About world records in disciplines hold the first time at an Unicon
Comments about this discussion:
Started
In the past, if at an Unicon a discipline has been offered for the first time, the world champions (male and female) became world record holders of this discipline too. This has been the case for example at Unicon16 for Stillstand.
At Unicon16 there was set up a world record in 100m unlimited and at Unicon19 in Rail Race. Whatever, they has not been listed yet, we should list them.
To avoid such situations in the future, I propose the following rule:
"1.7.1 If at an Unicon a discipline is offered for the first time, the world champions (male and female) become world record holders in this discipline too. This rule concerns disciplines, of which the course is clearly defined."
The Urban record (Rail Race) should be listed in chapter 6.
100m unlimited should be listed as track races.
Comment
I don't see it that way. If we start listing all these records we will end up with an never ending list. I remember in Mondovi at Unioec there were 400m and 800m unlimited races, in Denmark and Langenthal at Unicon we had 700c 1500m,...
There are a lot of disciplines that were held once or twice only at Unicon but not at any other races. Who says that Rail Race will be held at next Unicon?
Other to such disciplines Stillstand is now a commonly held discipline so you also have the possibilty to compare results from one Unicon with results from another Unicon. If Rail Race is never held again the world record holder is the one and only winner of this race. In my opinion this is not a World record.
Comment
@Mirjam: We should not discuss about Mondivi because this committee is a world record committee and not a european record committee and Monrovia has been an european championship.
At an european championship the best european riders compare their performance/results. That means that the european champion of a new discipline becomes automatically the european record holder and not a world record holder.
In contrast, at an Unicon the best riders of the world compare their performance/results and the best becomes world champion. In the case of Unicon the best riders of all over the world are competing against each other.
Therefore, it has to be obvious that the best rider of a new discipline at an Unicon is setting up with his result a world record.
In contrary, we have listed records as rope skipping or time trial records that never has been disciplines at an Unicon, what means that the best riders of the world didn´t compete against each other.
If I understood well, for you it´s a problem that a world record set up at an Unicon can not be compared with the best results of another Unicon. What about the comparison of for example 100mile that had never never been offered at an Unicon?
We should elaborate transferable rules valid for all disciplines. We should not write in this committee about "like" and "don´t like" whithout criteria. "We will end up with an never ending list" or "there is too much time needed for awards" are no criteria, but personal preferences or simplified "likes" and "don´t likes".
We should develop the unicycling sport and appreciate riders performance who trained hard to perform the best result in an Unicon competition. A discipline where the world champion is awarded, has to be a world record discipline. Otherwise, it´s ridiculous.
How will you explain to the press, who is showing more and more interest, that the best performance is not a record, because the world record team prefers a short list and they don´t like a long list??? completely ridiculous!!!
The press is more and more interested in great performances (= world records)!
Comment
Ana, we do not even have a list with European Record holders.
You are also talking about time trial records. Yes, I agree that riders cannot compete against each other at a Unicon because it simply isn't a race that is suited for man against man or woman against woman. However, every single person on earth can try and break the time trial records, anytime, anywhere if the guidelines are fullfilled. So it is wrong to say that results cannot be compared.
As I said before, there are several disciplines that were held at different Unicons (if we exclude Mondovi) which are still not in the world record list. I suggest you read through discussion 19, where we discussed about New IUF World Record Categories.
I agree that the press is interested in world records - but I keep to my opinion stated in discussion 19.
What do the others think of that?
Comment
If I understand well, your idea is that a new discipline at Unicon has to been offered several times and maybe after 2, 4 or 6 years a world record would be recognized, maybe backdated.
For time trial records that would mean, that a time trial record would be recognized only after a defined number of riders would have attempted to set up a record in this discipline. But your case, if I remember well was the following:
You are the world record holder of 4 time trial records. Up to your world record attempts of 1h, 100km, 100miles the world record list of these disciplines was blank.
According to your idea/logic you could not become the world record holder up to other riders would have started these world record attempts too.
About 100 riders performed a run in rail race at Unicon19. What´s your idea? How many riders are needed with a performed run to have enough comparison to recognize a world record?
For example, in the case of Stillstand which was done the first time at Unicon16, the world champions (male and female) became world record holders. In nobodys mind would have came the idea, that the world champions would have to wait 2 or 4 years and only in case of a repetition of this discipline at an Unicon the world record would be recognized.
Comment
Having a discipline offered at Unicon does not mean it is an 'IUF Rulebook' competition. All hosts have the right to add competition categories- some of these are 'fun' events, others may gain popularity and get written into the IUF rulebook.
We didn't even have IUF rules for the Unicon 19 railrace- they were made up by the Unicon hosts. How do we replicate the conditions used at Unicon 19 at a different event (eg width of rail, material, how straight does it have to be, timing/measurement accuracy, etc)?
Comment
@Mirjam:
To your opinion, stated in discussion19:
You don´t want to accept world records of disciplines that are not in the IUF rulebook. (The only exception/incoherence are your own 4 records, 3 of them you set up as the only one rider who tried these records. As I mentioned, up to your attempt the list was blank.)
To recognize only and exclusively records that are in the IUF rulebook means the end of
- the development of our unicycling sport and
- the object of our committees.
In my opinion, it´s unacceptable that you treat as equivalent Unicon disciplines with awarded world champions and as the example you mentioned "baking the most cookies on a unicycle".
You even are proposing that a world champion of a new discipline at an Unicon should repeat his attempt applying to a Guiness record.
Let me explain what I mean with the end of the development of the unicycling sport:
By recognizing the stillstand record without having stillstand rules in the IUF rulebook at this moment, the IUF opened the door to establish stillstand as an interesting discipline. One Unicon later, rules were developed, including the experiences of 2 Unicons and riders performances (male and female) are increasing from Unicon to Unicon because riders performances are appreciated.
Press and sponsors are very interested in these new records.
If the stillstand record from Brixen hadn´t been recognized, all these things wouldn´t have happened!
Comment
@Ken: Of course, the rail race can be repeated. We could describe the rules in the next IUF rulebook discussion, as we did with stillstand. Your points are described in the rules of the host, except the width of the rail.
@Jason: Could you be so kind to give us the exact width of the rail. I will compare it with the rail where I am training.
I´m in touch with other urban riders and I would like to represent their interest in getting the goal to establish a world record in an urban discipline.
Comment
Thanks Ana- it needs to be a Rulebook committee discussion, rather than World Record Committee. We made up the rules for rail-race with the exchange of a couple of emails.
In terms of being awarded the same status as official IUF competition- that is an issue that should also be addressed in the rulebook committee. A lot of hosts put on one-off events that are not part of official competition, and they never appear again.
I think unless it is an official IUF competition, it should not be awarded the same status. It seems backwards thinking to give world champion status and have a world record before we even have official rules for the record
The Olympics have 'demonstration' sports. Maybe this could be how we go about adding one-off-events, or potential new-events.
Ken
p/s I agree that the rail race would be a nice event to have in the rulebook
Comment
Time trial records are already mentioned in the old Guideline from 2011 so I don't understand why they should not be seen as IUF Records. As it is an attempt where a SINGLE rider tries to break it, it cannot be compared with competitions where a lot of riders take part.
Just to make your statement correct: two of the records where blank before I tried them (you had the 24h and Nadine Wegner the 1h) and as I said before, anybody can feel free and try to break it.
"I think unless it is an official IUF competition, it should not be awarded the same status. It seems backwards thinking to give world champion status and have a world record before we even have official rules for the record"
-> I completely agree with that, Ken.
Comment
First of all, I am not in favour of automatically making disciplines a WR discipline just because they were once held at a UNICON.
The most important reason is the one Ken has already mentioned: According to the rules every host is allowed to add more disciplines, for which there are no rules in the official IUF Rulebook, to a competition and thus also to the UNICON. But these disciplines are no official 'IUF Unicycling disciplines' and may be meant as 'fun' events.
The IUF as the world federation represents unicycling as a competitive sport and as a representative of a competitive sport, I think the IUF should only keep world records in officially recognized competitive disciplines*. And therfore I completely agre with Kens statement: "It seems backwards thinking to give world champion status and have a world record before we even have official rules for the record"
Of course I am also of the opinion that we must not stop the further development of unicycling sport by our rules. But saying that recognizing only and exclusively records that are in the IUF rulebook means the end of the development of our unicycling sport and the object of our committees dosn't fit. Every host can add new disciplines as experimental/fun/... disciplines. And if these disciplines are well accepted by the athletes, rules can be developed for them and the discipline can be included in the official IUF competition disciplines. But in my opinion a discipline without any official rules should not have the same status as a discipline for which there are official competition rules and regulations.
I think it is a task of the Rulebook Committee and in a certain way also of the WR Committee to decide whether it makes sense to include a certain discipline in the circle of official competition disciplines or not. Of course we should consider the wishes of the athletes and keep in mind the development of the sport, but I don't think we can leave this task to the organisers. And as long as it is possible to bring new disciplines to competitions without official rules, we would do exactly that with the proposed rule. For the development of the sport, however, I think it is unbelievably important that organizers are allowed to add this new disciplines. This is the only way to try out how a possible discipline is accepted by the athletes and whether it is worthwhile to develop it further.
I like Kens Idea of going about adding one-off-events, or potential new-events as a kind of 'demonstration' disciplines. In this way one could make it clear that these are not yet official competition disciplines and that the two groups of disciplines are thus distinguished from each other. But this would be a topic for the rulebook and not for the WRG.
*Time trials also belong to the competitive disciplines for me, even if there are only few competitions in the classical way and these are usually held as individual record attempts. But it is the sense of a time trial to compete against the clock and not in a group against each other.
Comment
I completely agree with the last posts of Ken, Mirjam and Jan.