emit touch free

[cbg]

Does anyone know what happened at 195 (9 on F1A) ? Splits suggest 7 of the 18 on Men's Open mispunched but have been reinstated - was the control unit faulty?

I understand that the control was deemed to have failed through low battery power. Why just one control? The original design had sealed batteries and could be inadvertently left (the human factor), or switched back, on (the 5 second hold on the On button can be achieved by another object). The latest design has removable batteries; not only will this significantly lengthen their useful life, but it enables the batteries to be completely removed from the unit to prevent inadvertent power drainage.

The control siting made it easy to determine that all affected competitors had visited it.

[housewife]

As I understand bof rules, you simply can't go around re-instating people cause they 'probably' went there. The instructions clearly stated that if you did not get a flashing light, you had to use the back up punch and show a punched map at the finish.

I punched a control at the british long champs which used SI, and was seen doing so by jess Tullie. We got to the finish, and that control had not registered. This missing punch handed the victory from me to Jess. Jess reported to the controller that she had seen me punch it, but I was told that because I did not have a recorded punch there was no way I could be reinstated.

It seems v inconsistent to have made reinstatements last weekend based on what 'probably' happened when I didn't get reinstated in a case where it was witnessed to have happened.

It seems like rules were made up over the weekend to suit circumstances.

Claire Ward

[DJM]

A competitor with a missing or unidentifiable punch will be disqualified unless it can be established with certainty that the missing or unidentifiable punch is not the competitor’s fault.

The difference between the two situations lies with the second part of BOF Rule 22.4 quoted above. If the Touch Free unit battery is dead then it's pretty certain that the missing punch "is not the competitor's fault."

So it seems that the application of the rule to the two events was entirely consistent (unfortunately ...)

[buzz]

A competitor with a missing or unidentifiable punch will be disqualified unless it can be established with certainty that the missing or unidentifiable punch is not the competitor’s fault.

The difference between the two situations lies with the second part of BOF Rule 22.4 quoted above. If the Touch Free unit battery is dead then it's pretty certain that the missing punch "is not the competitor's fault."

So it seems that the application of the rule to the two events was entirely consistent (unfortunately ...)

If I understand it correctly in this case it can't be proved with certainty that it wasn't the competitors fault because the battery apparently wasn't dead, just low and not all of the competitors were disqualified.

Presumably those that mis-punched didn't take as much time as the others and didn't check for flashing units and were therefore gaining an advantage. I guess they were relying on consistent behaviour from the emit units.

Seems a blatant disregard for the rules - unless I've misunderstood the technology or circumstance.

Personally I think good sportsmanship should prevail and if those that mis-punched were gaining an advantage by routinely not checking for flashing lights then they should come clean and disqualify themselves retrospectively.

[Snail]

This approach would also suggest that if for some reason (say a bunch of people at the control talking about failure) you are certain a control unit is faulty then it is not worth wasting time using the backup punch, despite what final details may say. Discuss...

[Len]

I had a 'mis-punch' on download for control #195.

Luckily I had stood by someone in the heats, who had also 'mis-punched' but been
re-instated as interrogation of his card showed he had been there.

I say luckily, as I would have just thought I hadn't been there long enough to register otherwise.

Looking at the screen as my card was interrogated, each punch was on a seperate line of code, with the exception of the control before 195 and 195 itself, which were one continuous line, and so a simple press of return between the two solved the issue.

No idea if it was low battery that caused this, but not the competitiors fault, as I am sure I saw a flash at this one.

I will admit as I became more comfortable with the system I didn't check everytime, maybe 80% for the final, I would be interested to know how many people would say they checked every time.

[Toni]

at the Irish Champs Sprint race this year we used SI air instead of emit. Nick Simonin 'missed' the last control and was disqualified despite the professional photographer recording him with his SI Card within the 50cm distance of the unit... It seems that it was his responsibility for ensuring it punched despite doing what we were told would work which I kind of get... But it seems unfair at the same time when you are told it works within 50cms and it doesn't - it doesn't seem that it is entirely the competitors fault. That said I don't want to go back to pin punching and I don't have a better solution as Claire is evidence that it can happen with 'normal' SI too!

[Nottinghamshire outlaw]

.... but we all know that photo evidence wasn't enough to get Hollie reinstated at WOC last year - we all thought that was very harsh too.

[Snail]

It would be good to have a better description of exactly what you have to do to register at a control - either theoretically or from practical experience.

Final Details said:
High speed punching is performed by holding the emiTag 20-50 cm from the control unit for a short moment

but also

Their punching range is 75cm. The range is reduced if punching at high speed.

Is the requirement that the tag be held stationary, within a certain range, for a minimum period - as suggested by the first statement? Or simply that the tag and control unit have to be within a certain range for a minimum period - which is what the second statement would tend to suggest?

[SJC]

Principles of operation:
Emit Touch-Free Pro (TFP) control units and emiTag control cards are both battery powered.
The TFP control unit creates a field which extends to approximately 80 cm from the unit.
The emiTag must be within the field of the TFP control unit for at least 0.07 seconds in order to record a “punch”.
When a competitor is moving at high speed, the emiTag needs to be considerably closer than 80 cm in order to record a punch.
The TFP unit transmits its code to the emiTag and it is stored in the internal memory along with the time of the punch.

[housewife]

The problem I have with the current rule is how am I supposed to find and prove the fault with the punch or SI card? I just train for orienteering - I don't spend time analysing different punching systems, and how they might fail. The same problem Hollie had.

[graeme]

We are *far* too keen to disqualify people for minor punching misdemeanors, especially when so many people are excuse from crossing "uncrossible" features with impunity.

Hollie's problem is of an entirely different magnitude:
there is video evidence of the system not functioning properly, but the organisers were still too anal to reinstate her.

[Arnold]

Could some sort of audible signal be added? Or a vibration? Although if done wrongly it could make for a noisy competition

I didn't like the system to start with but got more comfortable by the end. Didn't have a problem with punches but probably was just lucky.

One other question while I'm here - on F2A all the M16s have splits to controls 19 and 20 that are 10+ seconds faster (each) than all the M35/40/45s. Did they find a secret shortcut that was later closed? cbg do you know? Thanks.

[graeme]

Did they find a secret shortcut that was later closed? cbg do you know? Thanks.

My M16 son confirms they "all" took the obvious illegal shortcut.
Causing much hilarity that it was me who got DQed

[drobin]

I've suggested that instead of orange netting to block off illegal passageways, a coil of razor wire is used next time.