Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [racewalking] The end of DQs?

Expand Messages
  • AC Jaime
    Jack I did just that during last springs Elementary School Walks in Pharr and it appeared that the parents and coaches understood and appreciated that
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 1, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Jack

      I did just that during last springs Elementary School Walks in Pharr and it
      appeared that the parents and coaches understood and appreciated that
      their children were not DQ'd. I of course did it Lone Ranger style without any
      practice but it seemed to have worked.  I would strongly recommend that we start
      out with our Junior Olympic group. We have far to many violations that are
      discouraging other children and their parents.

      I had one child in particular that finished his race crying  at the Sacramento
      JO's in July because every time he passed two children that were walking ahead
      of him they would come back practically running to overtake him again.  They
      were disqualified in the end but it is hard on the children doing their very
      best to stay within the rules. I have had a couple of beginners that have done
      the same to others. This is what infuriates the parents of the children that are
      walking within the rules and leads to the ridicule and bad mouthing that we
      receive in racewalking.

      I acted as the chief judge among our four police officers that were judging the
      20 races in Pharr last Spring. I would keep an eye on the children walking
      between the 100 and 300 meter area and would stop any and all children that were
      taking advantage of any other child and that were given a warning by anyone of
      the judges. I would talk to them for approximately ten seconds (not wanting to
      call it a penalty but in fact that is just what my intentions were) or longer if
      I considered the violation to be a gross violation and then let them continue
      and would stop them again if they continued violating the rules.  We did not
      have any DQ's and I did not hear of any complains among the 469  children that
      participated nor from their parents or coaches and am planning on doing it again
      with more help at this Springs Elementary School walks already scheduled.

      AC



      ________________________________
      From: Jack Mortland <jmortlan@...>
      To: racewalking@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Fri, October 1, 2010 12:15:18 PM
      Subject: [racewalking] The end of DQs?

       
      Following is a rather lengthy item from the September issue of the Ohio
      Racewalker, which I sent to subscribers (via snail mail) two days ago. I thought
      it might elicit some discussion on this list. So have at ti.

      The End of DQ's?

      (The following was published in Great Britain's Race Walking Record in the most
      recent issue. We repeat it here with the blessing of Editor John Constandinou,
      who prefaced it as follows.)

      At an IAAF Racewalking Committee meeting earlier this year, a radical new
      proposal was discussed. The aim of the proposal is to eliminate
      disqualifications through the introduction of a pit-lane or penalty area where
      athletes would be held for a period when breaking the rules, before being
      allowed to continue the race. The Committee members were handed acopy of the
      proposal which they were asked to discuss and circulate with in the racewalking
      community and to gather feedback of the next meeting. Folwoing is the proposal.

      IAAF RACE WALKING COMMITTEE MEETING

      17 MAY 2010, CHIHUAHUA (MEX)

      Is there a problem linked to racewalking and what is it? Racewalking is the only
      athletics discipline where athletes can be subjectively disqualified by judges
      for not complying with the rules before the end of the race and not have the
      right to appeal (except in the case of a disqualification by the Chief Judge in
      the last part of the race).

      This creates the following problems:

      . a clear discrepancy with the other disciplines where athletes can finish the
      race and appeal

      . a great number of disqualifications with respect to the number of starters
      offering a negative image of the sport

      . discourages grass-roots athletes from approaching the discipline to the extent
      that, in somecountries, only the loss of contact rule (perhaps easier to
      understand and detect) is applied for age-group competitions in an effort to
      reduce the number of disqualifications

      . judging ability is not consistent throughout the international panels so the
      "quality" of theudging panel unfairly becomes a determining factor in the
      athlete's possibility to succeed or fail in a race

      . a lack of understanding from the general public and loss of affection for the
      discipline.

      What possible options are there to help solve the problem keeping the current
      rule.

      Studies have been conducted on the use of electronically operated warning
      devices linked to the athletes' shoes and able to detect and report loss of
      contact, which is only one of the two

      characteristics of the Racewalking Rule (the other being the bent knee). This
      would introduce an objective element which would, in theory, ensure consistency
      in the detection of this violation of the rule. For the moment these devices are
      still prototypes which need further studies to guarantee the necessary
      reliability, duration and flexibility and are incompatible with a short-term
      real world application.

      In any case taking the Racewalking Judges out of the equation is not possible
      nor desirable (an eventual electronic device would only be available for the
      major competitions). Courses and seminars are held periodically in an attempt to
      establish a common understanding on the interpretation of the Racewalking Rule
      and on the criteria for its uniform application during a race, but this is
      proving difficult to achieve because the key characteristics that make a good
      judge are different from one judge to the other:

      . concentration

      . stamina

      . eyesight

      * observation

      . reaction time

      * commitment

      * experience

      A new approach

      It is very unlikely that it will be possible to do without the subjective
      element of judging in the short term so a possible approach could be to find a
      way to reduce the impact that the judging factor has on the results of a race.
      At the moment it has a drastic impact which can go as far as the athlete's
      disqualification. What if it instead leads to a penalty of some kind for those
      athletes breaking the rule (i.e. slowing them down), thus giving an advantage to
      the athletes walking properly, instead of leading to a disqualification? This
      principle, which already exists in other sports (biathlon, show jumping, car
      racing, etc.), is widely accepted and understood and its application to
      racewalking may not be seen as so unusual. In actual fact the judges would
      continue to do their duty in the same way and the efforts towards the
      development of a more consistent judging manner would be maintained, however
      their actions would lead to different consequences.

      The proposal

      Probably the closest existing practical application of the above principle is in
      motor racing (pit-lane drive through) and biathlon, the basic concept of which
      reads as follows:

      "A Biathlon competition consists of a race in which contestants ski around a
      cross-country track, and where the total distance is broken up by either two or
      four shooting rounds, half in prone position, the other half standing. Depending
      on the shooting performance, extra distance or time is added to the contestant's
      total running distance/time. As in most races, the contestant with the shortest
      total time wins."

      If we reword to suit race walking, the basic principle could read: "A Racewalk
      competition consists of a race in which contestants racewalk around a circuit in
      compliance with the rules of racewalking. Athletes judged unable to walk
      strictly according to the rules are penalized and extra distance (or time) is
      added to their total running distance/time. The contestant with the shortest
      total time wins."

      This, of course, would be the new basic principle for which general consensus
      would be required and the immediate consequences of which would be that athletes
      would no longer be disqualified (except, perhaps, extreme cases in the last part
      of the race) but, depending on the number of red cards received, would be
      required to either stop for a certain time before continuing or walk an extra
      distance in the middle of the race (or a combination of both). During the time
      in which the athlete undergoes the penalty, he/she must be off the course and in
      a designated secured area ("pit lane")

      Advantages

      .No longer any disqualifications for not walking according to the rule (except
      extreme cases) so all athletes have the chance to finish the race and record a
      performance - very important for young less experienced athletes

      .Less pressure on the race walking judges who can act according to their best
      knowledge and capacity without being conditioned by the consequences of their
      actions

      .Penalized athletes still remain in the competition with a chance to come back
      creating more drama, suspense and uncertainty in the race

      . Penalties can be a spectacular moment of the race and add to the appeal of the
      competition if adequately presented and televised

      Disadvantages

      . Practical implementation

      o More paperwork / data processing required

      o Physical feasibility and location of the start-stop phase

      . Historical comparison of results and performances

      . Determination of correct penalties (time and / or distance)

      In practice

      The practical implementation is certainly a challenge and can be more or less
      complicated depending on the technology available to assist with the process.
      The identification of the key phases of the process from the moment an athlete
      receives his third red card (assuming this is the criteria which determines
      his/her stop at the pit lane) could be as follows. For the moment we are
      assuming that athletes receiving three red cards must stop for 30 seconds and
      that the pit lane is placed somewhere before the finish line.

      . The Recorder acknowledges the receipt of the red card from a third Judge

      . The Posting Board is updated and shows that the athlete must undergo a penalty

      . The Recorder informs the relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge

      . The relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge (or the Chief Judge if closer)
      notifies the athlete of the third red card and of the consequential penalty

      . Having been notified, the athlete approaching the Pit Lane is directed into
      the holding area by a Competition Official. The athlete must stop and cannot
      postpone his stop.

      .The clock starts counting 30 seconds from the moment the athlete crosses the
      entry line


      o if transponders are available, a mat could be used to start the clock and the
      time could be shown on a simple display, also showing the athlete's bib number
      or name, at the exit of the Pit Lane


      o if technology is not available, then a timekeeper shall start the time and
      shall notify the athlete with some sort of countdown leading up to his exit from
      the Pit Lane

      .The athlete is free to stop or continue moving inside the Pit Lane area without
      constraints (cannot however have access to refreshments, drinking or sponging)

      .When the 30 seconds are over, the athlete is free to leave the Pit Lane and
      re-enter the course, where he is again required to walk according to the Rules

      .The count of the red cards for that specific athlete starts again from zero and
      the Posting Board is amended accordingly (though the total red cards received is
      kept on record for statistical purposes)

      Next steps

      Should it be concluded that this proposal has some merit, the next logical steps
      could be:

      .Give mandate to a small working group to fine-tune the practical aspects by a
      certain deadline

      ..If the proposal is supported in principle by the IAAF Council , officially
      inform the racewalking community that such a proposal is being considered by the
      IAAF and that opportunities to test this new concept, at first within the
      younger age groups or at minor competitions, are sought.

      ORW Editor comments:

      First, I am curious as to why this has apparently remained underground since
      May. It was news to me when John passed it on. That aside, here are my initial
      comments to John:

      I have had the thought in the past that a time penalty in lieu of a DQ might be
      a way to go and I think I, or someone else, has expressed that thought in one of
      the many discussions of judging matters that have appeared in the ORW over 46
      years. Briefly, some comments on the proposal:

      How do we define "extreme case"? Probably everyone can relate to the term
      (flagrant violation might be another term), but where is the fine line between a
      routine loss of contact and an "extreme case"?

      After three cards and time in the pit lane, does a competitor have to accumulate
      three additional reds before a secomd penalty, or does each subsequent violation
      warrant a penalty (say 10 seconds)" If it takes three more, a competitor might
      try to make up for the 30 seconds lost by throwing all caution to the wind
      (short of becoming an "extreme case", however that might be defined) until two
      more reds are thrown his or her way.

      After three reds and a penalty, can a judge who issued one of the three reds,
      issue another red, or do subsequent reds have to come from other judges?

      Finally, why not just a time penalty (30 seconds added to the final time) rather
      than the "pit lane" stop, which it would seem would be more of an administrative
      headache.

      And here is John's reply to my comments:

      "I had the document for a few months, but have been rushed with space and stuff.
      No doubt there have been many suggestions over the years, all probaly with
      merit. But for the IAAF committee to discuss it at this level seriously is a
      great step. They acknowledge in the document that there are many things to
      consider and it won't be easy, and some dismiss it out of hand altogether as
      many people don't like any change whatsoever. A time penalty would be near
      identical to a pit lane, no argument there-but more exciting for an audience to
      see penalties in action during the event rather that see someone finish in first
      place and then appear in the results in fifth, confusing them! (Ed. Good point)
      It is the confusion and the impression of cheating that outsiders see in our
      sport that we need to fix, and personally I think it would be great. I know a
      lot of people who quit the sport due to getting DQ'd too. If it stirs up debate,
      then great. I don't think it will happen any time soon though"

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Tony Bell
      Guten Abend Some of our friends over the pond posted in response to John s article in the last RWR. An interesting proposal, I m not sure how workable this
      Message 2 of 5 , Oct 2, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Guten Abend

        Some of our friends over the pond posted in response to John's
        article in the last RWR.

        An interesting proposal, I'm not sure how workable this would be at a
        little club event but in a championship where there are sufficient
        judges to keep track of things it might work.

        I think that 30s stop penalty could be too short, especially for a
        longer race. Someone who gets a 30s stop go in a 50km say around 30km
        would then have the mild inconvenience of a 30s stop but then
        restarts with a clean slate and another couple of hours to catch up.
        Maybe the time penalty should increase for longer distance races.
        Alternatively if a walker get 3 red cards and has a stop/go penalty,
        restarts and gets 3 more red cards then maybe a longer time penalty
        should result. It could also encourage walkers with less than perfect
        techniques, they could think "well even if I still get 3 cards I can
        still finish the race". An alternative would be 30s for 3 red cards
        and 30s for each subsequent card?

        It could make for exciting TV viewing, a walker gets their 3rd red
        card on the last lap of a 20km and has to pull into the pits just
        before the finish line and watches the opposition come past to win
        the race! In the winter Olympic biathlon sport how long is the time
        penalty for missing a shot and what proportion is this time penalty
        of the usual finish time?

        What do you think?
        >
        > At an IAAF Racewalking Committee meeting earlier this year, a
        > radical new
        > proposal was discussed. The aim of the proposal is to eliminate
        > disqualifications through the introduction of a pit-lane or penalty
        > area where
        > athletes would be held for a period when breaking the rules, before
        > being
        > allowed to continue the race. The Committee members were handed
        > acopy of the
        > proposal which they were asked to discuss and circulate with in the
        > racewalking
        > community and to gather feedback of the next meeting. Folwoing is
        > the proposal.
        >
        > IAAF RACE WALKING COMMITTEE MEETING
        >
        > 17 MAY 2010, CHIHUAHUA (MEX)
        >
        > Is there a problem linked to racewalking and what is it?
        > Racewalking is the only
        > athletics discipline where athletes can be subjectively
        > disqualified by judges
        > for not complying with the rules before the end of the race and not
        > have the
        > right to appeal (except in the case of a disqualification by the
        > Chief Judge in
        > the last part of the race).
        >
        > This creates the following problems:
        >
        > . a clear discrepancy with the other disciplines where athletes can
        > finish the
        > race and appeal
        >
        > . a great number of disqualifications with respect to the number of
        > starters
        > offering a negative image of the sport
        >
        > . discourages grass-roots athletes from approaching the discipline
        > to the extent
        > that, in somecountries, only the loss of contact rule (perhaps
        > easier to
        > understand and detect) is applied for age-group competitions in an
        > effort to
        > reduce the number of disqualifications
        >
        > . judging ability is not consistent throughout the international
        > panels so the
        > "quality" of theudging panel unfairly becomes a determining factor
        > in the
        > athlete's possibility to succeed or fail in a race
        >
        > . a lack of understanding from the general public and loss of
        > affection for the
        > discipline.
        >
        > What possible options are there to help solve the problem keeping
        > the current
        > rule.
        >
        > Studies have been conducted on the use of electronically operated
        > warning
        > devices linked to the athletes' shoes and able to detect and report
        > loss of
        > contact, which is only one of the two
        >
        > characteristics of the Racewalking Rule (the other being the bent
        > knee). This
        > would introduce an objective element which would, in theory, ensure
        > consistency
        > in the detection of this violation of the rule. For the moment
        > these devices are
        > still prototypes which need further studies to guarantee the necessary
        > reliability, duration and flexibility and are incompatible with a
        > short-term
        > real world application.
        >
        > In any case taking the Racewalking Judges out of the equation is
        > not possible
        > nor desirable (an eventual electronic device would only be
        > available for the
        > major competitions). Courses and seminars are held periodically in
        > an attempt to
        > establish a common understanding on the interpretation of the
        > Racewalking Rule
        > and on the criteria for its uniform application during a race, but
        > this is
        > proving difficult to achieve because the key characteristics that
        > make a good
        > judge are different from one judge to the other:
        >
        > . concentration
        >
        > . stamina
        >
        > . eyesight
        >
        > * observation
        >
        > . reaction time
        >
        > * commitment
        >
        > * experience
        >
        > A new approach
        >
        > It is very unlikely that it will be possible to do without the
        > subjective
        > element of judging in the short term so a possible approach could
        > be to find a
        > way to reduce the impact that the judging factor has on the results
        > of a race.
        > At the moment it has a drastic impact which can go as far as the
        > athlete's
        > disqualification. What if it instead leads to a penalty of some
        > kind for those
        > athletes breaking the rule (i.e. slowing them down), thus giving an
        > advantage to
        > the athletes walking properly, instead of leading to a
        > disqualification? This
        > principle, which already exists in other sports (biathlon, show
        > jumping, car
        > racing, etc.), is widely accepted and understood and its
        > application to
        > racewalking may not be seen as so unusual. In actual fact the
        > judges would
        > continue to do their duty in the same way and the efforts towards the
        > development of a more consistent judging manner would be
        > maintained, however
        > their actions would lead to different consequences.
        >
        > The proposal
        >
        > Probably the closest existing practical application of the above
        > principle is in
        > motor racing (pit-lane drive through) and biathlon, the basic
        > concept of which
        > reads as follows:
        >
        > "A Biathlon competition consists of a race in which contestants ski
        > around a
        > cross-country track, and where the total distance is broken up by
        > either two or
        > four shooting rounds, half in prone position, the other half
        > standing. Depending
        > on the shooting performance, extra distance or time is added to the
        > contestant's
        > total running distance/time. As in most races, the contestant with
        > the shortest
        > total time wins."
        >
        > If we reword to suit race walking, the basic principle could read:
        > "A Racewalk
        > competition consists of a race in which contestants racewalk around
        > a circuit in
        > compliance with the rules of racewalking. Athletes judged unable to
        > walk
        > strictly according to the rules are penalized and extra distance
        > (or time) is
        > added to their total running distance/time. The contestant with the
        > shortest
        > total time wins."
        >
        > This, of course, would be the new basic principle for which general
        > consensus
        > would be required and the immediate consequences of which would be
        > that athletes
        > would no longer be disqualified (except, perhaps, extreme cases in
        > the last part
        > of the race) but, depending on the number of red cards received,
        > would be
        > required to either stop for a certain time before continuing or
        > walk an extra
        > distance in the middle of the race (or a combination of both).
        > During the time
        > in which the athlete undergoes the penalty, he/she must be off the
        > course and in
        > a designated secured area ("pit lane")
        >
        > Advantages
        >
        > .No longer any disqualifications for not walking according to the
        > rule (except
        > extreme cases) so all athletes have the chance to finish the race
        > and record a
        > performance - very important for young less experienced athletes
        >
        > .Less pressure on the race walking judges who can act according to
        > their best
        > knowledge and capacity without being conditioned by the
        > consequences of their
        > actions
        >
        > .Penalized athletes still remain in the competition with a chance
        > to come back
        > creating more drama, suspense and uncertainty in the race
        >
        > . Penalties can be a spectacular moment of the race and add to the
        > appeal of the
        > competition if adequately presented and televised
        >
        > Disadvantages
        >
        > . Practical implementation
        >
        > o More paperwork / data processing required
        >
        > o Physical feasibility and location of the start-stop phase
        >
        > . Historical comparison of results and performances
        >
        > . Determination of correct penalties (time and / or distance)
        >
        > In practice
        >
        > The practical implementation is certainly a challenge and can be
        > more or less
        > complicated depending on the technology available to assist with
        > the process.
        > The identification of the key phases of the process from the moment
        > an athlete
        > receives his third red card (assuming this is the criteria which
        > determines
        > his/her stop at the pit lane) could be as follows. For the moment
        > we are
        > assuming that athletes receiving three red cards must stop for 30
        > seconds and
        > that the pit lane is placed somewhere before the finish line.
        >
        > . The Recorder acknowledges the receipt of the red card from a
        > third Judge
        >
        > . The Posting Board is updated and shows that the athlete must
        > undergo a penalty
        >
        > . The Recorder informs the relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge
        >
        > . The relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge (or the Chief Judge if
        > closer)
        > notifies the athlete of the third red card and of the consequential
        > penalty
        >
        > . Having been notified, the athlete approaching the Pit Lane is
        > directed into
        > the holding area by a Competition Official. The athlete must stop
        > and cannot
        > postpone his stop.
        >
        > .The clock starts counting 30 seconds from the moment the athlete
        > crosses the
        > entry line
        >
        > o if transponders are available, a mat could be used to start the
        > clock and the
        > time could be shown on a simple display, also showing the athlete's
        > bib number
        > or name, at the exit of the Pit Lane
        >
        > o if technology is not available, then a timekeeper shall start the
        > time and
        > shall notify the athlete with some sort of countdown leading up to
        > his exit from
        > the Pit Lane
        >
        > .The athlete is free to stop or continue moving inside the Pit Lane
        > area without
        > constraints (cannot however have access to refreshments, drinking
        > or sponging)
        >
        > .When the 30 seconds are over, the athlete is free to leave the Pit
        > Lane and
        > re-enter the course, where he is again required to walk according
        > to the Rules
        >
        > .The count of the red cards for that specific athlete starts again
        > from zero and
        > the Posting Board is amended accordingly (though the total red
        > cards received is
        > kept on record for statistical purposes)
        >
        > Next steps
        >
        > Should it be concluded that this proposal has some merit, the next
        > logical steps
        > could be:
        >
        > .Give mandate to a small working group to fine-tune the practical
        > aspects by a
        > certain deadline
        >
        > ..If the proposal is supported in principle by the IAAF Council ,
        > officially
        > inform the racewalking community that such a proposal is being
        > considered by the
        > IAAF and that opportunities to test this new concept, at first
        > within the
        > younger age groups or at minor competitions, are sought.
        >
        > ORW Editor comments:
        >
        > First, I am curious as to why this has apparently remained
        > underground since
        > May. It was news to me when John passed it on. That aside, here are
        > my initial
        > comments to John:
        >
        > I have had the thought in the past that a time penalty in lieu of a
        > DQ might be
        > a way to go and I think I, or someone else, has expressed that
        > thought in one of
        > the many discussions of judging matters that have appeared in the
        > ORW over 46
        > years. Briefly, some comments on the proposal:
        >
        > How do we define "extreme case"? Probably everyone can relate to
        > the term
        > (flagrant violation might be another term), but where is the fine
        > line between a
        > routine loss of contact and an "extreme case"?
        >
        > After three cards and time in the pit lane, does a competitor have
        > to accumulate
        > three additional reds before a secomd penalty, or does each
        > subsequent violation
        > warrant a penalty (say 10 seconds)" If it takes three more, a
        > competitor might
        > try to make up for the 30 seconds lost by throwing all caution to
        > the wind
        > (short of becoming an "extreme case", however that might be
        > defined) until two
        > more reds are thrown his or her way.
        >
        > After three reds and a penalty, can a judge who issued one of the
        > three reds,
        > issue another red, or do subsequent reds have to come from other
        > judges?
        >
        > Finally, why not just a time penalty (30 seconds added to the final
        > time) rather
        > than the "pit lane" stop, which it would seem would be more of an
        > administrative
        > headache.
        >
        > And here is John's reply to my comments:
        >
        > "I had the document for a few months, but have been rushed with
        > space and stuff.
        > No doubt there have been many suggestions over the years, all
        > probaly with
        > merit. But for the IAAF committee to discuss it at this level
        > seriously is a
        > great step. They acknowledge in the document that there are many
        > things to
        > consider and it won't be easy, and some dismiss it out of hand
        > altogether as
        > many people don't like any change whatsoever. A time penalty would
        > be near
        > identical to a pit lane, no argument there-but more exciting for an
        > audience to
        > see penalties in action during the event rather that see someone
        > finish in first
        > place and then appear in the results in fifth, confusing them! (Ed.
        > Good point)
        > It is the confusion and the impression of cheating that outsiders
        > see in our
        > sport that we need to fix, and personally I think it would be
        > great. I know a
        > lot of people who quit the sport due to getting DQ'd too. If it
        > stirs up debate,
        > then great. I don't think it will happen any time soon though"
        >
        >


        tony....
        Tony Bell
        ynotlleb1@...
        Englishman in Hamburg, Germany
      • mark wall
        A reminder that the UKA/RWA 50km is at the Racecourse at Northampton October 17th. Entries close with Peter Marlow the preceding week. The changing
        Message 3 of 5 , Oct 2, 2010
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          A reminder that the UKA/RWA 50km is at the Racecourse at Northampton
          October 17th. Entries close with Peter Marlow the preceding week. The
          changing facilities are now at the Malcolm Arnold Academy, Trinity
          Avenue, Northampton NN2 6JW. Parking will be at a premium at the venue so one would be advised to park close to the school. This parking issue and the facilities alteration is due to a change to a late season race, the preference on the part of some for a Sunday event and the obvious clash with Sunday League football. The superb changing facilities adjacent to the course were paid for by the Football Foundation so rightly football have first claim. The new changing facilities are only 200m or so from the bottom end of the course and are available from 9AM to start time and from 3pm until 4:30pm. The awards ceremony is in the usual location, the Conservative club close by the school.

          On the discussion on this ill advised rule change suggestion. I venture warily into this. People would be wise to consider the impact and implementation of technology. Given the prevailing Biomechanic data (freely available in appropriate journals suggesting the 0.004s differential in human eye sight and the reality- the reason for the daming photographs), I suggest that races would a become farce as you would be 'banking up' an awful lot of a field. Before anyone says here here, will we therefore need to look at past results going back a century or more? Are we to have electronic devices for legs to determine straightening (note the word in the rule) so that the differential of 2-5 degrees is strictly imposed, who can tell 180 degrees? The human eye cannot, is a leg straightened at that or less? Musculature variations?

          Mark

          To: racewalk@yahoogroups.com
          From: ynotlleb1@...
          Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 21:32:55 +0200
          Subject: [UK racewalk] The end of DQs?




























          Guten Abend



          Some of our friends over the pond posted in response to John's

          article in the last RWR.



          An interesting proposal, I'm not sure how workable this would be at a

          little club event but in a championship where there are sufficient

          judges to keep track of things it might work.



          I think that 30s stop penalty could be too short, especially for a

          longer race. Someone who gets a 30s stop go in a 50km say around 30km

          would then have the mild inconvenience of a 30s stop but then

          restarts with a clean slate and another couple of hours to catch up.

          Maybe the time penalty should increase for longer distance races.

          Alternatively if a walker get 3 red cards and has a stop/go penalty,

          restarts and gets 3 more red cards then maybe a longer time penalty

          should result. It could also encourage walkers with less than perfect

          techniques, they could think "well even if I still get 3 cards I can

          still finish the race". An alternative would be 30s for 3 red cards

          and 30s for each subsequent card?



          It could make for exciting TV viewing, a walker gets their 3rd red

          card on the last lap of a 20km and has to pull into the pits just

          before the finish line and watches the opposition come past to win

          the race! In the winter Olympic biathlon sport how long is the time

          penalty for missing a shot and what proportion is this time penalty

          of the usual finish time?



          What do you think?

          >

          > At an IAAF Racewalking Committee meeting earlier this year, a

          > radical new

          > proposal was discussed. The aim of the proposal is to eliminate

          > disqualifications through the introduction of a pit-lane or penalty

          > area where

          > athletes would be held for a period when breaking the rules, before

          > being

          > allowed to continue the race. The Committee members were handed

          > acopy of the

          > proposal which they were asked to discuss and circulate with in the

          > racewalking

          > community and to gather feedback of the next meeting. Folwoing is

          > the proposal.

          >

          > IAAF RACE WALKING COMMITTEE MEETING

          >

          > 17 MAY 2010, CHIHUAHUA (MEX)

          >

          > Is there a problem linked to racewalking and what is it?

          > Racewalking is the only

          > athletics discipline where athletes can be subjectively

          > disqualified by judges

          > for not complying with the rules before the end of the race and not

          > have the

          > right to appeal (except in the case of a disqualification by the

          > Chief Judge in

          > the last part of the race).

          >

          > This creates the following problems:

          >

          > . a clear discrepancy with the other disciplines where athletes can

          > finish the

          > race and appeal

          >

          > . a great number of disqualifications with respect to the number of

          > starters

          > offering a negative image of the sport

          >

          > . discourages grass-roots athletes from approaching the discipline

          > to the extent

          > that, in somecountries, only the loss of contact rule (perhaps

          > easier to

          > understand and detect) is applied for age-group competitions in an

          > effort to

          > reduce the number of disqualifications

          >

          > . judging ability is not consistent throughout the international

          > panels so the

          > "quality" of theudging panel unfairly becomes a determining factor

          > in the

          > athlete's possibility to succeed or fail in a race

          >

          > . a lack of understanding from the general public and loss of

          > affection for the

          > discipline.

          >

          > What possible options are there to help solve the problem keeping

          > the current

          > rule.

          >

          > Studies have been conducted on the use of electronically operated

          > warning

          > devices linked to the athletes' shoes and able to detect and report

          > loss of

          > contact, which is only one of the two

          >

          > characteristics of the Racewalking Rule (the other being the bent

          > knee). This

          > would introduce an objective element which would, in theory, ensure

          > consistency

          > in the detection of this violation of the rule. For the moment

          > these devices are

          > still prototypes which need further studies to guarantee the necessary

          > reliability, duration and flexibility and are incompatible with a

          > short-term

          > real world application.

          >

          > In any case taking the Racewalking Judges out of the equation is

          > not possible

          > nor desirable (an eventual electronic device would only be

          > available for the

          > major competitions). Courses and seminars are held periodically in

          > an attempt to

          > establish a common understanding on the interpretation of the

          > Racewalking Rule

          > and on the criteria for its uniform application during a race, but

          > this is

          > proving difficult to achieve because the key characteristics that

          > make a good

          > judge are different from one judge to the other:

          >

          > . concentration

          >

          > . stamina

          >

          > . eyesight

          >

          > * observation

          >

          > . reaction time

          >

          > * commitment

          >

          > * experience

          >

          > A new approach

          >

          > It is very 4hIq
          PGKTkJJDgIOgACIHvmnSusuiyZ5/PBJzHFndOTO7p4Mz6BlFJQOTshPR6scoRiCEuY9g1Hc7AYgk
          +NNn0bugsDTRhnuKAX2z2E6Y2085QojLUogLaO4uju5het0X9imAO+1Eq7TdQ7BJdHIzjW2EGmxl
          bJBzTfcGbiMWfaKeXsAqvwhdym57ubWe4IFd7Xg2o1I2+6OcukolN5aByBt94Y7y4jMuMT7h3+mK
          0lnffkQge5wWcwXrdMoArbNvuhDtKR1IDw5mxhPswmKr6rzyZJnG2mGdBMgmb/lXzJefnZLzZnHq
          iLfiDE3gGmOzIGaMuVN3vjKbzNrSdE9Z2Wl2r78xM6tWEARFnFon+GxnLbui72zni4ucWkZh1RAJ
          vojZSMEynmzO7aZpdmNesjT+dtpcZOMmCTWrV+98QTYB2/vUwZxETfYfNz6O/mZWQt+dWvp5GOcA
          1+OEDN/pnlp8FUUsEbpiPQ7miqfzjfjglgA5vq+mgCopO1QB02v/5CueYRs5ihgGEhxdTdypUvMm
          dWTNClvQHeTWtMVTs5CYdzNII5BJxJWCwdvgbruzpYcHZ68Hd0DPX9gdtQ9l+MHmlr7KfHxaQwvr
          pAWFkgiN0d5hIJIEnLgWCMgk4+WfI23gobcSIPsR1wcjzY+VTeaPzB96wlpYB8u8At/0K74MuBhc
          x3uWo7vS552Y0QnsJ6flMzaFyXCMEC6ieYMcJACVJt9IfTfyIyML03B3QnZyYdgkPfFKVyaUnXMz
          rdqOib0EzyETKAFfbMvZad2CQjzb+zWZl9vXgUn5webPrmDFClybdawGblJoRWdnI7PnvCzNBXJq
          aj30gM1qjdRcU/C5t2Ft685U23FJFQiUSmvMldZLGTRMzuJ5fQu3uE2CS5F6A70nA4y7TAiKS3yX
          mYdSZeRmdlzuyAAszGE4SAPHOedzCe1iszOsGaTQOmf2SxTFhIQ1ZuG7s05ydeTrXedUHUy2DNuo
          uBZ07qrJnp/w6lV5gzxzJrPNp5DdymQZO9RVAyYZH/IUVPjuCZk4m1dwugXSDuElCdAesyq/Jcp3
          CUzGa698JMyMJaRa3/GmjLBJ8RksmSwIdMsz03QXb8mXTJqje6fFGgXUCi3T1GVJzdaVp0NlsWtS
          EptGaOe0yi9WSZpuld2mjDswiTmylUuPAbr>
          >

          > The proposal

          >

          > Probably the closest existing practical application of the above

          > principle is in

          > motor racing (pit-lane drive through) and biathlon, the basic

          > concept of which

          > reads as follows:

          >

          > "A Biathlon competition consists of a race in which contestants ski

          > around a

          > cross-country track, and where the total distance is broken up by

          > either two or

          > four shooting rounds, half in prone position, the other half

          > standing. Depending

          > on the shooting performance, extra distance or time is added to the

          > contestant's

          > total running distance/time. As in most races, the contestant with

          > the shortest

          > total time wins."

          >

          > If we reword to suit race walking, the basic principle could read:

          > "A Racewalk

          > competition consists of a race in which contestants racewalk around

          > a circuit in

          > compliance with the rules of racewalking. Athletes judged unable to

          > walk

          > strictly according to the rules are penalized and extra distance

          > (or time) is

          > added to their total running distance/time. The contestant with the

          > shortest

          > total time wins."

          >

          > This, of course, would be the new basic principle for which general

          > consensus

          > would be required and the immediate consequences of which would be

          > that athletes

          > would no longer be disqualified (except, perhaps, extreme cases in

          > the last part

          > of the race) but, depending on the number of red cards received,

          > would be

          > required to either stop for a certain time before continuing or

          > walk an extra

          > distance in the middle of the race (or a combination of both).

          > During the time

          > in which the athlete undergoes the penalty, he/she must be off the

          > course and in

          > a designated secured area ("pit lane")

          >

          > Advantages

          >

          > .No longer any disqualifications for not walking according to the

          > rule (except

          > extreme cases) so all athletes have the chance to finish the race

          > and record a

          > performance - very important for young less experienced athletes

          >

          > .Less pressure on the race walking judges who can act according to

          > their best

          > knowledge and capacity without being conditioned by the

          > consequences of their

          > actions

          >

          > .Penalized athletes still remain in the competition with a chance

          > to come back

          > creating more drama, suspense and uncertainty in the race

          >

          > . Penalties can be a spectacular moment of the race and add to the

          > appeal of the

          > competition if adequately presented and televised

          >

          > Disadvantages

          >

          > . Practical implementation

          >

          > o More paperwork / data processing required

          >

          > o Physical feasibility and location of the start-stop phase

          >

          > . Historical comparison of results and performances

          >

          > . Determination of correct penalties (time and / or distance)

          >

          > In practice

          >

          > The practical implementation is certainly a challenge and can be

          > more or less

          > complicated depending on the technology available to assist with

          > the process.

          > The identification of the key phases of the process from the moment

          > an athlete

          > receives his third red card (assuming this is the criteria which

          > determines

          > his/her stop at the pit lane) could be as follows. For the moment

          > we are

          > assuming that athletes receiving three red cards must stop for 30

          > seconds and

          > that the pit lane is placed somewhere before the finish line.

          >

          > . The Recorder acknowledges the receipt of the red card from a

          > third Judge

          >

          > . The Posting Board is updated and shows that the athlete must

          > undergo a penalty

          >

          > . The Recorder informs the relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge

          >

          > . The relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge (or the Chief Judge if

          > closer)

          > notifies the athlete of the third red card and of the consequential

          > penalty

          >

          > . Having been notified, the athlete approaching the Pit Lane is

          > directed into

          > the holding area by a Competition Official. The athlete must stop

          > and cannot

          > postpone his stop.

          >

          > .The clock starts counting 30 seconds from the moment the athlete

          > crosses the

          > entry line

          >

          > o if transponders are available, a mat could be used to start the

          > clock and the

          > time could be shown on a simple display, also showing the athlete's

          > bib number

          > or name, at the exit of the Pit Lane

          >

          > o if technology is not available, then a timekeeper shall start the

          > time and

          > shall notify the athlete with some sort of countdown leading up to

          > his exit from

          > the Pit Lane

          >

          > .The athlete is free to stop or continue moving inside the Pit Lane

          > area without

          > constraints (cannot however have access to refreshments, drinking

          > or sponging)

          >

          > .When the 30 seconds are over, the athlete is free to leave the Pit

          > Lane and

          > re-enter the course, where he is again required to walk according

          > to the Rules

          >

          > .The count of the red cards for that specific athlete starts again

          > from zero and

          > the Posting Board is amended accordingly (though the total red

          > cards received is

          > kept on record for statistical purposes)

          >

          > Next steps

          >

          > Should it be concluded that this proposal has some merit, the next

          > logical steps

          > could be:

          >

          > .Give mandate to a small working group to fine-tune the practical

          > aspects by a

          > certain deadline

          >

          > ..If the proposal is supported in principle by the IAAF Council ,

          > officially

          > inform the racewalking community that such a proposal is being

          > considered by the

          > IAAF and that opportunities to test this new concept, at first

          > within the

          > younger age groups or at minor competitions, are sought.

          >

          > ORW Editor comments:

          >

          > First, I am curious as to why this has apparently remained

          > underground since

          > May. It was news to me when John passed it on. That aside, here are

          > my initial

          > comments to John:

          >

          > I have had the thought in the past that a time penalty in lieu of a

          > DQ might be

          > a way to go and I think I, or someone else, has expressed that

          > thought in one of

          > the many discussions of judging matters that have appeared in the

          > ORW over 46

          > years. Briefly, some comments on the proposal:

          >

          > How do we define "extreme case"? Probably everyone can relate to

          > the term

          > (flagrant violation might be another term), but where is the fine

          > line between a

          > routine loss of contact and an "extreme case"?

          >

          > After three cards and time in the pit lane, does a competitor have

          > to accumulate

          > three additional reds before a secomd penalty, or does each

          > subsequent violation

          > warrant a penalty (say 10 seconds)" If it takes three more, a

          > competitor might

          > try to make up for the 30 seconds lost by throwing all caution to

          > the wind

          > (short of becoming an "extreme case", however that might be

          > defined) until two

          > more reds are thrown his or her way.

          >

          > After three reds and a penalty, can a judge who issued one of the

          > three reds,

          > issue another red, or do subsequent reds have to come from other

          > judges?

          >

          > Finally, why not just a time penalty (30 seconds added to the final

          > time) rather

          > than the "pit lane" stop, which it would seem would be more of an

          > administrative

          > headache.

          >

          > And here is John's reply to my comments:

          >

          > "I had the document for a few months, but have been rushed with

          > space and stuff.

          > No doubt there have been many suggestions over the years, all

          > probaly with

          > merit. But for the IAAF committee to discuss it at this level

          > seriously is a

          > great step. They acknowledge in the document that there are many

          > things to

          > consider and it won't be easy, and some dismiss it out of hand

          > altogether as

          > many people don't like any change whatsoever. A time penalty would

          > be near

          > identical to a pit lane, no argument there-but more exciting for an

          > audience to

          > see penalties in action during the event rather that see someone

          > finish in first

          > place and then appear in the results in fifth, confusing them! (Ed.

          > Good point)

          > It is the confusion and the impression of cheating that outsiders

          > see in our

          > sport that we need to fix, and personally I think it would be

          > great. I know a

          > lot of people who quit the sport due to getting DQ'd too. If it

          > stirs up debate,

          > then great. I don't think it will happen any time soon though"

          >

          >



          tony....

          Tony Bell

          ynotlleb1@...

          Englishman in Hamburg, Germany



















          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • mark wall
          Read damning for daming, I can spell but the laptop does not always react to key depression! ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 5 , Oct 2, 2010
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Read damning for daming, I can spell but the laptop does not always react to key depression!

            > To: racewalk@yahoogroups.com
            > From: marnwal@...
            > Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 22:15:06 +0000
            > Subject: [UK racewalk] On more important matters-UKA 50km
            >
            >
            > A reminder that the UKA/RWA 50km is at the Racecourse at Northampton
            > October 17th. Entries close with Peter Marlow the preceding week. The
            > changing facilities are now at the Malcolm Arnold Academy, Trinity
            > Avenue, Northampton NN2 6JW. Parking will be at a premium at the venue so one would be advised to park close to the school. This parking issue and the facilities alteration is due to a change to a late season race, the preference on the part of some for a Sunday event and the obvious clash with Sunday League football. The superb changing facilities adjacent to the course were paid for by the Football Foundation so rightly football have first claim. The new changing facilities are only 200m or so from the bottom end of the course and are available from 9AM to start time and from 3pm until 4:30pm. The awards ceremony is in the usual location, the Conservative club close by the school.
            >
            > On the discussion on this ill advised rule change suggestion. I venture warily into this. People would be wise to consider the impact and implementation of technology. Given the prevailing Biomechanic data (freely available in appropriate journals suggesting the 0.004s differential in human eye sight and the reality- the reason for the daming photographs), I suggest that races would a become farce as you would be 'banking up' an awful lot of a field. Before anyone says here here, will we therefore need to look at past results going back a century or more? Are we to have electronic devices for legs to determine straightening (note the word in the rule) so that the differential of 2-5 degrees is strictly imposed, who can tell 180 degrees? The human eye cannot, is a leg straightened at that or less? Musculature variations?
            >
            > Mark
            >
            > To: racewalk@yahoogroups.com
            > From: ynotlleb1@...
            > Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 21:32:55 +0200
            > Subject: [UK racewalk] The end of DQs?
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Guten Abend
            >
            >
            >
            > Some of our friends over the pond posted in response to John's
            >
            > article in the last RWR.
            >
            >
            >
            > An interesting proposal, I'm not sure how workable this would be at a
            >
            > little club event but in a championship where there are sufficient
            >
            > judges to keep track of things it might work.
            >
            >
            >
            > I think that 30s stop penalty could be too short, especially for a
            >
            > longer race. Someone who gets a 30s stop go in a 50km say around 30km
            >
            > would then have the mild inconvenience of a 30s stop but then
            >
            > restarts with a clean slate and another couple of hours to catch up.
            >
            > Maybe the time penalty should increase for longer distance races.
            >
            > Alternatively if a walker get 3 red cards and has a stop/go penalty,
            >
            > restarts and gets 3 more red cards then maybe a longer time penalty
            >
            > should result. It could also encourage walkers with less than perfect
            >
            > techniques, they could think "well even if I still get 3 cards I can
            >
            > still finish the race". An alternative would be 30s for 3 red cards
            >
            > and 30s for each subsequent card?
            >
            >
            >
            > It could make for exciting TV viewing, a walker gets their 3rd red
            >
            > card on the last lap of a 20km and has to pull into the pits just
            >
            > before the finish line and watches the opposition come past to win
            >
            > the race! In the winter Olympic biathlon sport how long is the time
            >
            > penalty for missing a shot and what proportion is this time penalty
            >
            > of the usual finish time?
            >
            >
            >
            > What do you think?
            >
            > >
            >
            > > At an IAAF Racewalking Committee meeting earlier this year, a
            >
            > > radical new
            >
            > > proposal was discussed. The aim of the proposal is to eliminate
            >
            > > disqualifications through the introduction of a pit-lane or penalty
            >
            > > area where
            >
            > > athletes would be held for a period when breaking the rules, before
            >
            > > being
            >
            > > allowed to continue the race. The Committee members were handed
            >
            > > acopy of the
            >
            > > proposal which they were asked to discuss and circulate with in the
            >
            > > racewalking
            >
            > > community and to gather feedback of the next meeting. Folwoing is
            >
            > > the proposal.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > IAAF RACE WALKING COMMITTEE MEETING
            >
            > >
            >
            > > 17 MAY 2010, CHIHUAHUA (MEX)
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Is there a problem linked to racewalking and what is it?
            >
            > > Racewalking is the only
            >
            > > athletics discipline where athletes can be subjectively
            >
            > > disqualified by judges
            >
            > > for not complying with the rules before the end of the race and not
            >
            > > have the
            >
            > > right to appeal (except in the case of a disqualification by the
            >
            > > Chief Judge in
            >
            > > the last part of the race).
            >
            > >
            >
            > > This creates the following problems:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . a clear discrepancy with the other disciplines where athletes can
            >
            > > finish the
            >
            > > race and appeal
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . a great number of disqualifications with respect to the number of
            >
            > > starters
            >
            > > offering a negative image of the sport
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . discourages grass-roots athletes from approaching the discipline
            >
            > > to the extent
            >
            > > that, in somecountries, only the loss of contact rule (perhaps
            >
            > > easier to
            >
            > > understand and detect) is applied for age-group competitions in an
            >
            > > effort to
            >
            > > reduce the number of disqualifications
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . judging ability is not consistent throughout the international
            >
            > > panels so the
            >
            > > "quality" of theudging panel unfairly becomes a determining factor
            >
            > > in the
            >
            > > athlete's possibility to succeed or fail in a race
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . a lack of understanding from the general public and loss of
            >
            > > affection for the
            >
            > > discipline.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > What possible options are there to help solve the problem keeping
            >
            > > the current
            >
            > > rule.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Studies have been conducted on the use of electronically operated
            >
            > > warning
            >
            > > devices linked to the athletes' shoes and able to detect and report
            >
            > > loss of
            >
            > > contact, which is only one of the two
            >
            > >
            >
            > > characteristics of the Racewalking Rule (the other being the bent
            >
            > > knee). This
            >
            > > would introduce an objective element which would, in theory, ensure
            >
            > > consistency
            >
            > > in the detection of this violation of the rule. For the moment
            >
            > > these devices are
            >
            > > still prototypes which need further studies to guarantee the necessary
            >
            > > reliability, duration and flexibility and are incompatible with a
            >
            > > short-term
            >
            > > real world application.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > In any case taking the Racewalking Judges out of the equation is
            >
            > > not possible
            >
            > > nor desirable (an eventual electronic device would only be
            >
            > > available for the
            >
            > > major competitions). Courses and seminars are held periodically in
            >
            > > an attempt to
            >
            > > establish a common understanding on the interpretation of the
            >
            > > Racewalking Rule
            >
            > > and on the criteria for its uniform application during a race, but
            >
            > > this is
            >
            > > proving difficult to achieve because the key characteristics that
            >
            > > make a good
            >
            > > judge are different from one judge to the other:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . concentration
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . stamina
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . eyesight
            >
            > >
            >
            > > * observation
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . reaction time
            >
            > >
            >
            > > * commitment
            >
            > >
            >
            > > * experience
            >
            > >
            >
            > > A new approach
            >
            > >
            >
            > > It is very 4hIq
            > PGKTkJJDgIOgACIHvmnSusuiyZ5/PBJzHFndOTO7p4Mz6BlFJQOTshPR6scoRiCEuY9g1Hc7AYgk
            > +NNn0bugsDTRhnuKAX2z2E6Y2085QojLUogLaO4uju5het0X9imAO+1Eq7TdQ7BJdHIzjW2EGmxl
            > bJBzTfcGbiMWfaKeXsAqvwhdym57ubWe4IFd7Xg2o1I2+6OcukolN5aByBt94Y7y4jMuMT7h3+mK
            > 0lnffkQge5wWcwXrdMoArbNvuhDtKR1IDw5mxhPswmKr6rzyZJnG2mGdBMgmb/lXzJefnZLzZnHq
            > iLfiDE3gGmOzIGaMuVN3vjKbzNrSdE9Z2Wl2r78xM6tWEARFnFon+GxnLbui72zni4ucWkZh1RAJ
            > vojZSMEynmzO7aZpdmNesjT+dtpcZOMmCTWrV+98QTYB2/vUwZxETfYfNz6O/mZWQt+dWvp5GOcA
            > 1+OEDN/pnlp8FUUsEbpiPQ7miqfzjfjglgA5vq+mgCopO1QB02v/5CueYRs5ihgGEhxdTdypUvMm
            > dWTNClvQHeTWtMVTs5CYdzNII5BJxJWCwdvgbruzpYcHZ68Hd0DPX9gdtQ9l+MHmlr7KfHxaQwvr
            > pAWFkgiN0d5hIJIEnLgWCMgk4+WfI23gobcSIPsR1wcjzY+VTeaPzB96wlpYB8u8At/0K74MuBhc
            > x3uWo7vS552Y0QnsJ6flMzaFyXCMEC6ieYMcJACVJt9IfTfyIyML03B3QnZyYdgkPfFKVyaUnXMz
            > rdqOib0EzyETKAFfbMvZad2CQjzb+zWZl9vXgUn5webPrmDFClybdawGblJoRWdnI7PnvCzNBXJq
            > aj30gM1qjdRcU/C5t2Ft685U23FJFQiUSmvMldZLGTRMzuJ5fQu3uE2CS5F6A70nA4y7TAiKS3yX
            > mYdSZeRmdlzuyAAszGE4SAPHOedzCe1iszOsGaTQOmf2SxTFhIQ1ZuG7s05ydeTrXedUHUy2DNuo
            > uBZ07qrJnp/w6lV5gzxzJrPNp5DdymQZO9RVAyYZH/IUVPjuCZk4m1dwugXSDuElCdAesyq/Jcp3
            > CUzGa698JMyMJaRa3/GmjLBJ8RksmSwIdMsz03QXb8mXTJqje6fFGgXUCi3T1GVJzdaVp0NlsWtS
            > EptGaOe0yi9WSZpuld2mjDswiTmylUuPAbr>
            > >
            >
            > > The proposal
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Probably the closest existing practical application of the above
            >
            > > principle is in
            >
            > > motor racing (pit-lane drive through) and biathlon, the basic
            >
            > > concept of which
            >
            > > reads as follows:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > "A Biathlon competition consists of a race in which contestants ski
            >
            > > around a
            >
            > > cross-country track, and where the total distance is broken up by
            >
            > > either two or
            >
            > > four shooting rounds, half in prone position, the other half
            >
            > > standing. Depending
            >
            > > on the shooting performance, extra distance or time is added to the
            >
            > > contestant's
            >
            > > total running distance/time. As in most races, the contestant with
            >
            > > the shortest
            >
            > > total time wins."
            >
            > >
            >
            > > If we reword to suit race walking, the basic principle could read:
            >
            > > "A Racewalk
            >
            > > competition consists of a race in which contestants racewalk around
            >
            > > a circuit in
            >
            > > compliance with the rules of racewalking. Athletes judged unable to
            >
            > > walk
            >
            > > strictly according to the rules are penalized and extra distance
            >
            > > (or time) is
            >
            > > added to their total running distance/time. The contestant with the
            >
            > > shortest
            >
            > > total time wins."
            >
            > >
            >
            > > This, of course, would be the new basic principle for which general
            >
            > > consensus
            >
            > > would be required and the immediate consequences of which would be
            >
            > > that athletes
            >
            > > would no longer be disqualified (except, perhaps, extreme cases in
            >
            > > the last part
            >
            > > of the race) but, depending on the number of red cards received,
            >
            > > would be
            >
            > > required to either stop for a certain time before continuing or
            >
            > > walk an extra
            >
            > > distance in the middle of the race (or a combination of both).
            >
            > > During the time
            >
            > > in which the athlete undergoes the penalty, he/she must be off the
            >
            > > course and in
            >
            > > a designated secured area ("pit lane")
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Advantages
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .No longer any disqualifications for not walking according to the
            >
            > > rule (except
            >
            > > extreme cases) so all athletes have the chance to finish the race
            >
            > > and record a
            >
            > > performance - very important for young less experienced athletes
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .Less pressure on the race walking judges who can act according to
            >
            > > their best
            >
            > > knowledge and capacity without being conditioned by the
            >
            > > consequences of their
            >
            > > actions
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .Penalized athletes still remain in the competition with a chance
            >
            > > to come back
            >
            > > creating more drama, suspense and uncertainty in the race
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . Penalties can be a spectacular moment of the race and add to the
            >
            > > appeal of the
            >
            > > competition if adequately presented and televised
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Disadvantages
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . Practical implementation
            >
            > >
            >
            > > o More paperwork / data processing required
            >
            > >
            >
            > > o Physical feasibility and location of the start-stop phase
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . Historical comparison of results and performances
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . Determination of correct penalties (time and / or distance)
            >
            > >
            >
            > > In practice
            >
            > >
            >
            > > The practical implementation is certainly a challenge and can be
            >
            > > more or less
            >
            > > complicated depending on the technology available to assist with
            >
            > > the process.
            >
            > > The identification of the key phases of the process from the moment
            >
            > > an athlete
            >
            > > receives his third red card (assuming this is the criteria which
            >
            > > determines
            >
            > > his/her stop at the pit lane) could be as follows. For the moment
            >
            > > we are
            >
            > > assuming that athletes receiving three red cards must stop for 30
            >
            > > seconds and
            >
            > > that the pit lane is placed somewhere before the finish line.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . The Recorder acknowledges the receipt of the red card from a
            >
            > > third Judge
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . The Posting Board is updated and shows that the athlete must
            >
            > > undergo a penalty
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . The Recorder informs the relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . The relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge (or the Chief Judge if
            >
            > > closer)
            >
            > > notifies the athlete of the third red card and of the consequential
            >
            > > penalty
            >
            > >
            >
            > > . Having been notified, the athlete approaching the Pit Lane is
            >
            > > directed into
            >
            > > the holding area by a Competition Official. The athlete must stop
            >
            > > and cannot
            >
            > > postpone his stop.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .The clock starts counting 30 seconds from the moment the athlete
            >
            > > crosses the
            >
            > > entry line
            >
            > >
            >
            > > o if transponders are available, a mat could be used to start the
            >
            > > clock and the
            >
            > > time could be shown on a simple display, also showing the athlete's
            >
            > > bib number
            >
            > > or name, at the exit of the Pit Lane
            >
            > >
            >
            > > o if technology is not available, then a timekeeper shall start the
            >
            > > time and
            >
            > > shall notify the athlete with some sort of countdown leading up to
            >
            > > his exit from
            >
            > > the Pit Lane
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .The athlete is free to stop or continue moving inside the Pit Lane
            >
            > > area without
            >
            > > constraints (cannot however have access to refreshments, drinking
            >
            > > or sponging)
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .When the 30 seconds are over, the athlete is free to leave the Pit
            >
            > > Lane and
            >
            > > re-enter the course, where he is again required to walk according
            >
            > > to the Rules
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .The count of the red cards for that specific athlete starts again
            >
            > > from zero and
            >
            > > the Posting Board is amended accordingly (though the total red
            >
            > > cards received is
            >
            > > kept on record for statistical purposes)
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Next steps
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Should it be concluded that this proposal has some merit, the next
            >
            > > logical steps
            >
            > > could be:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > .Give mandate to a small working group to fine-tune the practical
            >
            > > aspects by a
            >
            > > certain deadline
            >
            > >
            >
            > > ..If the proposal is supported in principle by the IAAF Council ,
            >
            > > officially
            >
            > > inform the racewalking community that such a proposal is being
            >
            > > considered by the
            >
            > > IAAF and that opportunities to test this new concept, at first
            >
            > > within the
            >
            > > younger age groups or at minor competitions, are sought.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > ORW Editor comments:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > First, I am curious as to why this has apparently remained
            >
            > > underground since
            >
            > > May. It was news to me when John passed it on. That aside, here are
            >
            > > my initial
            >
            > > comments to John:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > I have had the thought in the past that a time penalty in lieu of a
            >
            > > DQ might be
            >
            > > a way to go and I think I, or someone else, has expressed that
            >
            > > thought in one of
            >
            > > the many discussions of judging matters that have appeared in the
            >
            > > ORW over 46
            >
            > > years. Briefly, some comments on the proposal:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > How do we define "extreme case"? Probably everyone can relate to
            >
            > > the term
            >
            > > (flagrant violation might be another term), but where is the fine
            >
            > > line between a
            >
            > > routine loss of contact and an "extreme case"?
            >
            > >
            >
            > > After three cards and time in the pit lane, does a competitor have
            >
            > > to accumulate
            >
            > > three additional reds before a secomd penalty, or does each
            >
            > > subsequent violation
            >
            > > warrant a penalty (say 10 seconds)" If it takes three more, a
            >
            > > competitor might
            >
            > > try to make up for the 30 seconds lost by throwing all caution to
            >
            > > the wind
            >
            > > (short of becoming an "extreme case", however that might be
            >
            > > defined) until two
            >
            > > more reds are thrown his or her way.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > After three reds and a penalty, can a judge who issued one of the
            >
            > > three reds,
            >
            > > issue another red, or do subsequent reds have to come from other
            >
            > > judges?
            >
            > >
            >
            > > Finally, why not just a time penalty (30 seconds added to the final
            >
            > > time) rather
            >
            > > than the "pit lane" stop, which it would seem would be more of an
            >
            > > administrative
            >
            > > headache.
            >
            > >
            >
            > > And here is John's reply to my comments:
            >
            > >
            >
            > > "I had the document for a few months, but have been rushed with
            >
            > > space and stuff.
            >
            > > No doubt there have been many suggestions over the years, all
            >
            > > probaly with
            >
            > > merit. But for the IAAF committee to discuss it at this level
            >
            > > seriously is a
            >
            > > great step. They acknowledge in the document that there are many
            >
            > > things to
            >
            > > consider and it won't be easy, and some dismiss it out of hand
            >
            > > altogether as
            >
            > > many people don't like any change whatsoever. A time penalty would
            >
            > > be near
            >
            > > identical to a pit lane, no argument there-but more exciting for an
            >
            > > audience to
            >
            > > see penalties in action during the event rather that see someone
            >
            > > finish in first
            >
            > > place and then appear in the results in fifth, confusing them! (Ed.
            >
            > > Good point)
            >
            > > It is the confusion and the impression of cheating that outsiders
            >
            > > see in our
            >
            > > sport that we need to fix, and personally I think it would be
            >
            > > great. I know a
            >
            > > lot of people who quit the sport due to getting DQ'd too. If it
            >
            > > stirs up debate,
            >
            > > then great. I don't think it will happen any time soon though"
            >
            > >
            >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            > tony....
            >
            > Tony Bell
            >
            > ynotlleb1@...
            >
            > Englishman in Hamburg, Germany
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • mark wall
            Good thing I am not in a position where decimal places are a life and death matter: freely available in appropriate journals suggesting the 0.004s
            Message 5 of 5 , Oct 3, 2010
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Good thing I am not in a position where decimal places are a life and death matter:
              "freely available in appropriate journals suggesting the 0.004s differential in human eye sight" should read 0.04. In addition the area on past results, it is a bit unclear, it meant to make the point that past records etc would now not be able to be compared, all-time ranking lists would be irrelevant as they were under different conditions pertaining to contact, Mexico and Australia would possibly have claims on retrospective medals from Sydney perhaps.

              To: racewalk@yahoogroups.com
              From: marnwal@...
              Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 22:18:45 +0000
              Subject: RE: [UK racewalk] On more important matters-UKA 50km






























              Read damning for daming, I can spell but the laptop does not always react to key depression!



              > To: racewalk@yahoogroups.com

              > From: marnwal@...

              > Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 22:15:06 +0000

              > Subject: [UK racewalk] On more important matters-UKA 50km

              >

              >

              > A reminder that the UKA/RWA 50km is at the Racecourse at Northampton

              > October 17th. Entries close with Peter Marlow the preceding week. The

              > changing facilities are now at the Malcolm Arnold Academy, Trinity

              > Avenue, Northampton NN2 6JW. Parking will be at a premium at the venue so one would be advised to park close to the school. This parking issue and the facilities alteration is due to a change to a late season race, the preference on the part of some for a Sunday event and the obvious clash with Sunday League football. The superb changing facilities adjacent to the course were paid for by the Football Foundation so rightly football have first claim. The new changing facilities are only 200m or so from the bottom end of the course and are available from 9AM to start time and from 3pm until 4:30pm. The awards ceremony is in the usual location, the Conservative club close by the school.

              >

              > On the discussion on this ill advised rule change suggestion. I venture warily into this. People would be wise to consider the impact and implementation of technology. Given the prevailing Biomechanic data (freely available in appropriate journals suggesting the 0.004s differential in human eye sight and the reality- the reason for the daming photographs), I suggest that races would a become farce as you would be 'banking up' an awful lot of a field. Before anyone says here here, will we therefore need to look at past results going back a century or more? Are we to have electronic devices for legs to determine straightening (note the word in the rule) so that the differential of 2-5 degrees is strictly imposed, who can tell 180 degrees? The human eye cannot, is a leg straightened at that or less? Musculature variations?

              >

              > Mark

              >

              > To: racewalk@yahoogroups.com

              > From: ynotlleb1@...

              > Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 21:32:55 +0200

              > Subject: [UK racewalk] The end of DQs?

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              > Guten Abend

              >

              >

              >

              > Some of our friends over the pond posted in response to John's

              >

              > article in the last RWR.

              >

              >

              >

              > An interesting proposal, I'm not sure how workable this would be at a

              >

              > little club event but in a championship where there are sufficient

              >

              > judges to keep track of things it might work.

              >

              >

              >

              > I think that 30s stop penalty could be too short, especially for a

              >

              > longer race. Someone who gets a 30s stop go in a 50km say around 30km

              >

              > would then have the mild inconvenience of a 30s stop but then

              >

              > restarts with a clean slate and another couple of hours to catch up.

              >

              > Maybe the time penalty should increase for longer distance races.

              >

              > Alternatively if a walker get 3 red cards and has a stop/go penalty,

              >

              > restarts and gets 3 more red cards then maybe a longer time penalty

              >

              > should result. It could also encourage walkers with less than perfect

              >

              > techniques, they could think "well even if I still get 3 cards I can

              >

              > still finish the race". An alternative would be 30s for 3 red cards

              >

              > and 30s for each subsequent card?

              >

              >

              >

              > It could make for exciting TV viewing, a walker gets their 3rd red

              >

              > card on the last lap of a 20km and has to pull into the pits just

              >

              > before the finish line and watches the opposition come past to win

              >

              > the race! In the winter Olympic biathlon sport how long is the time

              >

              > penalty for missing a shot and what proportion is this time penalty

              >

              > of the usual finish time?

              >

              >

              >

              > What do you think?

              >

              > >

              >

              > > At an IAAF Racewalking Committee meeting earlier this year, a

              >

              > > radical new

              >

              > > proposal was discussed. The aim of the proposal is to eliminate

              >

              > > disqualifications through the introduction of a pit-lane or penalty

              >

              > > area where

              >

              > > athletes would be held for a period when breaking the rules, before

              >

              > > being

              >

              > > allowed to continue the race. The Committee members were handed

              >

              > > acopy of the

              >

              > > proposal which they were asked to discuss and circulate with in the

              >

              > > racewalking

              >

              > > community and to gather feedback of the next meeting. Folwoing is

              >

              > > the proposal.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > IAAF RACE WALKING COMMITTEE MEETING

              >

              > >

              >

              > > 17 MAY 2010, CHIHUAHUA (MEX)

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Is there a problem linked to racewalking and what is it?

              >

              > > Racewalking is the only

              >

              > > athletics discipline where athletes can be subjectively

              >

              > > disqualified by judges

              >

              > > for not complying with the rules before the end of the race and not

              >

              > > have the

              >

              > > right to appeal (except in the case of a disqualification by the

              >

              > > Chief Judge in

              >

              > > the last part of the race).

              >

              > >

              >

              > > This creates the following problems:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . a clear discrepancy with the other disciplines where athletes can

              >

              > > finish the

              >

              > > race and appeal

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . a great number of disqualifications with respect to the number of

              >

              > > starters

              >

              > > offering a negative image of the sport

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . discourages grass-roots athletes from approaching the discipline

              >

              > > to the extent

              >

              > > that, in somecountries, only the loss of contact rule (perhaps

              >

              > > easier to

              >

              > > understand and detect) is applied for age-group competitions in an

              >

              > > effort to

              >

              > > reduce the number of disqualifications

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . judging ability is not consistent throughout the international

              >

              > > panels so the

              >

              > > "quality" of theudging panel unfairly becomes a determining factor

              >

              > > in the

              >

              > > athlete's possibility to succeed or fail in a race

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . a lack of understanding from the general public and loss of

              >

              > > affection for the

              >

              > > discipline.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > What possible options are there to help solve the problem keeping

              >

              > > the current

              >

              > > rule.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Studies have been conducted on the use of electronically operated

              >

              > > warning

              >

              > > devices linked to the athletes' shoes and able to detect and report

              >

              > > loss of

              >

              > > contact, which is only one of the two

              >

              > >

              >

              > > characteristics of the Racewalking Rule (the other being the bent

              >

              > > knee). This

              >

              > > would introduce an objective element which would, in theory, ensure

              >

              > > consistency

              >

              > > in the detection of this violation of the rule. For the moment

              >

              > > these devices are

              >

              > > still prototypes which need further studies to guarantee the necessary

              >

              > > reliability, duration and flexibility and are incompatible with a

              >

              > > short-term

              >

              > > real world application.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > In any case taking the Racewalking Judges out of the equation is

              >

              > > not possible

              >

              > > nor desirable (an eventual electronic device would only be

              >

              > > available for the

              >

              > > major competitions). Courses and seminars are held periodically in

              >

              > > an attempt to

              >

              > > establish a common understanding on the interpretation of the

              >

              > > Racewalking Rule

              >

              > > and on the criteria for its uniform application during a race, but

              >

              > > this is

              >

              > > proving difficult to achieve because the key characteristics that

              >

              > > make a good

              >

              > > judge are different from one judge to the other:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . concentration

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . stamina

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . eyesight

              >

              > >

              >

              > > * observation

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . reaction time

              >

              > >

              >

              > > * commitment

              >

              > >

              >

              > > * experience

              >

              > >

              >

              > > A new approach

              >

              > >

              >

              > > It is very 4hIq

              > PGKTkJJDgIOgACIHvmnSusuiyZ5/PBJzHFndOTO7p4Mz6BlFJQOTshPR6scoRiCEuY9g1Hc7AYgk

              > +NNn0bugsDTRhnuKAX2z2E6Y2085QojLUogLaO4uju5het0X9imAO+1Eq7TdQ7BJdHIzjW2EGmxl

              > bJBzTfcGbiMWfaKeXsAqvwhdym57ubWe4IFd7Xg2o1I2+6OcukolN5aByBt94Y7y4jMuMT7h3+mK

              > 0lnffkQge5wWcwXrdMoArbNvuhDtKR1IDw5mxhPswmKr6rzyZJnG2mGdBMgmb/lXzJefnZLzZnHq

              > iLfiDE3gGmOzIGaMuVN3vjKbzNrSdE9Z2Wl2r78xM6tWEARFnFon+GxnLbui72zni4ucWkZh1RAJ

              > vojZSMEynmzO7aZpdmNesjT+dtpcZOMmCTWrV+98QTYB2/vUwZxETfYfNz6O/mZWQt+dWvp5GOcA

              > 1+OEDN/pnlp8FUUsEbpiPQ7miqfzjfjglgA5vq+mgCopO1QB02v/5CueYRs5ihgGEhxdTdypUvMm

              > dWTNClvQHeTWtMVTs5CYdzNII5BJxJWCwdvgbruzpYcHZ68Hd0DPX9gdtQ9l+MHmlr7KfHxaQwvr

              > pAWFkgiN0d5hIJIEnLgWCMgk4+WfI23gobcSIPsR1wcjzY+VTeaPzB96wlpYB8u8At/0K74MuBhc

              > x3uWo7vS552Y0QnsJ6flMzaFyXCMEC6ieYMcJACVJt9IfTfyIyML03B3QnZyYdgkPfFKVyaUnXMz

              > rdqOib0EzyETKAFfbMvZad2CQjzb+zWZl9vXgUn5webPrmDFClybdawGblJoRWdnI7PnvCzNBXJq

              > aj30gM1qjdRcU/C5t2Ft685U23FJFQiUSmvMldZLGTRMzuJ5fQu3uE2CS5F6A70nA4y7TAiKS3yX

              > mYdSZeRmdlzuyAAszGE4SAPHOedzCe1iszOsGaTQOmf2SxTFhIQ1ZuG7s05ydeTrXedUHUy2DNuo

              > uBZ07qrJnp/w6lV5gzxzJrPNp5DdymQZO9RVAyYZH/IUVPjuCZk4m1dwugXSDuElCdAesyq/Jcp3

              > CUzGa698JMyMJaRa3/GmjLBJ8RksmSwIdMsz03QXb8mXTJqje6fFGgXUCi3T1GVJzdaVp0NlsWtS

              > EptGaOe0yi9WSZpuld2mjDswiTmylUuPAbr>

              > >

              >

              > > The proposal

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Probably the closest existing practical application of the above

              >

              > > principle is in

              >

              > > motor racing (pit-lane drive through) and biathlon, the basic

              >

              > > concept of which

              >

              > > reads as follows:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > "A Biathlon competition consists of a race in which contestants ski

              >

              > > around a

              >

              > > cross-country track, and where the total distance is broken up by

              >

              > > either two or

              >

              > > four shooting rounds, half in prone position, the other half

              >

              > > standing. Depending

              >

              > > on the shooting performance, extra distance or time is added to the

              >

              > > contestant's

              >

              > > total running distance/time. As in most races, the contestant with

              >

              > > the shortest

              >

              > > total time wins."

              >

              > >

              >

              > > If we reword to suit race walking, the basic principle could read:

              >

              > > "A Racewalk

              >

              > > competition consists of a race in which contestants racewalk around

              >

              > > a circuit in

              >

              > > compliance with the rules of racewalking. Athletes judged unable to

              >

              > > walk

              >

              > > strictly according to the rules are penalized and extra distance

              >

              > > (or time) is

              >

              > > added to their total running distance/time. The contestant with the

              >

              > > shortest

              >

              > > total time wins."

              >

              > >

              >

              > > This, of course, would be the new basic principle for which general

              >

              > > consensus

              >

              > > would be required and the immediate consequences of which would be

              >

              > > that athletes

              >

              > > would no longer be disqualified (except, perhaps, extreme cases in

              >

              > > the last part

              >

              > > of the race) but, depending on the number of red cards received,

              >

              > > would be

              >

              > > required to either stop for a certain time before continuing or

              >

              > > walk an extra

              >

              > > distance in the middle of the race (or a combination of both).

              >

              > > During the time

              >

              > > in which the athlete undergoes the penalty, he/she must be off the

              >

              > > course and in

              >

              > > a designated secured area ("pit lane")

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Advantages

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .No longer any disqualifications for not walking according to the

              >

              > > rule (except

              >

              > > extreme cases) so all athletes have the chance to finish the race

              >

              > > and record a

              >

              > > performance - very important for young less experienced athletes

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .Less pressure on the race walking judges who can act according to

              >

              > > their best

              >

              > > knowledge and capacity without being conditioned by the

              >

              > > consequences of their

              >

              > > actions

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .Penalized athletes still remain in the competition with a chance

              >

              > > to come back

              >

              > > creating more drama, suspense and uncertainty in the race

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . Penalties can be a spectacular moment of the race and add to the

              >

              > > appeal of the

              >

              > > competition if adequately presented and televised

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Disadvantages

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . Practical implementation

              >

              > >

              >

              > > o More paperwork / data processing required

              >

              > >

              >

              > > o Physical feasibility and location of the start-stop phase

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . Historical comparison of results and performances

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . Determination of correct penalties (time and / or distance)

              >

              > >

              >

              > > In practice

              >

              > >

              >

              > > The practical implementation is certainly a challenge and can be

              >

              > > more or less

              >

              > > complicated depending on the technology available to assist with

              >

              > > the process.

              >

              > > The identification of the key phases of the process from the moment

              >

              > > an athlete

              >

              > > receives his third red card (assuming this is the criteria which

              >

              > > determines

              >

              > > his/her stop at the pit lane) could be as follows. For the moment

              >

              > > we are

              >

              > > assuming that athletes receiving three red cards must stop for 30

              >

              > > seconds and

              >

              > > that the pit lane is placed somewhere before the finish line.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . The Recorder acknowledges the receipt of the red card from a

              >

              > > third Judge

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . The Posting Board is updated and shows that the athlete must

              >

              > > undergo a penalty

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . The Recorder informs the relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . The relevant Assistant to the Chief Judge (or the Chief Judge if

              >

              > > closer)

              >

              > > notifies the athlete of the third red card and of the consequential

              >

              > > penalty

              >

              > >

              >

              > > . Having been notified, the athlete approaching the Pit Lane is

              >

              > > directed into

              >

              > > the holding area by a Competition Official. The athlete must stop

              >

              > > and cannot

              >

              > > postpone his stop.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .The clock starts counting 30 seconds from the moment the athlete

              >

              > > crosses the

              >

              > > entry line

              >

              > >

              >

              > > o if transponders are available, a mat could be used to start the

              >

              > > clock and the

              >

              > > time could be shown on a simple display, also showing the athlete's

              >

              > > bib number

              >

              > > or name, at the exit of the Pit Lane

              >

              > >

              >

              > > o if technology is not available, then a timekeeper shall start the

              >

              > > time and

              >

              > > shall notify the athlete with some sort of countdown leading up to

              >

              > > his exit from

              >

              > > the Pit Lane

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .The athlete is free to stop or continue moving inside the Pit Lane

              >

              > > area without

              >

              > > constraints (cannot however have access to refreshments, drinking

              >

              > > or sponging)

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .When the 30 seconds are over, the athlete is free to leave the Pit

              >

              > > Lane and

              >

              > > re-enter the course, where he is again required to walk according

              >

              > > to the Rules

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .The count of the red cards for that specific athlete starts again

              >

              > > from zero and

              >

              > > the Posting Board is amended accordingly (though the total red

              >

              > > cards received is

              >

              > > kept on record for statistical purposes)

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Next steps

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Should it be concluded that this proposal has some merit, the next

              >

              > > logical steps

              >

              > > could be:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > .Give mandate to a small working group to fine-tune the practical

              >

              > > aspects by a

              >

              > > certain deadline

              >

              > >

              >

              > > ..If the proposal is supported in principle by the IAAF Council ,

              >

              > > officially

              >

              > > inform the racewalking community that such a proposal is being

              >

              > > considered by the

              >

              > > IAAF and that opportunities to test this new concept, at first

              >

              > > within the

              >

              > > younger age groups or at minor competitions, are sought.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > ORW Editor comments:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > First, I am curious as to why this has apparently remained

              >

              > > underground since

              >

              > > May. It was news to me when John passed it on. That aside, here are

              >

              > > my initial

              >

              > > comments to John:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > I have had the thought in the past that a time penalty in lieu of a

              >

              > > DQ might be

              >

              > > a way to go and I think I, or someone else, has expressed that

              >

              > > thought in one of

              >

              > > the many discussions of judging matters that have appeared in the

              >

              > > ORW over 46

              >

              > > years. Briefly, some comments on the proposal:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > How do we define "extreme case"? Probably everyone can relate to

              >

              > > the term

              >

              > > (flagrant violation might be another term), but where is the fine

              >

              > > line between a

              >

              > > routine loss of contact and an "extreme case"?

              >

              > >

              >

              > > After three cards and time in the pit lane, does a competitor have

              >

              > > to accumulate

              >

              > > three additional reds before a secomd penalty, or does each

              >

              > > subsequent violation

              >

              > > warrant a penalty (say 10 seconds)" If it takes three more, a

              >

              > > competitor might

              >

              > > try to make up for the 30 seconds lost by throwing all caution to

              >

              > > the wind

              >

              > > (short of becoming an "extreme case", however that might be

              >

              > > defined) until two

              >

              > > more reds are thrown his or her way.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > After three reds and a penalty, can a judge who issued one of the

              >

              > > three reds,

              >

              > > issue another red, or do subsequent reds have to come from other

              >

              > > judges?

              >

              > >

              >

              > > Finally, why not just a time penalty (30 seconds added to the final

              >

              > > time) rather

              >

              > > than the "pit lane" stop, which it would seem would be more of an

              >

              > > administrative

              >

              > > headache.

              >

              > >

              >

              > > And here is John's reply to my comments:

              >

              > >

              >

              > > "I had the document for a few months, but have been rushed with

              >

              > > space and stuff.

              >

              > > No doubt there have been many suggestions over the years, all

              >

              > > probaly with

              >

              > > merit. But for the IAAF committee to discuss it at this level

              >

              > > seriously is a

              >

              > > great step. They acknowledge in the document that there are many

              >

              > > things to

              >

              > > consider and it won't be easy, and some dismiss it out of hand

              >

              > > altogether as

              >

              > > many people don't like any change whatsoever. A time penalty would

              >

              > > be near

              >

              > > identical to a pit lane, no argument there-but more exciting for an

              >

              > > audience to

              >

              > > see penalties in action during the event rather that see someone

              >

              > > finish in first

              >

              > > place and then appear in the results in fifth, confusing them! (Ed.

              >

              > > Good point)

              >

              > > It is the confusion and the impression of cheating that outsiders

              >

              > > see in our

              >

              > > sport that we need to fix, and personally I think it would be

              >

              > > great. I know a

              >

              > > lot of people who quit the sport due to getting DQ'd too. If it

              >

              > > stirs up debate,

              >

              > > then great. I don't think it will happen any time soon though"

              >

              > >

              >

              > >

              >

              >

              >

              > tony....

              >

              > Tony Bell

              >

              > ynotlleb1@...

              >

              > Englishman in Hamburg, Germany

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              >

              >

              >

              > ------------------------------------

              >

              > Yahoo! Groups Links

              >

              >

              >





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



















              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.