Proximity of start and finish, and elevation difference, in road races
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
In section 4.1, it says:
"The start and finish line should ideally be the in the same area. If not, there must be not more than +/- 50m elevation difference between the start and finish area"
I have multiple issues with this:
1. Something that is "ideally" so is not a requirement. This is not useful. The way it is, there is no penalty if start and finish are not in the same area.
2. "in the same area" is vague. How far apart might they be? Moreover, even if they are close together, there can still be an appreciable elevation difference. (I once made a 5 km hike from my camping spot, ending up almost directly above the same camping spot but 300 m higher.)
3. I think elevation difference is only a problem if the finish is lower than the start. If the finish is higher than the start, it is not advantageous to speed, and there is no reason to forbid it. (The marathon in Brixen, 2012, was not suitable for world records because the finish was about 250 m higher than the start, or so I was led to believe at the time. Doesn't make sense to me.)
4. 50 m works out differently on a short course (10 km) than on a long course. I think the allowable elevation difference (only down, and overall) should be expressed as a percentage of the course length.
5. Besides the influence of elevation and downward slope, there is also the possibility of tailwind advantage. This would be an additional reason to have start and finish close to each other. But then I think it should be a (quantified) requirement, not "ideally".
6. There is a superfluous "the" in the first sentence.
Comment
I agree, the finish can not be below the start if the race is to be considered for WR. I think that goes for any distance. The gain in speed from decent, even only small amounts is considerable.
Comment
I agree that the current wording is not well suited. I think it would make sense to set the distance between start and finish as well as the permissible height difference depending on the track length.
To what extent a higher speed is achieved from decent I cannot judge, I would rely on the opinion of the experienced road racers.
In athletics, the following applies to the recognition of world records in street races:
IAAF Compeition Rules 2018-2019: RULE 260 21.(b) and (c):
"(b) The start and finish points of a course, measured along a theoretical straight line between them, shall not be further apart than 50% of the race distance.
(c) The overall decrease in elevation between the start and finish shall not exceed 1:1000, i.e. 1m per km (0.1%).".
Comment
That looks good to me. Also the fact that there is no limit to the elevation difference if the finish is higher than the start. Of course an ascending course is not good for setting records, but if a record would still be broken, it should not be disapproved because of the ascent.
If no other opinions are given, I will create a proposal.
Comment
I agree with "(c)" from the IAAF for elevation difference. I do NOT think we should limit straight line courses for the road (e.g. the Brixen marathon), but may perhaps need to talk about tailwind influence here.
For example: If the course does not conform to "(b)" above in IAAF, then there can not be a tailwind with the average vector component of the wind advantage above 5 km/h. (Number is just an example. I'm not sure what should be required.)
Comment
I think indeed that the reason for (b) in the IAAF Competition Rules is to rule out "too much" advantage from tailwinds.
Scott's proposal makes sense in principle, but how exactly are we going to define this?
* Is it during the whole race along the whole trajectory?
* Is it even more specific, like what the claimant has experienced at his momentary location as a function of time?
* Or is it less specific, like the general wind in that area on that date?
And after definition comes measurement. The more specific (as per the above) our definition of allowed tailwind, the more difficult it is to measure. Still, tailwind can have a significant influence.
I think the IAAF approach makes sense and avoids such problems.
In my opinion an A-to-B race like the Unicon marathon (or 10k for that matter) in Brixen is still viable as a competition event, but it would not be amenable to World Records.
Comment
I can understand that the courses should be limited as little as possible, also in order not to make it even more difficult for possible organisers to find a course. I would like the idea with the wind measurement, but I also see the problems of definition and measurement, which Klaas already mentioned. If a solution could be found, I think it is a reasonable addition / alternative to (b).
Comment
I agree with that last sentence. On the other hand, (b) is often obeyed already, because long-distance unicycle races often involve loops/laps. This is more convenient in a lot of aspects, for organisers, riders and spectators. Any race with loops would almost automatically obey the IAAF's (b) requirement. The case of an A-to-B race is more rare. And even in A-to-B races, if they are shaped like a C or U, they might still comply to (b).
So we would not exclude a lot of races from being suitable for records. Note that races that do not comply with (b) are still perfectly OK as a competition event. So even if we would adopt (b), in itself we wouldn't limit courses for unicycle races at all.
(The Brixen marathon was one of those examples that did not conform to (b). But it was excluded for records anyway.)
Comment
About elevation:
I agree with (c) and with considering only if it's a down elevation.
About tailwind:
(b) allows in some cases to be helped by wind. The most critical case being a 10k starting with 2.5km against wind, making a U-turn and ending with 7.5km tailwind -> ok with (b) because distance_btw_start_and_finish = 5k = 50% of 10k.
I guess this rule is used because it is easy to check, and that works "most of the time" to prevent from wind-helping, that's why I'm ok with it.
I also think that if an organizer or a rider want a track not ok with (b) to be eligible for a record, (s)he can decide to make wind measurements, and if it's well documented, it can overpass (b).
For example, measuring tailwind speed on every tenth of the race at the beginning and finish of the race and considering a record valid only if the maximum measurement is below a threshold.
Comment
Hi Martin, how do you propose we measure tailwind speed at every 10th of the course? How many volunteers and what equipment will you need in order to co-ordinate this effort? Very few, if any, organisers would have the resources to do this.
Comment
I like Martin's suggestion to have a way out for someone who beat the record time, while the course does not fulfull (b).
The question that Ken raises is, paraphrased "is this realistic, will it ever happen".
I'm afraid the answer is: No this will not happen in practice.
It would be futile, and not add to our credibility, to require practically impossible measurements.
That would mean that if a course does not fulfill (b), any results from such a race cannot be a record.
That's a shame perhaps, but also a simple reality.
Comment
I will submit a proposal soon, if there are no further points of view.
Comment
From my point of view, you can make a proposal.
Comment
One more issue with 4.1 before I create a proposal. One of the items says "drafting is allowed".
About a year ago, in Discussion #102 for the Rulebook (not WR Guidelines), someone commented:
During a marathon or other races, drafting with a standard competitor behind unlimited competitor should not be allowed to certify a word (or national) standard record ?
It seems clear to me, that a unicyclist should not draft behind a motorcycle, or really anything that is not a unicyclist (or a group of them). Not only for records, but also for the race results per se. But this is not worded in the rule.
The least that "drafting is allowed" can mean is that riders competing for the same record can draft off of each other. That is the whole idea of road racing records.
But, like in above quote, there are cases in between. Is it allowed that a rider drafts off of a rider in another category? There is often opportunity for this, e.g. when standard and unlimited races are run back to back. Also, may a female rider draft behind a male rider, and still break the female world record?
My opinion is that whatever is allowed for the race itself, should also be allowed for records. Theoretically this may not be ideal, but we run into practical problems if the race rules allow something that is not valid for records.
And since I don't think it has ever been forbidden for a female to draft behind a male, or for a standard rider to draft behind an unlimited rider, I believe we should allow this for records too.
In athletics, something similar is done in long distance running. Runners often draft behind dedicated 'hares', who run only 10 or 20k in a marathon specifically to pace a record-worthy runner. Such results are still good for records.
All in all, the only thing I would change to the rule is to add three words "drafting behind other unicyclists is allowed".
Comment
I agree with you Klaas and I think the problem is not that big as women and men often are not in the same heat. So for example heat 1 is the one with the fastest male riders, a minute later heat 2 starts with the fastest female riders. Riders of heat one already have some advance and it is not likely that drafting between male/female will happen.
So I think with adding these three words the rule is clear.
Comment
I think that when we discuss this issue, the first thing we have to do is to make clear what drafting is concerned with: Drafting is about the power savings that riding in the slipstream brings to the athlete (at least in other sports e.g. triathlon it is "defined" that way). And if this kind of power saving is allowed in a race, then it doesn't matter behind whom an athlete drafts - whether female behind male or limited behind unlimited... Either the power saving by slipstream riding/drafting is allowed or it is not allowed. I see that it's different whether you draft behind a car or behind another athlete - the rulebook should clarify that, but what is allowed in races should also be allowed for world records.
If we prohibit drafting in certain disciplines, then we also have to determine what distances have to be maintained (in triathlon, for example, these are 10 m to other athletes and 35 m to cars, if I have the right values in mind).
Comment
I considered to disallow drafting, except behind other unicyclists. But I think it is not good to do that.
Like Jan says, we would have to be more specific about what constitutes drafting, including minimum distances to various sorts of vehicles and similar. And we would have to check that every rider adheres to it.
It may happen during a unicycle race, especially a road race, that a vehicle is on the road. For example in the Düsseldorf marathon, I've had several times that a car or motorcycle was in front of me. I would have had to slow down to maintain 35 meter distance, which I didn't.
I think that just adding "drafting behind other unicyclists is allowed" says what we intend, without creating an unworkable rule.
Again, this is a subject that should not only be in the WRG, but more importantly it should be in the IUF Rulebook.
Comment
I completely agree that this is definitely a topic for the rulebook. But for time trials there is no chapter in the rulebook, so you would either have to make explicit rules in the WRG for this or refer to the rules of road racing. However, this was not the original topic - maybe it should be discussed separately?
Comment
For time trials, no drafting is allowed according to the current WR Guidelines, and I'd like to keep that.
For road racing, I think we agree on what should be allowed and not allowed re drafting. Indeed drafting was not the original topic of this discussion, but since there it not much more to discuss, I think it doesn't need a separate discussion. And since it is regulated in the same section (4.1 in the WRG), it can be included here (in a single proposal together with the original topic). If there would be more to discuss about drafting, then yes we should make a separate discussion.
As long as it isn't in the rulebook, we need a rule in the WRG. Once it is regulated in the Rulebook, it could be omitted here but it doesn't hurt to duplicate, as long as there is no contradiction.
We must add drafting in road races to the list of issues to be brought up in the next Rulebook round.
For track racing, the WRG don't mention drafting. For me, that can stay the same.
Comment
I have created proposal 16, based on above discussion. Discussion may continue here if needed.
Comment
I have one more comment on drafting: I like the specification that drafting behind other unicyclists is allowed, but I think that this still (indirectly) raises the question, at what point it is an illegal drafting behind non-unicyclists.
In other words, I think we are not getting around the problem of determining at what point something is to be considered as drafting. Because as long as any form of drafting is not allowed, I think we have to explain to the riders what qualifies drafting and is therefore prohibited.
Comment
Can we address this by specifying minimum distances behind other vehicles (not being unicycles), probably depending on the type of vehicle?
I guess we wouldn't go as far as forbidding drafting behind non-vehicles, such as people on foot or horses. :-)
Perhaps we can borrow from IAAF regulations.
Comment
I do not know if the IAAF/World Athletics has a drafting rule... but the International Triathlon Union has. Maybe we can have a look there:
Rule 5.5 c) (iv) is the relevant section which explains what is considered as drafting (I only copied the two paragraphs for vehicles):
• Motorbike draft zone: thedraft zone behind a motorbike will be 15 meters long. Thisapplies also for draft legal events;
• Vehicle draft zone: The draft zonebehind a vehicle will be 35 meters long and applies to every vehicle on the bike segment.This applies also for draft legal events.
I think these distances also make sense for unicycle racing.
Draft legal / draft illegal refers in triathlon only to whether drafting behind other cyclists is allowed. In this sense, we would have draft legal races in unicycling ;)
Comment
I just revisited this discussion. Do we really want to specify drafting zones for other 'objects' than unicyclists? How do we check on this during a race? And what should a competitor do if a car rides 10 or 20 m in front of them. Ride slower? What if this car is a camera team that then also slows down to continue filming the competitor? Is the problem of drafting behind non-unicyclist enough of a problem to create rules for it, that in turn create other problems?
My current thinking is to allow drafting behind other unicyclists , and simply not mention drafting behind non-unicyclists. The current proposal does this.
Comment
Drafting unicycle to unicycle: Yes
Monitoring: Drafting rules are well established in Triathlons. They have motorcycle marshals and marshals spot checking for infringements. This is for both cycle to cycle drafting and cycle to motor vehicle drafting. They report the competitor number for penalty points or disqualification at the end of the event under a tabulated formula.
What if the vehicle gets in the racers way: The rule for Triathlons is the cyclists must get out of way/slow down. I have only seen a rider once be penalised for this infringe and he distinctly followed the motorbike to create a breakaway in a drafted race. In reality you shout at the motorcycle to get out of your way (I have had to do this to camera crews several times).
I note that the ITU motorcycle drafting rule has been updated to be only 12m (note this is front wheel to front wheel, not the distance between).
I am certain we can replicate the ITU rules on this, it would not be hard to do and may offer some clarity, not only for competitors but also organisers. It may be over the top though it may be better to simply say: unicycle competitors within the same race may draft each other. Drafting behind non competitors or vehicles of any kind is not allowed.
Comment
Seems very logical to me.
However it must be considered that like this on every point of the course there has to be a volunteer who can "control" that no unauthorized drafting is been made.
Comment
I like the simplicity of no drafting allowed, without detailed specifications. Most riders will be aware when they are drafting or not, and an official will likely also be able so assess that, perhaps even better than estimating if the distance is 11 or 13 meters.
In response to Mirjam, I think we can have the rule that (nowhere during the race) drafting is allowed, without checking it continuously.
As an example, it happens at many levels in society that a law forbids something permanently, but adherence to the law is not checked continuously. Even so, the law is still useful.
Comment
As I have written in this discussion before, I agree that drafting behind other unicyclists is allowed. I think we are in agreement on this point.
But I still think that this (indirectly) raises the question, at what point it is an illegal drafting behind non-unicyclists - even if we do not mention explicitly that drafting behind non-unicyclists is prohibited. So I'm very much in favor of Roger's suggestion to replicate the ITU rules and offer some clarity for competitors and organisers. I would therefore adopt the rules of the ITU with the permissible distances.
I completely agree that it is not easy to check whether a distance of 12 m or 35 m is respected - but I would find it even more difficult to judge whether non-permitted drafting is taking place if there is no reference at all to when it becomes illegal. Therefore, I am strongly in favor of the inclusion of a concrete definition at which point it counts as illegal drafting.
Comment
I am in agreement with Roger- it keeps it simple without being too prescriptive and difficult to enforce.
Comment
Roger writes two conflicting things:
(1.) "I am certain we can replicate the ITU rules (with precisely prescribed distances - KB) on this, it would not be hard to do and may offer some clarity, not only for competitors but also organisers."
(2.) "it may be better to simply say: [...] Drafting behind non competitors or vehicles of any kind is not allowed."
Ken writes he agrees with Roger - it keeps it simple etc.
Ken, is it correct that you agree to (2.) of Roger?
I tend to think the same, but Jan will disagree and be in favour of prescribing specific distances. This may be difficult to enforce, but maybe not more difficult than an unspecified distance, in which case an official standing along the course has to assess whether the rider is drafting or not. I would not be against this either, also because we are not inventing this rule ourselves, but copying from another sport.
Comment
Sorry, maybe I should expand my thoughts.
I think you need both a simple statement that explains the rule in simple terms and then potentially a separate definition of what drafting is (I believe this is the way the BTU lay it out).
The reason for this is that you do not want riders to be obsessed with the rule, they need to race. So it needs to be simple to understand. Since you can gain a draft from a vehicle at 50m in front of you... but you do need to put a line in the sand somewhere and if we use similar figures to the ITU or BTU who have been using this for years and I presume have debugged it for real life situations.
So I think I am agreeing with Jan on this.
Comment
If I get you correctly, we could write it like:
"Unicycle competitors within the same race may draft each other. Drafting behind non-competitors or vehicles of any kind is not allowed. Drafting is defined as following a motor cycle closer than 12 meters, or a car closer than 35 meters, where the distance is measured from front wheel to unicycle wheel."
Following a lorry (if that ever happens in a road race) at 35 m still creates significant draft. Firstly because the lorry is longer (behind the front wheel), and secondly because the wake of a lorry is more significant than from a car.
BTW, it would be more practical/logical to define from the rearmost wheel(s). Those are closer to the actual rear of the vehicle, however long it may be.
Another point for discussion: what is a competitor "within the same race"? May a marathon standard rider draft from an unlimited rider, or vice versa? May a female unlimited rider draft from a male unlimited rider, or vice versa? It is the most practical to say that "the same race" includes all unicyclists racing on that particular stretch of road. Is that fair?
Comment
yes, that is pretty much it. Although I would remove the word "Motor" from the sentence because there is the situation of drafting a pedal cycle. That would then cover both.
Your logic on drafting is absolutely correct, I have been puzzled by this also when I read the ITU rules. The BTU who also do non drafted races specify it as 10m behind another cycle... so about 12m front to front. The only reason I can think they are doing it this way around is so they can get an exact distance mechanically. ie, over a sensor.
For "same race" I have always assumed it is the group of riders setting off at the same time irrespective of category is ok to draft. You are not allowed to draft someone who did not set off with you. Again this is set out in the Triathlon rules in this way (although they may have better descriptions than I have given). To add another to the discussion... in Triathlons you can not draft behind someone in the same race but on a different lap.
Comment
Removing "motor" is fine.
Indeed, the sensor argument may be the reason, and it makes sense (no pun intended). I hadn't thought of checking adherence to this rule with sensors. Not that I think we will use sensors for this purpose.
Your "same race" assumption is not practical. In many road rades, riders are starting in waves. How is a rider supposed to know who was in their wave?
In my view, it would be both practical and (sufficiently) fair to allow drafting behind any unicyclist racing in the same road stretch.
Comment
Sorry for the late reply. Yes, I agree with 'drafting behind non-competitors or vehicles of any kind is not allowed'.
However, having prescribed distances will be very hard for officials and competitors to quantify. As Roger said, people still need to race without being obsessed by the rules.
As easier solution for officials would be to use a time gap in order work out what is drafting. For instance, if you are riding within 3 seconds behind a vehicle, that constitutes drafting. This is easier to work out that 12m vs 35m in a race situation.
Comment
Defining drafting by time gap makes sense to me. For an official along the course it is easier to measure than a distance in meters. And also, the higher the velocity, the stronger the wake is. I would like the time gap to be defined from the rearmost part of the front vehicle to the frontmost part of the unicycle/unicyclist in question. So it really is the gap (that is: the duration of nothingness) between them.
Now let's try to convert distance gap to time gap.
(a) Drafting limit of 12 m to the front wheel of a preceding cycle is about 10 m from the rearmost part of it. At a typical speed of 8 m/s (this is 28.8 km/h) this is 1.25 seconds. Would it be practical to set it at 1 second, or is that too close?
(b) Drafting limit of 35 m to the front wheels of a preceding car is about 32 m from the rearmost part of that car. At 8 m/s that amounts to 4 seconds. For a van or lorry I would maintain that same limit (from the rearmost part).
(a) would apply to vehicles with not more than two wheels, and (b) would apply to vehicles with three or more wheels.
Do we want to forbid drafting behind pedestrians (runners)? I guess not. Although in (runner) marathons with unicycles this may occur. If we want to include runners, I would group them under (a).
Comment
A definition of drafting over a period of time would also be OK for me. I can't say why the ITU uses the distances, perhaps because of the easier verifiability with sensors - but I think the solution with the time seems to be more practicable for our application, so I would go with that.
I'm not sure if 1 second could be too short - I am not familiar enough with road racing for that, I think others here can judge better if one second is enough.
I would assume that runners are usually a bit slower than unicyclists (in the WR range) and therefore drafting behind a runner would be more of a "disadvantage"? But again, I'm not a road racer.
Comment
As we are relying on the racers to conform with the rule, I would suggest that it should stick to specifying it as distance. If you are travelling at the approximately the same speed as the person in front of you it is hard to judge if you are 2 second or 3 seconds behind, but it is relatively easy to judge the distance. It may be worth adding the time calculation for organisers as this will be a way of helping static judges determine distance.
Drafting becomes more effective with speed and is negligible at speeds below 15km/h, so I agree that drafting behind a runner could be ignored. It would, as Jan suggests, be a potentially a hinderance to speed.
Comment
I'm not sure guessing distance is easier. Ask someone what is 3m and you'll get a range of answers.
We estimate time gaps all the time when racing. Take a reference point (eg lamp post), and then count 1000, 2000, 3000 etc until you cross that point. It's what I use when I'm trying to catch another rider.
For a static official, it's easier because they can use a stopwatch, rather than complex instruments to measure distance.
I'm terms of drafting, 15km/hr might have negligible effect normally, but what if you have a 30km/hr headwind?
Comment
Hi! It's me again! =)
I see the drafting issue from another angle. It shouldn't be up to the racer to respect a distance with a vehicle not part of the race (motorcycle, truck, car, bike...). It is up to the marshal to tell the vehicle to get out of the way by accelerating or parking.
However, if we were to set up races where drafting between competitors was not allowed. I think we could measure the length in "unicyclists". If you have the space to put several unicyclists between 2 competitors, the drafting effects is really small. You can also say 1 second or 10 meters...
In practice, there is also a question of intention. A rider who gets overtaken and changes pace to try to keep up with the one who just passed him is drafting.
Comment
Revisiting this discussion, specifically the part about drafting.
I don't like the specification between front wheel of the leading vehicle and unicycle wheel. The drafting effect then depends very much on the vehicle length, because you draft off of the rear end. Distance between the back of the leading vehicle and the unicyclist would be better. But better still is a time difference between the rear end of the leading vehicle and the unicyclist, I think. Reasons: (1) it is relatively easy to count seconds for the unicyclist in question, and also for any official along the route, and (2) it automatically incorporates the fact that the effective length of the wake of any vehicle is larger as the speed increases.
Possible threshold:
2 seconds for drafting behind a two-wheeled vehicle (bicycle, motorbike). That's approx 11 meters at 20 km/h, and 17 meters at 30 km/h
3 seconds for drafting behind a vehicle with more than two wheels (car, van). That's approx 17 meters at 20 km/h, and 25 meters at 30 km/h
Comment
Revisiting again. Thinking as a race participant, I think it is complicated to have to distinguish between two-wheeled and more-than-two-wheeled vehicles. Drafting behind vehicles other than unicyclists is not the core business of a race participant, so the rule should be as simple as possible, that is: a whole number of seconds, for whatever type of vehicle.
If we would agree to that, it would be a matter of choosing between 2 or 3 seconds.
Comments are of course welcome.
I am about to start a discussion in the Rulebook committee, because we need a rule in the rulebook. We can see what the members over there do think.
Comment
I would be fine with having 3 seconds for everything - but I think we will see what the discussion in the Rulebook committee says.
Comment
The only comment in the Rulebook committee so far, is (in summary) we'd better focus on preventing that vehicles are on the course, rather than penalising the riders for it. And also, a vehicle in front of a rider is more often annoying to that rider than it is helpful. I think this is a very valid comment from the Rulebook perspective. Still, I hope we get more comments in the Rulebook committee, because trying to prevent vehicles to be on the course doesn't exclude the possibility of drafting behind them, which could result in an unfairly fast time from a WR Committee perspective.
Comment
As I said in the rulebook road racing committee.
For me, there are 2 situations depending on whether the vehicle is on the course intentionally or not.
1/ If it's unintentional, it usually means that we've caught up with the vehicle and it's getting in the way.
2/ If it's intentional (whether to open the race or for television...), it's perfectly possible to set an arbitrary distance or time, but I think this practice should be limited.
In any case, for me it raises the question of drafting behind a competitor in another category or of another gender (I remember a man on a bike who was following Jana during the Unicon 16 marathon, he shouted at me not to take her draft).
I'm not saying that riders should be punished, but I do think that drafting between different category and gender should be avoided. These are different races.
Comment
oops it was at San Sebastian in 2016 (unicon 18)
I know that there are already measures in place to prevent drafting between participants of different classes and genders. Organizing separate starts is usually enough.
But it's possible for a female to catch up with a male and for the latter to be able to take his draft.
Comment
The bike drafting behind Jena could have given her 14% advantage over her riding by her self, that should also not have been allowed. There is also advantage for riding close beside a rider.
Comment
Roger, you're talking about the pushing effect and not drafting? How do you calculate this result? It seems complicated enough to calculate the gain from drafting. I find it interesting to quantify these effects, but at the same time, I'm afraid we'll get lost in the numbers.
It seems to me that below a speed of 20km/h, the drafting effect is often considered negligible.
On the other hand, at 30-35km/h, the drafting effect can no longer be neglected.
In all cases, drafting provides protection from the wind.
On that basis, I'd tend to think that there's no need to talk about drafting in the standard 24" category. It doesn't solve the question, but I think we can exempt the standard 24" from these considerations.
To return to the question of the threshold, I think 2 seconds is more than enough, even if you're riding at 35km/h.
I'm pretty sure there's no gain in riding 10m behind someone at 35km/h.
Comment
> I do think that drafting between different category and gender should be avoided. These are different races.
This has never been in our rules, as far as I know. Also, I don't think it is practical. Yes, if you are in the first group of an unlimited race, you will know that your fellow riders are in the same race. But further down the race, a lot of mixing of male/female and standard/unlimited takes place. It would in my opinion be too much to ask of a rider to distinguish who in front of them is their gender and category and who is not.
> I know that there are already measures in place to prevent drafting between participants of different classes and genders.
Are you referring to the separate starts, i.e. no mixed genders and no mixed categories? This is at best a partial prevention of intergender/intercategory drafting. Later in the race, the initial start wave groups are spread out, and the original starting waves don't matter that much, especially for the "lower ranks". And then again, in a mass start males and females may start together, see 3D.10.3.
> The bike drafting behind Jena could have given her 14% advantage over her riding by her self
I don't know how you get at this percentage, but I find it hard to believe. WA rules prevent drafting per se, that is: behind a car or the like, not in front of it, do they? And then, how could you blame a rider for riding in front of something anyway?
> To return to the question of the threshold, I think 2 seconds is more than enough, even if you're riding at 35km/h.
Seems reasonable. Also note that the shorter the maximum, the easier it is to put in practice. Just from that reasoning, 2 seconds seems better than 3.
Comment
> The bike drafting behind Jena The science behind drafting is very well documented. The quote of 14% is from a respectable research paper on the subject, figures vary from 8% up to 14%. If you think about it you see the advantage all the time - the lead rider in the peloton chasing breakaways in races. If they did not have that advantage they would not catch them with the speed they do. I think the point is valid for certain conditions, like WR attempts, it is not acceptable to have a bike in front or following you. (I have seen it called draft effect, not heard it called push, but does describe it well)
> To return to the question of the threshold, Time is good as relates to the speed and if you are watching a race, time is easy to judge... if you are riding a race you are traveling at almost the same speed as those around you and it is really hard to judge. Distance is easier to judge for riders which is why I assume triathlons use that as a measure. If we decide definately on time, how can that be described to riders?
>It seems to me that below a speed of 20km/h, the drafting effect is often considered negligible. It is still there and even runners have it - I dont know if you remember the marathon WR broken last year as a drafted record? Drafting on 24" is possible, I don't know the advantage or when it would come in.
Comment
Quantifying the effect of drafting is quite complex and depends on many factors: speed, position, wind...
Yes, of course I've heard of the INEOS sub 2h. I've also read some data on hill drafting... yes, it's not zero at 20km/h, but it's a power gain < 5%. Whereas the effect of drafting at 30-35km/h is > 20%.
During the Tour de France time trial, we talked about the effect of following cars. Some teams put their bikes perpendicular to the car roof and followed the cyclists as closely as possible.
It's proven that having someone behind you improves aerodynamic drag. But the impact on power seems to be about 10 times less than that of having someone in front of you (3 %?). But these results are obtained at speeds higher than those of unicycles, and with different positions.
BENEFITS OF DRAFTING ON THE LEADING CYCLIST
Comment
Roger, I found an article with the figures you gave :
Aerodynamic benefit for a cyclist by a following motorcycle
=> "The cyclist drag reduction goes up to 8.7% for a single trailing motorcycle and to 13.9% for three trailing motorcycles at a distance of 0.25 m behind the cyclist" (cycling speed : 15m/s = 54 km/h)
Here's another article that quantifies the reduction in drag with a cyclist behind :
CFD simulations of the aerodynamic drag of two drafting cyclists
=> It's less than 3% and depends on the position.
______________________
There are no studies on unicyclists, and given that these effects have an exponential correlation with speed, I can imagine that these effects are less for unicyclists. On a unicycle, I suppose drafting for the rider behind must be greater (for the same speed), as we're in a more upright position than a cyclist.
As for quantifying in time or meters the distance to a vehicle ahead or behind, I don't think we need to complicate things too much.
In my opinion, there are 3 different subjects:
- an opening vehicle (bike, motorcycle, car) can give an advantage to the head of the race (or an organization vehicle or a TV vehicule...). A time or distance can be defined.
- a vehicle on the course by accident hinders the race, we can't add a penalty to the participants stuck behind.
- drafting between participants is allowed within the same race. There is little (or no) drafting in 24" races. Mixing gender and class in unlimited and 29" can lead to inequalities if there is drafting between riders who are not in the "same race". I know it's a tricky question, especially as the organizers of the next UNICON want to focus on the gender dimension.
Comment
> I do think that drafting between different category and gender should be avoided. These are different races.
I honestly don't understand why drafting should be forbidden between different categories/gender but allowed within the same category?
As I understand it (and already wrote it at the beginning of this discussion) drafting is about the power savings that riding in the slipstream brings to the athlete. And if this kind of power saving is allowed in a race, then in my opinion it doesn't matter behind whom an athlete drafts - whether female behind male or limited behind unlimited... Either the power saving by slipstream riding/drafting is allowed or it is not allowed.
> a vehicle on the course by accident hinders the race, we can't add a penalty to the participants stuck behind
If someone claims a world record, how are we supposed to check whether a vehicle someone was following was on the course unintentionally or intentionally? This is simply not possible - and completely irrelevant. If drafting behind vehicles is forbidden, then we can't recognize a world record just because someone says that the vehicle he was following was unintentionally on the course. Was the power saving by drafting then also unintentional and therefore irrelevant? So I am of the opinion that if drafting behind vehicles is forbidden and therefore e.g. a gap of two seconds has to be kept, then this has to apply to all vehicles.
Comment
For races, it seems to me that at unicyclist speeds, the effect of a car trailing closely is so small that it can essentially be neglected. Mainly because the follow distance will be too large to allow a significant effect. By contrast, in the Tour de France, e.g., a car from the same team can deliberately drive very close behind a rider to "push" him. But we don't have cars in our races that belong to the same team and hence would have an incentive to "push" them. Finally, a rule to prevent such things from happening during road races, would make the Rulebook too complicated in my opinion.
Now, all this is in my opinion different for a Time Trial, read: a solo attempt for a World Record. Here you can indeed have a following car that has an incentive to "push" the rider. So indeed, for time trials (solo rides where an auxiliary car is allowed) we might want to specify a minimum distance.
Comment
> As for quantifying in time or meters the distance to a vehicle ahead or behind, I don't think we need to complicate things too much.
That's why I propose to measure in seconds. It is easiest to check by an official along the route, and easy enough for the rider.
> Mixing gender and class in unlimited and 29" can lead to inequalities if there is drafting between riders who are not in the "same race"
I still don't think that we currently have such a rule, and I think it would be impractical to require.
Comment
Jan, your second argument makes perfect sense to me from the World Record point of view. Drafting is not allowed (with certain limits) in a solo attempt (time trial) irrespective of who/what generated the draft.
But for Road Races, suppose a rider rides closely behind a vehicle that he has nothing to do with. Would it be fair to punish him for not slowing down? After all, he's in a race to do his best, not to slow down unnecessarily.
Comment
> Jan, your second argument makes perfect sense to me from the World Record point of view.
But we are discussing here in the World Record Committee! And we have to set rules at this point to recognize world records.
I understand that in a race situation it seems unlogical that a rider should slow down to keep the distance to a - not desired - vehicle in front of him. But if we think that saving energy by drafting behind a vehicle should not be allowed in a race, how could we recognize a world record where this was the case?
And even within a race I see this critically. If someone follows a vehicle, he will save energy - if this is not allowed, it doesn't matter if the vehicle drives in front of you intentionally or unintentionally. You would save energy by following at a short distance, which is not allowed according to the rules. The consequence must therefore be that you either keep the distance or overtake the vehicle.
Comment
My comment about not having a bike behind a WR contender is still valid, it should not be allowed as it gives the contender an advantage. This is not push as with a large object behind like a car, this is specifically about a similar object behind within the turbulence air created by the front rider that reduces the cd of the combined system. This increases with the length of the system as can be seen in the peloton simulations of up to 14% as I have quoted. Even if it was as low as 3% gain (12w extra power?) it should not be allowed.
I was involved with the WR attempts for the Penny Farthing world record in 2018/9 and we had considerable resources supplied by GCN to test and prove the drag reduction created by different situations. We found that due to the less aerodynamic nature of the penny farthings the gains were considerable when drafting offering both gains to the rear and front. Unicycles have a similar un-aerodynamic nature, so they are likely to have a similar higher gain than a bike.
Why not stipulate a distance (or time) that another vehicle can be in front or behind a WR contender?
Comment
Emergency (accidental) vehicle on course creating a drafting situation.
Race: This is just part of racing and will generally slow everyone down, so I do not think we can penalise riders for this. We maybe can take the lead from the World Triathlon Series, in the UK event this year there was an ambulance on the course that nuitralized the last lap of the last 5km of the cycle, initially officials issued drafting penalties to riders stuck behind it, this was quickly revoked by the chief referee who removed all penalties.
WR solo attempt: Although this will slow up the rider and reduce their time. It also gives the rider a rest... so I suggest that a drafting distance on this situation should be observed here.
Comment
Drafting between riders in different races: I agree, it should be considered but can be mostly be done by organisers of the events with waves. I personally think everyone in each wave can race everyone else in that wave. Here is an example that needs considering... in a multi lap race you have a fast group on a different lap that can "pull" a rider on a different lap (and gender/race) to change their position within their race. Would this be ok or is this just racing (I think it is)?
Comment
> Race vs. WR solo attempt
The distinction is not sufficient here - in the World Record Committee the question must be Race WR vs. Solo attempt WR and I am of the opinion that equal conditions must apply here for a WR in both cases.
I can understand that for the race (without WR) other rules may be useful. But if these rules are against the conditions for WR, then no world record can be set in the race. And here in the committee it is about conditions for world records!
In other sports it is also like this - example from athletics: If a runner is jostled, he may leave his lane without being disqualified in the race - but this performance will still not be accepted as a WR, because he has not run the required distance, even if he has apparently suffered a disadvantage due to the jostling.
What I want to say: For the race itself (without WR) it may be okay not to punish the rider for the disadvantage. For the recognition of a performance as WR, the fact of drafting - no matter for what reasons - cannot be ignored in my opinion.
Comment
I thought this topic was all about road races.
For a timed record attempt, stricter measures can be applied.
For me, it's pretty easy to tell the difference between a car that's there to follow or open the race and someone who's there by accident. Road races last dozens of minutes, even hours. A driver who gets lost on the course has no reason to drive on the course at the speed of the competitors.. A marshal or a race opener must signal him to leave the course.
We've already had this situation on the 10km race of the French championships in 2018. In the 1st kilometer after the start, a car slowed down in the middle of the lane, and Martin overtook it by jumping onto the sidewalk, while I stayed behind the car. In this example, it seems to me that the driver was trying to park. When we catch up with cars, this is often the situation. From a competitor's point of view, this is a very stressful situation.
>Drafting between riders in different races
In fact, I think we already need to agree that standard, unlimited, male, female races are "different races" (or not).
Insofar as the starts are separate and there are expert rankings for each, I consider them to be different races in the same event.
It seems to me that it's mainly for organizational reasons that these different races are organized in the same event.
Like Roger, I've been thinking about multilap race. Although the loop must be very small for the difference in level to be bridged by the drafting effect.
I have another example: if a male competitor falls just after the start or just waits to be caught by female competitors to ride in front. It's about 30% less power at 30km/h, so for me it wouldn't make sense to homologate a WR set in such conditions.
Comment
> It's about 30% less power at 30km/h, so for me it wouldn't make sense to homologate a WR set in such conditions.
But if this power saving would come through drafting behind a rider from their own category, would it be Okay? I don't see the difference. Either the power saving by drafting behind a unicclist is Okay or it is not. If it is not Okay, then drafting must be forbidden in general, if it is Okay, then it is Okay!?
Comment
> But if this power saving would come through drafting behind a rider from their own category, would it be Okay? I don't see the difference.
For me, drafting behind a competitor in another race is like drafting behind the bike that opens the race.
Today, sprint finishes are quite rare in road races, despite the fact that the courses are flat.
I think it's linked to a lower athlete density than in other sports. If the density of athletes increases, there will be more sprint finishes and WR will increase thanks to drafting.
I'm already wondering about the meaning of road races WR, so if drafting is allowed between competitors in different races, I'm lost.
Is a road race WR an individual performance? In 2019 at the French national, Martin and I have teamed up to try to beat the marathon race WR. It was windy and rainy, and we failed by 8 seconds. That day, trying to beat the world record seemed more interesting than racing against each other. Is this acceptable behavior? It was a good experience, but it feels weird to be able to do that.
Comment
> Is a road race WR an individual performance? In 2019 at the French national, Martin and I have teamed up to try to beat the marathon race WR. It was windy and rainy, and we failed by 8 seconds. That day, trying to beat the world record seemed more interesting than racing against each other. Is this acceptable behavior? It was a good experience, but it feels weird to be able to do that.
To me, such teaming up is perfectly acceptable. Road racing is very much about interplay / interference between riders. Unlike a solo time trial, a road race WR is not an individual performance without outside influences, even though in the end a resulting time (and if applicable a WR) is awarded individually.
Comment
I'm with Jan and Klaas on this. I think it's impractical to separate out competitors between different classes within a race, and for riders to figure out who they can and can't draft behind. The fact we allow drafting in a racing record means that drafting forms part of the record strategy, whether it is with other riders within your class or not.
In 10km and Marathon running races, although the speeds are slower than unicycling, there is still drafting between men and women. I think we are overthinking this.