New safety rules

[MorganW]

The not allowing folding of numbers and insisting that they are pinned to your vest is just petty dabbling. Insisting on runners wearing a top is overkill to, although given our weather most runners do most of the time anyway. Yes it could a little bit easier to see a number pinned to your chest..... unless you've lost a safety pin, put on your waterproof or fallen face first in a bog..... but, really, whats the problem with pinning it to your shorts? Yep, you're right there is not a single problem

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

[Stagger]

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

Dibber, solved that problem.
Then folks can run vest free.

[noel]

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

That's interesting MorganW. It's good to hear how these things work in practice - rather than thinking it through in-front of a keyboard. Before reading this, I wouldn't have thought it would make a difference. I mean, the numbers themselves are the same size - what difference can it make?

[Stagger]

Strikes me the committee are backing each other the the rest are kicked into touch.
Come on FRA listen to your members please.

[Woodzy]

You didn't seem to have any difficulty reading my number pinned to my shorts as you shouted it out well in advance of reaching yourself. to hot for a vest today

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

[MorganW]

Before reading this, I wouldn't have thought it would make a difference. I mean, the numbers themselves are the same size - what difference can it make?

Noel, Jonathan Broxap was spotting and calling and I was writing furiously.

I am guessing that the next to no white background from a folded number gives definition problems for the eye, made worse if the shorts are dark coloured.

[MorganW]

Strikes me the committee are backing each other the the rest are kicked into touch.
Come on FRA listen to your members please.

I'm a member too Stagger, so I'll be making my own views known after yesterday through the appropriate channel.

[Woodzy]

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

So if the lady runner (or gent) had put her number on her shorts there wouldn't have been an issue as you only missed logging one number and they never reached your cp.
Rule 1, I am responsible for my own safety.
Rule 2, CORRECT KIT MUST be carried when specified by RO. That's near enough all the rules you need!

[Woodzy]

Why were you trying to read numbers if you had a number caller?

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

[FellJunior]

From time to time I produce race results on behalf of RO. I have learned to expect problems with the recording and transcribing of race numbers through the finish at every race; mostly 'duplicate' or unissued numbers due to misreading. These can only be resolved at the end of the race, when the list of outstanding finishers is produced, and can take some time. This detracts from identifying a runner, who is genuinely missing. In some circumstances it might significantly reduce the medical golden hour that can determine the outcome for that runner.

Technology is only reliable when it is working. Please don't respond with 'system A hasn't failed in X years and Y events', because all you are telling me is it hasn't failed - YET. Such systems may well eradicate the above problems, when working, but what if they fail and all data is corrupted or lost? All of these systems require a robust manual contingency plan, not to produce instant results, but so that everyone can be accounted for.

In this thread and others, there are many assertions that 'I am responsible for my own safety'; I would add 'and indirectly the safety of other runners'. So for example, making sure that race numbers are displayed in a consistent manner could make the crucial difference for someone else. Carrying kit and having navigational skills might help get a fellow runner out of a difficult situation. Surely any technique or action, no matter how small or apparently pedantic, that contributes to (your) safety has to be welcomed.