Adding an "unlimited-ungeared" category to each of the recognised fixed-distance Road Racing World Record categories
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
Comment
Let's wait with discussing this subject until we have clarity about adding 100km or not.
Comment
As this is a category split has been used by UNICON (and other events) over the past few years these records should be recorded.
Comment
Let's wait with discussing this subject until we have clarity about adding 100km or not.
This is currently being voted on (proposal #5), and should be clear by 17 January.
Comment
By agreeing on proposals #5 and #6, we have extended the recognised race records from THREE to SIX. We now have 10km, 42.195km and 100km, each in standard and unlimited.
Some committee members want to add three more categories, i.e. a non-geared but otherwise unlimited category to each of the three race distances.
I will now create a text proposal to that effect. It can be discussed here (in Discussion #30).
Comment
My feeling is that there are too many categories, at least as it looks like we are now recognising an 100km distance as a racing record. It is actually 12 extra records (male and female).
It also add extra record categories in the time trial, and we are bringing back old world records (for instance Patrick Schmid's 1hr record still stands as the current world record).
If you'd asked me 10yrs ago I would have said it would be good category to have, because there is a big distinction between geared and ungeared. However, since then the standard class has grown to allow ungeared riders to compete in the Marathon.
Comment
I think it is enough to have a standard and an unlimited category.
Comment
Ken, you may have the feeling that there are too many categories already, with what there was and what we have agreed. That is: 10k, 42.195k and 100k, each in standard and unlimited flavour, and each for male and female. But that is simply the current situation for which we have voted, and not subject to discussion anymore.
The current discussion is about adding unlimited-ungeared to each distance.
Roger argues that unlimited-ungeared has been awarded separately in the last few Unicons. That is correct, and ndeed, this is per the IUF Rulebook section 4D.6.
It must be noted though, that unlimited-ungeared is not a fully recognised group. According to the IUF Rulebook,
* its existence is mandatory only at Unicons, not at other events;
* it is only required when there are certain numbers of riders;
* there are no age groups unlike most or all other disciplines.
With these restrictions, should unlimited-ungeared be regarded as a full-blown category for which World Records should exist?
Apart from the "in-between" status of unlimited-ungeared, we are not required to recognise every discipline in the Rulebook. We also don't recognise 3B.6.6. Slow Giraffe Race, or 3B.6.10 Juggling Unicycle Race, to name but a few.
Comment
I made that point in a previous discussion- in the current IUF rulebook it is an in-between category- where we recognise it if there are enough ungeared riders competing in the unlimited.
Having an award at a Unicon is not a reason to recognise an event or category. The rail race, for instance, was an event made up by the organisers for the last Unicon (with no entry in the IUF rulebook). Likewise, the 100km was an event added by the Unicon 16 organisers, and has contradictory statements in the IUF rulebook (4A.1 vs 4D 15.2)- but we won't go there again :-)
I think the number of recognised record categories 'is' part of the consideration, particularly where there is a grey area. If there are too many categories, it requires more resources to validate each record.
If we go back to the 2011 World Record Guidelines section 1.6- "is it sufficiently different to an existing world record?" Does the unlimited-ungeared category measure a different type of athletic performance from Unlimited and Standard Class?
Comment
It is probably true that validation requires more resources if there are more categories. But to me it is not a convincing argument. Unlimited-Ungeared will most likely come from a competition where there are Standard and Unlimited categories already, and it is probably not too difficult to validate.
I think we all agree that we don't need to recognise WRs in every category that gets awards.
I think we also agree that we don't need to recognise WRs for every category that is in the Rulebook.
I think the key question in this matter is "Is Unlimited-Ungeared sufficiently different from Standard and Unlimited?"
And the key word in that question is "sufficiently". This is a matter of opinion.
Without doubt Unlimited-Ungeared is faster than Standard.
Also without doubt Unlimited-Ungeared is slower than (fully) Unlimited (be it by a much smaller difference).
However, there being a difference does not necessarily make it sufficiently different. Otherwise, we could accept separate World Records for each wheel diameter, because every next-smaller diameter will be slower. I think all agree that it would be too much to recognise all these separate records.
In my opinion, the above narrows down the discussion to:
Is Unlimited-Ungeared sufficiently different from Standard and Unlimited to warrant its own WR category?
Comment
Here is how I feel the unicycles ride/race when raced on the flat.
Race 24 and Race 29 are definitely limited by the speed you can spin, not by the power you can exert. The 36" without a gearbox is similar with the limiting point still being how fast you can spin.
The limiting factor on 36" with a gearbox at top speed is power not how fast you can spin.
Comment
I have done some research and data analysis to try and answer the question:
Is Unlimited-Ungeared sufficiently different from Standard, and from (fully) Unlimited?
I have based myself on the top male and female results from the following:
(1a) all the results from the unlimited category in the Unicycle Marathon (42.195 km) in Düsseldorf where geared or not, as well as wheel size and crank length, were recorded - this was from 2010 u/i 2014 (note that there was no separate unlimited-ungeared category, but with the data I could work out who would have been in that category);
(1b) all the results from the "standard" category from Düsseldorf in the same years ("standard" implied 28 x 1.75 tyre, minimum 114 mm cranks);
(2) the results for 10k, 42.195k and 100k from Unicon 2018, the only year for which Unlimited-Ungeared was presented as such in the results list.
AAA SPINNING RATE
Roger claims that for standard and for unlimited-ungeared, the limiting factor is how fast you can spin, whereas for fully unlimited power is the limiting factor. If this is true, you would expect the cadence (rpm) to be about the same for standard and unlimited-ungeared races, while it would be slower for fully unlimited.
I have worked with the following assumptions:
* 24.33" as wheelsize for 10k standard, with 125 mm cranks,
* 28" as wheelsize for standard in Düsseldorf with 114 mm cranks (their minimum),
* 29" as wheelsize for standard marathon and 100k in Unicon 2014,
* actual (nominal) wheelsize for both unlimited-ungeared and (fully) unlimited (mostly 36") in all three events.
Averages are as follows:
Wheel & Crank : cadence
24.33" & 125mm : 175 rpm
28" & 114 : 159 rpm
29" & free : 167 rpm
unlimited-ungeared (mostly 36") & free: 141 rpm
unlimited-geared (mostly 36") & free: 112 rpm
(Details on request.)
Apparently, in ungeared-unlimited the limit is not just how fast you can spin, as the spin is clearly slower than in standard (either 24 or 29 Class).
BBB RESULTING TIMES
Here the question is:
Are the results (times) from Unlimited-Ungeared significantly different from both Standard and fully Unlimited?
For this, I have looked again at the Düsseldorf Marathon results from 2010 u/i 2014.
Over these years, there were 12 riders who participated more than once, AND who rode both unlimited-ungeared and unlimited-geared.
For each of these, I calculated
(a) the average resulting time of all their unlimited-ungeared races,
(b) the average resulting time of all their unlimited-geared races,
(c) the ratio between these two averages.
(Note that unlike in AAA, I looked at all participants, not just the winner in each category.)
This resulted in 12 numbers, ranging from 0.81 to 1.02. The average of these was 0.95. By which I mean: the average time for a geared rider was 95% of the average for the same ungeared rider.
Note that most of these 12 riders switched from ungeared to geared, rather than the other way around.
I also saw from the results that most riders show an improvement in their times even without the switch from ungeared to geared.
This suggests that part of the improvement may have been due to "autonomous" development rather than being due to the gearing, and that gearing generally causes maybe a few percent of time improvement.
(Again, details on request.)
Strictly speaking, this is only valid for 42.195 km. For 10k and 100k I don't have enough data to do such an exercise. But I think that the overall picture would be rather similar.
CCC CONCLUSION
In view of the above, for me unlimited-ungeared is not sufficiently different from the existing categories. For spinning speed it is halfway between Standard and fully Unlimited. For the resulting times (which is what matters in the end) it is only a few percent different from fully unlimited.
I would therefore not be in favour of adding an unlimited-ungeared category to our World Records for 10k, 42.195k and 100k.
Comment
These figures show that ungeared unlimited marathon seems not to be sufficiently different from existing categories.
Other arguments to not include it:
- inconsistent with other road disciplines, or should we consider 26", 29" for 10K also?
- are actual best times 36" ungeared WR worthy? best riders choose for 36" geared or 29" standard...
(side-think: why at Unicon a world title is given for this categorie while all top riders are choosing std or ultd? -> should be considered in Rulebook committee).
Comment
A few points.
With reference to Klaas's comment about Düsseldorf not categorising unlimited.ungeared, yes they did not on entry, but they did on prize giving. I have medals to prove this.
My average cadence during my fastest time at Dusseldorf (1:31:44 with and averaged speed of 17.14mph) had a cadence of 160. This puts it in the same region as the free spinning ungeared other sizes. Although I do well, I do not think I am the pinnacle of unlimited.ungeared racing.
To answer Erik's comment. You are speculating that the fastest riders did not enter the unlimited.ungeared category, but how can you be sure? I have always speculated that ungeared racing is one of the few sports where it is an advantage to be smaller and away from the standard for most sports where "bigger is better". Certainly for a time (before gearboxes) the fastest group of riders were all around 5' 7" in height.
I wonder if we are crossing the boundary here on what this committee is meant to do. Are we saying that this category is not worthy of having a world record and hence should not exist as a race category? Surely that is not our remit.
Comment
I must have been present at the award ceremonies in Düsseldorf where medals were given for unlimited-ungeared. I can't remember how "official" these were.
Anyway, they are not mentioned in the results lists that I have (although with all the data on geared/wheel/crank they can be compiled from them).
Roger, your time of 1:31:44 in 2012 was your fastest time in Düsseldorf of all the years you participated. Also faster than your single geared result (1:34:20 in 2010). Maybe indeed because for you, being of "smaller build", ungeared is relatively better suited.
Also note that the averages I gave are for male and female combined. E.g., the average for 36" unlimited-ungeared male-only is 151 rpm.
For the other ungeared categories, male-only results are also generally higher than male-and-female-combined.
The trend is still that within ungeared spinning rates, the larger the wheel, the slower the cadence.
Did anyone say that unlimited-ungeared should not exist as a race category? My understanding is that we are gauging its suitability as a World Record category.
Comment
Roger, I am not sure that the fastest riders are in std or ultd geared, you are right. And I definitely do not want to underestimate the 36" ungeared riders :-) My speculation is based on the fact that in last (2 or 3) Unicons unlimited ungeared what not an option to choose for during registration. So riders with the ambition to win the race should preferably ride 29" std or 36" geared. I believe unlimited ungeared was awarded without being announced as such.
Comment
The way I look at it, is that unlimited-ungeared is essentially the 36'' ungeared class. It is rare for anyone to use a large sized wheel, and smaller sized wheels are generally uncompetitive. The unlimited-ungeared record is essentially the 36'' ungeared category.
Is there a fundamental difference between geared and ungeared? I believe so. The unicycle 'feels' different, it has none of the simplicity of a regular unicycle, and there is a potentially unlimited range of gearing choices. But we already keep a standard category for the ungeared class- the 29 and 24 standard.
Unlimited favours riders who have more power than spinning ability (although there is an association between both). That is why in the geared unlimited class- there is a big difference between male and female, whereas in the standard classes- male and female results are similar, and there are many instances where the top females are faster than the top male;, and 13yr olds can come second in the 10km standard (Unicon 19). This doesn't happen where there is unlimited gearing.
Comment
I agree with the last post. But I'm not sure what conclusion it leads to, with regards to the present discussion (adding unlimited-ungeared or not).
Continuing the thoughts from the previous post: adding unlimited-ungeared would more or less imply having two standard classes.
For 10km: 24" and 36".
For 42km and 100km: 29" and 36".
So instead of having standard and unlimited for each distance, you would have standard (1), standard (2) and unlimited.
It seems a bit arbitrary to recognise these particular standard classes. One could wonder: why not recognise other wheelsizes too? Like 29" for 10km, or 32" for either distance? My answer is: it would lead to too much fragmentation of the WR list.
Don't get me wrong, 36" non-geared is a very viable unicycle. It's the fastest setup that is simple and widely available. But with all the different setups with which riders participate in distance racing, to me the distinction between unlimited on one hand, and a single standard set-up on the other hand, is enough, for official World Records.
Comment
Oh, interesting thought. I had thought it would be 2 unlimited classes as we are not stipulating wheelsize or crank length it is unlimited, but we are limiting it by saying no gearbox. There has been 40" unicycles used previously and we know of 52" unicycles that are being ridden at the moment, that would potentially fit in that category.
Comment
Any wheelsize above 36" is quite rare, especially in races. In practice, unlimited-ungeared would be the same group as "standard 36 inch", if there were such a thing defined.
Unlimited-ungeared is more limited than unlimited, in my view:
* Wheelsize is officially unlimited, but limited to 36" in practice.
* A gearbox is off-limits.
* Indeed, crank length is unlimited. This is however compatible with being a Standard class - also in standard 29 Class there is no crank size limit.
Technically, the proposal is ready to move on to Voting.
But as long as the discussion is meaningful (which I think is still the case), I intend to keep it in Pre-Voting.