides a more accurate record with splits etc which can be accessed, if not always immediately, at least at some point to support or negate the info from the paper records.
Finally although there are sometimes dibber only controls on some events I feel that marshalls play a much bigger role than recording numbers etc.
There was a big discussion (argument?) about folding numbers on here a year or two ago. I felt at first that it was a bureaucratic/EA type rule and that by folding my number and wearing it somewhere visible, such as on my shorts instead of under a cag I was actually being helpful but the point was made that wasn't how most marshalls preferred it so I dont anymore.

[IainR]

yeah electronics can fail.. but so do manual versions... GPS can fail.. but planes still fly on it...

Paper is slow and can get wet/blow away etc.

[Mark G]

yeah electronics can fail.. but so do manual versions... GPS can fail.. but planes still fly on it...

Paper is slow and can get wet/blow away etc.

Accept that Iain but the paper system involves humans - I think if electronics go wrong they go wrong and thats it, at least people even though fallible are adaptable and can usually apply some common sense and work round a problem - like pilots navigating if the GPS fails.