The JK 2019
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
Re: The JK 2019
General question - as EmitUK were awarded the timing and results contract did they provide all the 'manpower' at download and results display or did the club members from SCOA have to 'volunteer' ?
- PhilJ
- green
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:59 am
Re: The JK 2019
Emit UK were a complete black box entity to the organisation team, no manpower was sought from the day organiser(s), by emit UK to help with the processing of the results. The organising day needed to usher runners from the finish line, through the results tent and out again. The organising team were also responsible for taking output of results (when available) to paste up for display.
- MacMan
- white
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:03 pm
- Location: SouthE
Re: The JK 2019
So not a total black box then, helpers to usher runners and display results. I hope EmitUK paid each volunteer for ushering and results display for their time else its 'all gravy' for EmitUK and the bit they were paid for failed miserably. Breach of contract anybody ? But BO will just write it off as a 'must do better' and pay up, and they have more of our money to waste now by increasing membership fees.
- PhilJ
- green
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:59 am
Re: The JK 2019
The fundamental problem seems to be less the EMITag (whose job it is only to record punches & times) but the results software that then processes and displays the information received.
The main SI software was first written by Stephan Kraemer in 1995 (?) and has been continuously perfected since, so all the quirks you could think of (road crossings, multi days, relay variations, etc.) have been added, tested and refined - so they work.
The EMIT software used here seems to be relatively new and relatively untested, certainly for a race of this complexity. Hence lots of problems appearing for perhaps the first time, that now need sorting. There might be "better" EMIT software available somewhere, which might have had fewer issues, but for whatever reason it wasn't used.
@PhilJ, the ushering-through-results-tent and pasting-up-paper-results are not normally part of the results delivery contract, so amongst all the issues I don't think that one is a fair one. However, clearly the results providers didn't deliver on the bit they were paid for, which is the results processing!
The main SI software was first written by Stephan Kraemer in 1995 (?) and has been continuously perfected since, so all the quirks you could think of (road crossings, multi days, relay variations, etc.) have been added, tested and refined - so they work.
The EMIT software used here seems to be relatively new and relatively untested, certainly for a race of this complexity. Hence lots of problems appearing for perhaps the first time, that now need sorting. There might be "better" EMIT software available somewhere, which might have had fewer issues, but for whatever reason it wasn't used.
@PhilJ, the ushering-through-results-tent and pasting-up-paper-results are not normally part of the results delivery contract, so amongst all the issues I don't think that one is a fair one. However, clearly the results providers didn't deliver on the bit they were paid for, which is the results processing!
- Arnold
- diehard
- Posts: 737
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:24 am
Re: The JK 2019
I definitely touched the emitag to a control yesterday, and that control did not register (I had my elite back up still so saw that that had picked the control up and ran on). If you use the tag as instructed, you shouldn’t have to be obliged to check for it flashing, it should just work. Another big bear of mine was the results by club being displayed by course. Position by course is irrelevant at the JK - it is class that matters.
- housewife
- green
- Posts: 355
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:28 pm
- Location: probably at work
Re: The JK 2019
My understanding is you sweep your tag over the box, or hover it over as you pass. Touching it quickly and pulling the tag away, isn't recommended! At least that was the advice on the YouTube link on the final details.housewife wrote:I definitely touched the emitag to a control yesterday, and that control did not register (I had my elite back up still so saw that that had picked the control up and ran on). If you use the tag as instructed, you shouldn’t have to be obliged to check for it flashing, it should just work. Another big bear of mine was the results by club being displayed by course. Position by course is irrelevant at the JK - it is class that matters.
- maprun
- diehard
- Posts: 685
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 10:37 am
Re: The JK 2019
Think I will recommend use of touch free EMIT to my club. We can plan poor courses on a poor map with poor organisation and poor weather but the event would be all about the crap results system. Think how much effort we could save on pre-planning the event!
Seriously, it was a great JK, good planning (apart from needing some longer legs), readable maps, good clean terrain, good organisation, good arenas, good parking, easy travel and of course (too) great weather - pity many people left with a bit of an anticlimax, results still not sorted. And how can juries be dismissed on the day when there are so many outstanding issues.
Seriously, it was a great JK, good planning (apart from needing some longer legs), readable maps, good clean terrain, good organisation, good arenas, good parking, easy travel and of course (too) great weather - pity many people left with a bit of an anticlimax, results still not sorted. And how can juries be dismissed on the day when there are so many outstanding issues.
- ianandmonika
- red
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:03 pm
Re: The JK 2019
Wonder what the foreign competitors thought of our results system?
- denbydale
- green
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 1:42 pm
Re: The JK 2019
Homer wrote:Touch free punching might be an advantage in a Sprint Relay but I remain to be convinced that it is needed in forest orienteering.
Perhaps at the first control of a large forest relay?
British Orienteering Director | Opinions expressed on here are entirely my own, and do not represent the views of British Orienteering.
"If only you were younger and better..."
"If only you were younger and better..."
-
Scott - god
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:43 am
- Location: in the queue for the ice-cream van
Re: The JK 2019
Some commercial realities:
If the provision of electronic punching and results service was tendered, then it should have been open to SI and Emit to generate some competition. The lowest tender is NOT always the right option however attractive that might be to BO. ( I have no knowledge of this particular process).
If I were the CEO of BO I would have invited the CEO of Emit UK in for a ‘chat’ this morning to discuss the reputational damage that their organisation has caused BO for the UKs premier international competition, especially with the upcoming WOCSprint in Edinburgh.
If I were the CEO of Emit UK I would pre-empted this by offering a meeting to discuss a significant reduction of my JK fees, to start addressing the reputational damage to my company.
A win win outcome is a reduction in the cost of the JK service to BO, so benefitting all orienteers and Emit UK being encouraged to resolve their technical difficulties, so that Orienteering has at least two viable systems for major events to keep both companies ‘honest’ and competitive in tendering their services.
If the provision of electronic punching and results service was tendered, then it should have been open to SI and Emit to generate some competition. The lowest tender is NOT always the right option however attractive that might be to BO. ( I have no knowledge of this particular process).
If I were the CEO of BO I would have invited the CEO of Emit UK in for a ‘chat’ this morning to discuss the reputational damage that their organisation has caused BO for the UKs premier international competition, especially with the upcoming WOCSprint in Edinburgh.
If I were the CEO of Emit UK I would pre-empted this by offering a meeting to discuss a significant reduction of my JK fees, to start addressing the reputational damage to my company.
A win win outcome is a reduction in the cost of the JK service to BO, so benefitting all orienteers and Emit UK being encouraged to resolve their technical difficulties, so that Orienteering has at least two viable systems for major events to keep both companies ‘honest’ and competitive in tendering their services.
- RoT
- orange
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 8:14 am
Re: The JK 2019
It seems that the main problem with the operation of the Emitag system itself (as distinct from the results processing) was cases where the tag flashed and hence appeared to register, but when downloaded the punch was not correctly recorded.
I think that it would be impossible to implement an electronic punching system completely eleminating this possibility, but the probability of it occuring on each punch would depend strongly on the design of the system. If this probability was something like 1/100 then the system would clearly be unusable; if it was something like 1/1000000000 then it could be effectively ignored. However, if it was something like 1/10000 or 1/50000 most smaller events would be unaffected (and on the occasional instances where it happened would probably be put down to user error); but on a large event would be likely to affect a number of people.
Although it should be possible to design a punching system to keep this probability arbitrarily low, reducing it is likely to involve a trade off with other aspects of the system's performance such as punching speed, battery life and flexibility to use it for different applications. It is reasonable to expect contactless systems to be worse than conventional ones unless they have stronger mechanisms to avoid the issue.
It would be interesting to know if, when the IOF consider punching systems for approval, they take this probability into account - and if so what is considered an acceptable level.
On another point, my Emitag had an opaque number sticker directly over the LED. This did not completely obscure it, but significantly restricted the angle from which I could see it (as I found at the start of the Sprint when it took several seconds to confirm that it was flashing). It looks as though there was quite a bit of variation with the number stickers with some being transparent and others positioned differently so they weren't directly over the LED.
I think that it would be impossible to implement an electronic punching system completely eleminating this possibility, but the probability of it occuring on each punch would depend strongly on the design of the system. If this probability was something like 1/100 then the system would clearly be unusable; if it was something like 1/1000000000 then it could be effectively ignored. However, if it was something like 1/10000 or 1/50000 most smaller events would be unaffected (and on the occasional instances where it happened would probably be put down to user error); but on a large event would be likely to affect a number of people.
Although it should be possible to design a punching system to keep this probability arbitrarily low, reducing it is likely to involve a trade off with other aspects of the system's performance such as punching speed, battery life and flexibility to use it for different applications. It is reasonable to expect contactless systems to be worse than conventional ones unless they have stronger mechanisms to avoid the issue.
It would be interesting to know if, when the IOF consider punching systems for approval, they take this probability into account - and if so what is considered an acceptable level.
On another point, my Emitag had an opaque number sticker directly over the LED. This did not completely obscure it, but significantly restricted the angle from which I could see it (as I found at the start of the Sprint when it took several seconds to confirm that it was flashing). It looks as though there was quite a bit of variation with the number stickers with some being transparent and others positioned differently so they weren't directly over the LED.
- dch
- off string
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 12:12 am
Re: The JK 2019
On another point, my Emitag had an opaque number sticker directly over the LED. This did not completely obscure it, but significantly restricted the angle from which I could see it (as I found at the start of the Sprint when it took several seconds to confirm that it was flashing). It looks as though there was quite a bit of variation with the number stickers with some being transparent and others positioned differently so they weren't directly over the LED.
When we noticed that at the sample control I peeled the sticker off and fastened it somewhere else, and advised several others to do the same.
But more seriously there needs to be a report compiled listing all the problems so that they can be avoided in the future whatever system is used.
- MJG
- white
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:25 am
Re: The JK 2019
I don't know how Emit were selected for this gig, but for a one-off real-time event it's not appropriate to put the contract out to tender and then accept any tender that claims to satisfy the quality criteria. (Assuming there were some quality criteria). Any system that's selected for that type of event needs to be validated independently of the supplier before it is used.
I'm not brushing the issues with the tags under the carpet, but the main problem seems to have been that the Emit results system didn't prove up to the job. And given the diversity of its shortcomings it's a very safe bet that it wasn't independently validated.
It can't be the role of SC region to validate a results system: that needs to be done with resources at a national or international level.
BOF should now implement an enquiry into the events surrounding the results of this JK, and two key outcomes of that enquiry should be that (i) BOF uses its resources to validate some results systems/providers, and (ii) a validated system is required to be used at top level events.
Stapling control card stubs to bits of string was better than Emit. I don't remember it ever delaying the JK prizegiving.
By the way, I see all the results have now been taken down.
I'm not brushing the issues with the tags under the carpet, but the main problem seems to have been that the Emit results system didn't prove up to the job. And given the diversity of its shortcomings it's a very safe bet that it wasn't independently validated.
It can't be the role of SC region to validate a results system: that needs to be done with resources at a national or international level.
BOF should now implement an enquiry into the events surrounding the results of this JK, and two key outcomes of that enquiry should be that (i) BOF uses its resources to validate some results systems/providers, and (ii) a validated system is required to be used at top level events.
Stapling control card stubs to bits of string was better than Emit. I don't remember it ever delaying the JK prizegiving.
By the way, I see all the results have now been taken down.
- highfield
- string
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:49 pm
Re: The JK 2019
I can never get spɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ the right way up, and I got DQed last time they used EmitAG here,
but...
it's really important that we have some competition among these systems. SI cards are some 5 times more expensive that when they came out, in a period where most small electronic devices have got much cheaper.
but...
it's really important that we have some competition among these systems. SI cards are some 5 times more expensive that when they came out, in a period where most small electronic devices have got much cheaper.
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4724
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: The JK 2019
Kermit in the other thread wrote:The commentary wasn’t the best....
….I am lead to believe Andy M will be back commentating soon, phew.
I think its important not to blame the volunteers for results related fiasco assuming the commentary team were volunteers?
Its extremenly difficult to commentate for 6 hours without live results feed of some kind. I doubt Andy or Chris could have done much better - I understand that they declined this year due to the proposed results systems (or lack of it) - but I didn't get that direct from them so apologies if that's not the case.
When we used to commentate at the big races pre e-punching we relied on manual radio controls - typically we had 2 teams of 10 people supporting the commentators not really a sustainable solution - that's one of the reasons we pay 3rd parties for an automated results service. If this year's results providers weren't able to support a live commentary then they should never have been awarded the contract.
Last edited by buzz on Wed Apr 24, 2019 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
To oblivion and beyond....
-
buzz - addict
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:45 pm
- Location: Sheffield
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 155 guests