Adding commonly-held track non-racing disciplines to the WR Guidelines
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
Besides the standard track racing disciplines there are some, let's call them, technical track disciplines which are not in the WR Guidelines (WRG) right now but commonly-held at unicycle competitions. These disciplines are described in the Rulebook very well and I think we should add them to the WRG.
Track Coasting, Track Gliding, Stillstand, Slow Forward and Slow Backward
Comment
On the World Records list on the IUF website, all of these technical track disciplines are at the bottom of the page, and it is stated that they are "not yet" included in the official IUF World Record Guidelines. This seems to imply that now is the time to include them. This half-hearted recognition should not stay that way.
Comment
As these disciplines are commonly held at every Unicon, ECU and also at smaller events I totally agree that we should add them.
Comment
Agree to include these records except one: track gliding.
I propose to delete track gliding from the list.
In contrast with coasting, for gliding it is allowed to touch the tire. But it's not mandatory to touch it.
While touching the tire decreases the speed, it is better to coast in a track gliding event.
This makes the gliding records worthless, they should be replaced by the coasting records.
Comment
I was always under the impression that in a gliding competition, at least one foot (shoe) MUST at all times contact the tyre.
It turns out that Erik is right, the description for gliding the the IUF Rulebook includes "Coasting is allowed". And it's not a recent change: I have Rulebooks back to 2010, they all have this phrase.
But then I don't understand why there is a separate gliding discipline. You get more distance when coasting (compared to gliding). So why don't people coast all the time in a gliding competition??
Comment
Fact ist that in gliding competition riders use different gliding or costing technical options with their specific advantages and disadvantages to reach the longest distance. For example this is the case of unlimited long distance races: Why not everybody uses a 36" geard unicycle?
Another example: Why not every rider in slow races uses a 12" unicycle?
Conclusion: You can not simplify like:
- 12" = slowest rider
- 36" geard = fastest rider
- coasting = longest distance
There is a combination of many factors to get the best result.
So, I´m against deleting track gliding from the list.
I would like to call in question the distinction between "official" and "not official" world record, because "accept" or "not accept" a discipline as "world record discipline" is because the guidelines has been copied of the Guiness world record guidelines. Guiness has commercial interests and is aimed to an extremely wide spectrum of possible records. Therefore Guiness world record guidelines are not transferable to our sport: I mean the discussion in what discipline it´s allowed to set up a world record.
We should promote our sport and not "select disciplines" like Guiness.
Comment
I can only actually go along with Ana. I think Gliding offers the possibility to use completely different techniques than Coasting. For many - especially young athletes - gliding is much easier and there are a lot of athletes who go further in gliding than in coasting.
I am therefore against removing track giding from the list.
I also agree with Ana's comments regarding the distinction between "official" and "unofficial" world records.
Comment
I can understand that gliding is easier than coasting, and that a relatively inexperienced rider in these disciplines can get a longer distance if he is allowed to glide. Because if he is not allowed to glide, he will fall off before going very slow. That for me would be enough reason to keep Gliding records, but only if coasting would not be allowed.
Now that in Track Gliding it is allowed to coast, then why is the 177.6 m Track Coasting record of Knut Steffens not recognised as the Track Gliding record?
I am fully willing to follow the experts on this matter (I'm not an expert), but I just don't understand.
I agree as well that we should do away with the "additional records" list.
Comment
Agree with Jan's original post- that we should include the additional competitions that are in the IUF rulebook.
We need to be mindful that we don't end up with too many records, but it is important to recognise the events we regularly use in competition.
Just to add something to the discussion...what happens if events are 'taken out' of the rulebook? It may not happen- the rulebook gets fatter and fatter, but if a competition becomes less popular/obsolete (for convention hosts as well as competitors), should we have option of ceasing to recognise something as an 'official record'?
Comment
I found this article on discontinued Guinness World Records:
All of the examples of discontinued records are because they are about activities or conditions that most people would disapprove. This makes sense: if a certain World Record category is recognised, it encourages people to go after it.
I don't see this happening in unicycling. As an example, we may at some point in the future stop racing on 24" wheels. But even if that would happen, it would still be OK and non-controversial to try and break a 24" world record.
Therefore, I don't see the need to have the explicit option of ceasing to recognise something as an official record. If this need would arise in the future, it's early enough to deal with it then.
This implies a certain responsibility to not go wild in recognising new World Record categories. Once recognised, it's hard to get rid of them :-)
Comment
I think if you were to prohibit coasting in giding, it would be a very clear distinction between the two disciplines. At the same time you would exclude a lot of possible techniques for gliding and limit the discipline very much. The question would then be, when does coasting count as coasting? Is there already a very short loss of contact between shoe and tire coasting?
If so, then it would not be very easy to judge on the one hand and on the other hand it would be a real limitation of the possible gliding techniques.
If no, then it would probably be impossible to define the time and distance at which the loss of contact is considered as coasting or to control the time and distance in the competition.
Now of course you could say: Then we just cancel the discipline coasting and leave it to gliding - then you can also coast and the problem is solved... However, you take the challenge and difficulty, which the discipline Coasting quite constitutes: Namely that the tyre must never be touched at any time. In gliding, this touch is rule-compliant.
Personally, I would really find it a pity if this challenge didn't exist. Nevertheless, I realize that there is a lot of overlap between the disciplines.
Assuming you would only want to have one discipline in the rulebook/WRG because of these overlaps, then I would personally vote to leave the discipline of gliding in, simply to make still different techniques possible.
Even if I personally would miss the essential "challenge" of the discipline coasting.
Comment
Regarding separate Gliding and Coasting records: this is actually more a Rulebook discussion than a WRG discussion.
we have strongly argued that there should be a connection between IUF Rulebook and WR Guidelines.
Therefore, we should continue to acknowledge separate Gliding records, as long as this displine is officially in the IUF Rulebook.
But to state my opinion here: I only see the point of an official separate Gliding discipline if it is not allowed to coast.
Comment
After reading the extended comments of the discipline experts it is obvious that both gliding and coasting have their specific properties and are worth to exist as separate disciplines that can be offered in competitions. I do not want to remove some of both.
But for WR acceptance we have to be correct.
It is clear that the actual WR distances for gliding are not correct. If coasting is allowed in gliding and it is not mandatory to touch the tire, than the gliding WR should be at least at the same level as the coasting WR. If somebody should find a technique that makes it possible to go further while touching the tire, then it would be even possible that the gliding record is higher than the coasting record.
Comment
If the IUF Rulebook continues to have both Gliding and Coasting, then I think the WR Guidelines should also to recognise both.
In another discussion we have more or less concluded that all disciplines in certain IUF Rulebook chapters (including Track Racing) should be recognised as valid WR categories.
I have asked a few times why Knut Steffens's WR on Track Coasting doesn't count as the WR Track Gliding. Maybe the answer is that he never claimed the Gliding record. If he did, we would probably conclude that he fulfilled all requirements for the Track Glicing WR.
Comment
I also think, that the only reason why Knut Steffens's WR on Track Coasting isn't the WR Track Gliding, because he never claimed the Gliding record -maybe because je don't want to claim.
Comment
Jan, I think you can make a proposal to add the 5 disciplines you mentioned in your first post. It would also be fine with me if I make this proposal, but would gladly leave it to you as the discussion starter.
Comment
I'll prepare a proposal shortly.
Comment
I agree with this and may possibly suggest we go further. I generally think that if there is a competition at UNICON and the result is quantifiable, accurately in a replicable manner. Then the max achievement should be recorded for prosperity as an aim for future competitors and recognition of the achievement.
Comment
Are you suggesting to document all top results from Unicon, even if they constitute no World Record?
I think doing so is one of the objectives of the IUF, but in my opinion it is not within the scope of the World Record Committee. Any performance that is not, or has not been, a World Record is 'none of our business'.
Comment
I agree with Klaas. Otherwise you can also start listing performances from European Championships and so on.
Comment
I have prepared a proposal, but I think we will be able to make some improvements. However, I find it easier to discuss and make improvements if we already have a working basis, which is what the proposal should be.
I think it makes sense to include the "technical disciplines" in a separate chapter and not to add them to the track races. Therefore I have inserted an X for the future number in the proposal for the first time - an insertion behind the track races would be useful, I think.
The short description of the record is based on the existing records in the WRG. However, I think that if there is a clear reference to the rulebook, we do not need this description, which in my opinion is very imprecise, especially for the disciplines listed in the proposal, and should therefore be omitted completely. Or the description would have to be made more precise, which could, however, be very detailed and would be a duplication of the rulebook.
Comment
Your first paragraph:
Fine to have a proposal as a basis for further discussion.
Your second paragraph:
The five disciplines that you propose to add are all in the IUF Rulebook under the chapter name "Track: Other".
Your third paragraph:
If we make the title for your chapter X "Track Records: Other", and have it immediately after "Standard Track Records", we maintain maximum consistency with the IUF Rulebook.
We have short descriptions for every record in the WRG. E.g., for 100m we have "This is the fastest unicycle ride over a 100m distance".
I think that we must have some sort of description for each record in the WRG. All of these descriptions are short and imprecise. In the 100m example, they don't describe how to start, how to finish, to stay in your lane, etc.
But that is not a problem. For the precise descriptions and requirements we have the IUF Rulebook, and the clause in the WRG
"World Records in disciplines that are governed by the IUF Rulebook must comply with the rules for corresponding competitions as per the IUF Rulebook version valid at the date of the attempt."
This is new in the WRG, and agreed upon in Proposal #2.
Bottom line: I think your short descriptions are fine.
Other remarks:
For Gliding and Coasting, I think the maximum wheelsize is Class 24? Then we will need a small addition to Proposal 2 (well, it needs to be a new proposal). I'm not sure about Stillstand wheelsize restriction - I think there is none. Note that for Slow Forward and Slow Backward there is explicitly no wheel size or crank arm limit in the IUF Rulebook.
For Gliding and Coasting, why do you add the requirement "on a 400m athletics track"? This is not in the IUF Rulebook. I would leave this phrase out of the proposal, and rely on what the IUF Rulebook says about the venue.
In two places in your proposal, you misspelled unicycle as unicyce.
Comment
Oops, I misplaced "Your third paragraph". It should be one paragraph lower.
Comment
If we include track gliding, do we agree that in the WR list the records for gliding and coasting are the same?
Because technically 100% coasting is allowed in the gliding discipline so the gliding WR must be at least as high as the coasting record.
On the other hand the coasting WR can never be better than the gliding WR because gliding is not allowed during coasting.
This is simple logic.
Comment
I see your logic and I'm not happy with this inconsistency either.
Fact is that the current IUF Rulebook lists gliding and coasting as separate disciplines. I think that for now the WR list should follow that.
The two records are different in at least one respect: they have different names to them. Knut Steffens is current World Champion Track Coasting, but Daiki Izumeda is current World Champion Track Gliding.
Most likely, Knut Steffens never claimed the World Record Track Gliding. One reason may be that he did not set that record in a Track Gliding competition.
It all boils down to the Rulebook. I guess that once the Rulebook Track Racing committees (regular and "other") get going, this subject should be discussed there.
Comment
@Klaas:
I know, that the five disciplines are all under the chapter name "Track: Other" in the IUF Rulebook. Unfortunately, the rulebook also contains the relays in this chapter, which definitely belong to the track races. In addition, I find the rulebook designation very meaningless. But this will surely have to be mentioned at the next Rulebook Update... So for now, I'd agree with you, to make the title for the new chapter X "Track Records: Other",to have maximum consistency with the IUF Rulebook.
To the short descriptions:
Because all of these descriptions are short and imprecise and the fact that we have the new clause in the WRG
"World Records in disciplines that are governed by the IUF Rulebook must comply with the rules for corresponding competitions as per the IUF Rulebook version valid at the date of the attempt.", I don't see why we still need the impercise descriptions.
For the 100m, for example, in my opinion something in the form "This is the record for the IUF discipline 100m." would also be better. This wording would make it clear that this is an official IUF discipline to be found in the rulebook and would indirectly refer again to the corresponding rules.
To your other remarks:
Yes, the maximum wheelsize is Class 24 for gliding and coasting.
And yes, the rulebook doesn't require a "400m athletics track" for gliding and coasting - but I think this is the only way to be able to compare the performances 100% with each other, because especially the surface has a significant influence in these disciplines. The results of a competition on asphalt will therefore not be comparable to those on a athletic track. Particularly for world records, however, the conditions should be defined in such a way that the results are 100% comparable. And that's why I'd like to make the athletics track mandatory for WR.
Comment
I agree with the short descriptions referring to the IUF Rulebook.
The maximum wheelsize of Class 24 (and the requirement to have minimum 125 cranks) for gliding and coasting (or for e.g. 100m, for that matter) is not apparent from the IUF Rulebook. (The Rulebook would allow it to be 29 Class.)
I think therefore that it must be in the WRG description.
I agree to adding "on a 400 m Athletics Track". It is OK that htis is not a requirement for competition - if all riders ride on asphalt, the competition is still valid as a comparison between riders. But conditions for World Records must be as comparable as possible. Since glide (on flat) and coast competitions are generally done on a 400m athletics track, it makes sense to require this for a WR.
The only thing is: coasting results are very dependent on wind. That's probably why the Rulebook says under 3B.6.2.4 "Indoor coasting is the recommended coasting competition at a Unicon." That means that the recommended way of coasting cannot result in a World Record. That is kind of strange, aye?
Comment
I think the rulebook also contains the restriction to the 24 Class, because section 3B.5 Wheel Size Categories says "[...] When not otherwise specified, 24 Class isthe maximum wheel size above age 10. [..]". And the rules for gliding and coasting specify nothing else, so this paragraph should be valid (Only the crank arm length restriction is lifted in the Giding and Coasting rules).
Yeah, I totally agree with you that coasting results are very wind dependent. And I think thats why the Rulebook says "Wind must be at a minimum for records to be set and broken." - but of course this statement is completely useless as it cannot be judged objectively. I would therefore also like to measure the wind during coasting and gliding in a similar way to athletics or other wind-dependent sports and to determine a value above which no more record attempts can be made. But this would have to be enforced in the rulebook, because a wind measurement exclusively for WR is not feasible in my opinion. A general rule change would be necessary, so that we could use an already prescribed or at least recommended wind measurement for the WR.
I don't know why the Rulebook says that Indoor Coasting is the recommended coasting competition at a Unicon. I haven't seen this discipline in all the years I ride a unicycle at a competition and I think there are reasons for that.
A gym is very small, so you have to coast a lot of very tight radii, which leads to the fact that the achievable widths will be significantly below the widths on the track. Since coasting and gliding are normally held within the track disciplines, there is often no hall available. Training in the hall is also only possible before the start of the competition, which is not very practical for the participants due to the open starting order and the often large time window to complete the attempts.
All in all, I am very happy that the Track variant has established itself as the Standard Coasting variant. I think it would be useful to adjust the rulebook to the reality and perhaps even delete some variants completely from the rulebook.
Comment
Would it not be sensible to adopt the athletics definition for wind assistance, it seams to be used for restricting records, not for restricting events - so it would be appropriate to be set by this committee. It seams to be set out quite well and explained on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_assistance
Comment
Yes, it is true that wind measurement in athletics is used for restricting records, not for restricting events. But in athletics the wind measurement is mandatory for all competitions and the rules are even more extensive than the Wikipedia article.
I would be very much in favour of establishing a mandatory wind measurement for the recognition of WR (I think this would also be very useful in some other disciplines), but I perceive the risk that if we establish a mandatory wind measurement exclusively for the recognition of WR without having it generally required (or at least recommended) by the rulebook for the disciplines in question, this wind measurement will not be set up by the competition organisers. And that would make it extremely difficult for the athletes to fulfill the required rules for a WR.
I think if we take this certainly very sensible and reasonable step and make a wind measurement for the WR mandatory, then it is important that this requirement also finds its way directly into the rulebook.
Comment
Point taken: I agree that the wheelsize is covered in the IUF Rulebook, and hence in the WR requirements if we correctly refer back to the rulebook.
Wind speed is a difficult one. For a competition it is not so much needed as for a WR. The competition happens in a relatively short time, and so wind will have comparable effect on all competitors. Of course, wind may vary, but not nearly as much as between WRs that come from different events. Combining that with the additional organisational requirements to collect and process wind data, I would be reluctant to require it in the Rulebook for all competitions in Coasting and perhaps also Gliding, 100m and 200m. But in that case, WRs are difficult to compare...
Comment
I think we'll leave the discussion about the wind messurement out of the discussion at this point and collect all comments and remarks in the newly created discussion.
I have revised the proposal and added some things:
1. I changed the name to Track: Other, similar to what Klass suggested and as used in the current rulebook.
2. I added the explicit note that for coasting and gliding in addition to the rules in the rulebook for world records the performance must be achieved on an athletics track. I think there are good reasons to prescribe this for maximum comparability of the record conditions and since it is not prescribed in the IUF rules, I think an explicit reference is necessary.
3. I added the accuracy as discussed in discussion #6 "Accuracy of the world records". For standstill there was no such clear opinion in the discussion as for the other disciplines, but to me an accuracy of 1/10 seemed to be more appropriate, since the time is usually stopped by hand timing and the discussion in this case was more in the direction of 1/10 accuracy.
Comment
In this discussion, we have not discussed the direction of rounding, I believe.
What I mean by that is: should records be rounded up or down.
The 2017 IUF Rulebook doesn't mention rounding either. So we are "free" to prescribe it how we see fit.
In the current proposal, for Stillstand, Slow Forward and Slow Backward, records are rounded UP to the nearest 0.1 seconds.
Since the objective is to achieve as long times as possible, rounding UP makes the record time "better" than what was really achieved.
I therefore think we should round the times DOWN to the nearest 0.1 seconds, for these three disciplines.
That way, the stated time has really been achieved.
BTW, rounding in this way should also be in the Rulebook, in my opinion.
Comment
Klaas, of course you're absolutely right, it only makes sense to round DOWN the times. I have the normal races in mind, but of course it doesn't fit to Stillstand and the slow races.
Comment
If there are no further remarks on the proposal in the next two days, I will put them to the vote.