Emit cards

[seabird]

A long time ago (7 years or more) SI might have needed a bit more effort to use, with the need to wake up units, but that's long gone.

Paul, Is that entirely true.

I've been to two sprint events recently, where an early runner, has failed to register at a control when they have been the first to visit.

On each occasion the same factors seemed to be at play.
1. the si unit was slow to respond (not woken up) One was at the spectator control which was seen to be punched by the competitor.
2. as it was a Sprint the runners were in a particular hurry.
3. Both days were in bright sunlight, so neither runner felt able to rely on the flash, and assumed the unit had flashed.
4. Both runners were hard of hearing and not wearing their hearing aids so are used to not hearing a bleep.

Neither runner was an si expert. Both expected the unit to be fully waken,

[Paul Frost]

Originally you needed to Wake up a unit with a special stick, without that it didn't work at all. It then stayed on for a period of time that you could set.

Now, units are always on but in battery saving mode rather than sleeping. So the first punch takes it out of battery saving mode into a more alert state. That first punch may take a second to record and then the rest will be instant. Again you can set the amount of time it stays fully alert from minutes to days.

So generally, best practice for larger events is for the planner or controller to punch all controls when checking them in the hours prior to the start and so eliminate the very slight delay for the first competitor.

For smaller events it's likely that the controls are only put out just before the first start, so that person could punch each control as they put them out if you want to remove any disadvantage for the first competitor.

[Spookster]

Again you can set the amount of time it stays fully alert from minutes to days.

Yes, and I think the default period is 2 hours.

I think there are two issues:

(a) some planners forget (or don't know, or don't consider it sufficiently important) that they should ensure the boxes are fully "awake" for the first runner;

(b) 2 hours isn't long enough for a big event where planner and controller can punch everything on the morning of the event, but in the case of some controls they turn back into standby mode again before the first runners get to that point on the course.

[EddieH]

I was certainly aware of the delay being first to unwoken controls at the Purple Thistle, this despite the fact that with over 2 hours in total I wasn't particularly bothered.

[seabird]

Yes, and I think the default period is 2 hours.

My last si manager informed me they were set at 20 minutes (and that was 20 minutes before the first start), Nightmare!

[Paul Frost]

My last si manager informed me they were set at 20 minutes (and that was 20 minutes before the first start), Nightmare!

Sounds like you should have been talking to your SI manager before the event, it's a simple matter to change the time to whatever you want.
So it's not really a fault of the system, just a lack of communication.

My experience in Scotland is that planners/controllers provide a list of the controls that they would like a longer time set to the computing team/person. I seem to remember for the JK we had a few that were set for over 24 hours.

But don't get too hung up about the delay, it's really only an issue for the very top performers at large events. Considering the time it takes most people locating an Emit Brikke, even with the delay it's still quicker to punch.

[Karen]

As an habitual early starter, I've also noticed the very slight delay in registering when I am first to a SI control. In a minor event, it doesn't matter. I've never noticed it in a big event, so I expect it's a known problem and the planner/controller had woken them up.

[seabird]

Sounds like you should have been talking to your SI manager before the event.

Told him ok. He just forgot grrrrr.

[Roger]

Example SPORTident splits
Example Emit splits

I see what you mean: the SI ones have no marking whatsoever for the fastest splits.

BTW, is anyone else having trouble with Splitsbrowser, which is my tool of choice for looking at splits? For several weeks now I've been getting a security exception 'illegal URL redirect', see e.g. http://www.splitsbrowser.org.uk/splitsgraph.php?eventId=6071. Chrome, Firefox and IE, Java Plug-in 10.9.2.05 recently re-installed. Can't see a security setting to enable such behaviour so if I'm not the only one then I'll contact the developers.

[SJC]

I've been getting a security exception 'illegal URL redirect'

Same for me.

However, of all the splits analysis tools I find the Winsplits table with the coloured boxes and leg and overall positions the clearest. (If people upload the results).

[mister blobs]

I've been getting a security exception 'illegal URL redirect'

Same for me.

However, of all the splits analysis tools I find the Winsplits table with the coloured boxes and leg and overall positions the clearest. (If people upload the results).

Yes I've seen the same. Fixed by uninstalling Java and then install the latest version (just upgrading doesn't work).

[Roger]

Yes I've seen the same. Fixed by uninstalling Java and then install the latest version (just upgrading doesn't work).

Hmm. Just tried this and it didn't work.

...but following up with ctrl-F5 to clear the cache did! Many thanks.

[roadrunner]

Surely one of the main differences between Emit and SI is that for Emit, the brikke has a battery with a finite life (nominally 10 years, I think), whereas the SI SI Card is entirely passive (powered by the control unit) and so lasts forever (of until you lose or break it, or the system changes). I'm not sure whether the Emit controls have a battery, but I think they don't; the SI ones clearly do.

Therefore, if you're using Emit and a punch isn't recorded due to a flat battery, it's your fault, whereas for SI it's the fault of the event (and very likely affects everyone). The finite life of Emit cards, and the higher price (compared to the older SI dibbers) is the main reason why I chose to buy SI but not Emit.

[graeme]

...except most people use organiser-supplier brikkes, so its not "their fault".

I'm not a big fan of assigning blame for equipment failure, the issue is more whether you can recover from failure rather than looking for someone to blame.

When SI units fail the organisers still have start and finish information and a result is easily obtained. I notice reasonable SI organisers accept the "fault" and fix the problem by reinstating the competitor.
When Emit brikkes fail, there's no data to work with (unless you have another timing system). Unable to make a good fix, I even see emit organisers passing the "blame" to the competitor, as if its actually possible to check the emit battery.

It's a shame the one real advantage of Emit has gone: the window which allowed you to check you have discharged your "responsibility" to punch correctly.

Competition is still good though. The inflation of the purchase cost of SI shows it to be completely unrelated to manufacturing costs.

[andypat]

I can't access that link either, but this one seems OK from the Clyde RG page

http://www.clyde.routegadget.co.uk/clyde/reitti.cgi?act=splitsbrowser&id=19

Is it maybe the specific event?