the same thing happened at wuoc sprint in 2004. same features very close together were used and about one third competitiors were disqualified. noone was reinstated.
the SI rule Oli fell foul of is ridiculous ("you punched too fast" seems like a lame excuse by the SI people especially with version 6 cards) but the rule is being used consistently. the Troy thing is just weird. either control sites were fair and he mispunched or surely planning errors against the iof rules should have come up in the controlling.
it's class that andrew quinn is in the final -he's narrowly missed out on a couple of woc long finals already so i'm really pleased for him, but again.. why was there a car there anyway?
lots of little things making unfairness. hopefully there will be no more little problems now the finals are starting. and hopefully they go back to EMIT for future wocs.
WOC SPRINT - moving on
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
by guessed » Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:12 pm
There is an overriding rule of 'fairness'. The rule "don't look inside the SI Control Box" seems to contravene the fairness aspect.
If I was an outsider, I would see the sport taking arbitrary decisions. You could argue that cars parked in the wrong place is no different from not seeing a control because a competitor was standing in front of it.
I'm not suggesting the AQ reinstatement was incorrect - but the organiser took a view, and if the TdH protest had been resolved before, would almost certainly not have taken same view for AQ.
I'm arguing that if Organiser can make fairness decisions that cover periods of 7 secs or even 46 secs, then the organiser can also in the spirit of fairness see that Oli had visited the control, and allow his reinstatement.
Supposing the incidents were in the Final, rather than Qualification would the car cause the course to be voided ? I doubt it. And I doubt that 7 seconds compensation would be allowed. Tough.
In the same way, having actually read the Control Box from Oli, then in fairness, the Organiser now knows that Oli did visit the control. In fact, the Control Box should have not even been looked at - because by doing so, the Organiser has broken the rules.
Different Organisers - DIfferent Days
If I was an outsider, I would see the sport taking arbitrary decisions. You could argue that cars parked in the wrong place is no different from not seeing a control because a competitor was standing in front of it.
I'm not suggesting the AQ reinstatement was incorrect - but the organiser took a view, and if the TdH protest had been resolved before, would almost certainly not have taken same view for AQ.
I'm arguing that if Organiser can make fairness decisions that cover periods of 7 secs or even 46 secs, then the organiser can also in the spirit of fairness see that Oli had visited the control, and allow his reinstatement.
Supposing the incidents were in the Final, rather than Qualification would the car cause the course to be voided ? I doubt it. And I doubt that 7 seconds compensation would be allowed. Tough.
In the same way, having actually read the Control Box from Oli, then in fairness, the Organiser now knows that Oli did visit the control. In fact, the Control Box should have not even been looked at - because by doing so, the Organiser has broken the rules.
Different Organisers - DIfferent Days
- guessed
- off string
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:11 pm
by mharky » Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:25 pm
I think it's wrong to start comparing what are different situations.
How close was the car to the control? Did it stop him from physically being able to get there? Other wise its a bit silly, run to the feature...
How close was the car to the control? Did it stop him from physically being able to get there? Other wise its a bit silly, run to the feature...
-
mharky - team nopesport
- Posts: 4541
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:39 pm
by the duncan » Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:11 pm
but you got to love this opening ceremony!!! classic
'Grab it by the balls'
-
the duncan - diehard
- Posts: 949
- Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 2:20 pm
- Location: The mighty 'Deen
by Adventure Racer » Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:41 pm
mharky wrote:This is a stupid rule, who cares how close 2 controls are, can't these people read three digit numbers???
It's really a planning rule, given that it could be unfair to spot what looks like the correct feature with a flag and so run to that and lose time even if you do check the code and correct, so courses should not be planned like that. Not sure about the ruling though, given that from what I've seen planning / course problems usually result in the course being voided
- Adventure Racer
- addict
- Posts: 1111
- Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 11:53 pm
- Location: Somewhere near Malvern
by Mike » Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:46 pm
It's easy to keep checking the live results at work, a little harder to listen to the audio stream, but I'm going to struggle to be able to watch the video!
Go GBR!!
Go GBR!!
'They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist.....' Last words of General John Sedgewick, 1864.
-
Mike - orange
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2004 4:39 pm
- Location: Sheffield la la la
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests