Timing, Photo Finish and False Start Monitoring for Track Races (Closed for comments)
Comments about this discussion:
Started
I think the last UNICON has shown which problems can occur with the timing of the track races if the used timing system is not a fully automatic system. The fact that the achieved performances at the UNICON were not recognized as WR has been the consequence.
In order to avoid something like this in the future, I think we should, on the one hand, specify which requirements a timing system must fulfil so that the times measured with it can be recognised as WR and, on the other hand, make sure that these requirements will also be included in the rulebook.
In my opinion, there are two essential requirements for the timing system that the system must be tested for and for which the system must have a certificate of accuracy:
1. The System must record the finish through a camera positioned in the extension of the finish line, producing a composite photo finish image of at least 1000 images per second.
2. The System shall be started automatically by the Starter’s signal, so that the overall delay between the start signal and the start of the timing system is constant and equal to or less than 0.001 second.
In addition to fully automatic timing systems, I consider electronic false start monitoring to be an important contribution to reliable and verifiable world records in track racing. A false start monitoring system must be able to reliably detect a crossing of the start line before the start signal. From my own experience I would say that with a false start monitoring without technical equipment, false starts from about 250 ms before the start signal are only recognizable for experienced judges and with concentration on a single rider, from about 100ms they are practically no longer recognizable. But especially with the short distances these times can be decisive.
Maybe further rules are necessary in connection with this, e.g. how to align such a photo-finish camera and a fals start monitoring sysem and how to determine times from the photo finish image. But I think that the exact rules about timing belong to the Ruebook. Nonetheless, I think we as the WR Committee should give the impulse to establish these rules by making meaningful and necessary specifications for WR - even if the implementation in detail may be done elsewhere.
Comment
I am in favour of such requirements. But I think it should be done in parallel with editing the rulebook (which for track races seems to be at a hold still :-( ). The requirements in the Rulebook should ideally match those for WRs, in which case we can simply refer to the Rulebook.
Some details:
* Is "at least 1000 frames per second" really required? That's about 7 mm with the top riders. So the camera should at least have 7 mm resolution at the finish line to make this meaningful. I don't know how difficult/expensive it is to have this frame rate and resolution. I think a HD video at 60 fps would be sufficient if it can be analysed frame-by-frame, since wheel speed will change little over 1/60 second. 60 fps HD video is available nowadays in most modern consumer cameras, and hence easy to achieve.
* Making electronic false start monitoring mandatory is a good idea, even though this is less straightforward to implement. Like you say, relatively large differences (100 ms) may go undetected without an electronic system. BTW, this is a far bigger error source than 60 fps versus 1000 fps.
Comment
I completely agree with you that this should be done in parallel with editing the rulebook and we should not make such rules explict for the WRG. Refering to the Rulebook should be the way it should go. But I think if we can reach an agreement on this rules here in the WRG and we agree that these rules may be useful not only for WR but also for other competitions, it may be easier in the future to make appropriate changes in the Rulebook Committee and to make suggestions that have already been worked out.
To your remarks:
Photo Finish Cameras do not create a spatially resolved image, but a time-resolved image. This is necessary because the results, i.e. the times, in the track racing disciplines are read directly from these pictures. From a spatially resolved image, it would certainly be possible to determine the order of the riders, but not their exact time. A resolution of 1000 frames per second is therefore absolutely necessary, as this indicates the resolution of the time measurement. If someone wants to know more about the technology behind it, I can try to explain it in more detail.
A normal video camera can definitely not be used as a photo finish camera, because there is no possibility to determine the exact times of the riders from the video. In addition, even if it would be possible, the times from a 60fps camera would be only accurate to 0.017s, which would mean that the times could only be displayed with an accuracy of 1/10 s in the results.
Usually the time measurement at the unicycling events I have been to in the last few years was done by timekeepers from athletics (who certainly meet my requirements mentioned in the first post). So I don't see any problem to set these requirements at least for WR - I wouldn't want to forbid the use of time measuring systems with a lower resolution or a other working principle generally - I just think for WR and events that have the ambition to be on a level where WR can be set up, these should be the standard.
There are good electronic false start systems available in the unicycle community and I am personally happy to support anyone who has questions or needs help with such a system.
Comment
For the foto finish system I think the same applies as for the accuracy of the records - since corresponding regulations are included in the IUF Rulebook, we can refer to them. But I noticed that there are still some things missing in the rulebook which should be added in the next Rulebook round. Maybe we could add them to the WRG until then and delete them as soon as they are integrated into the rulebook?
Proposal
X.X Time measurement and finish image
1. For disciplines where a fully automatic finish image system for Unicon is mandatory, the requirements for Unicons according to the IUF rules apply for world records.
Note: A system that works automatically either at start or finish, but not both, will not produce fully automatically measured times and therefore does not comply with the requirements of a timing system for Unicons. In this case, the times read from such a Photo Finish image can not be recognized for world records.
Note: In order to confirm that the camera is correctly aligned and to facilitate the reading of the Photo Finish image, the intersection of the lane lines and the finish line shall be coloured black in a suitable design. Any such design mustbe solely confined to the intersection, for no more than20mm beyond, and not extended before, the leading edge of the finish line. Similar black marks may be placed on each side of the intersection of an appropriate lane line and the finish line to further facilitate reading.
2. The times shall be read from the finish image by means of a curser with its reading line guaranteed to be perpendicular to the time scale.
3. The system must automatically determine and record the athletes' finishing times and mst be able to produce a printed image showing the time of each athlete. Additionally, the system shall provide a tabular overview showing the time or other result for each athlete. Subsequent changes of automatically determined values and manual input of values (like start time, finish time), shall be indicated by the system automatically in the time scale of the printed image and the tabular overview.
4. The Timekeeper shall be responsible for the conformity to the rules and the functioning of the timing system. Before the start of an event, at the beginning of each day, he shall initiate a zero control test to ensure that the equipment is started automatically by the starter's signal within the limit identified in the IUF-Rulebook (i.e. equal to or lessthan 0.001 second). He supervises the system and makes sure that the camera is correctly aligned.
Comment
Are there any further comments or objections to the proposal? If not, I would like to create a proposal that can be voted on after the official review time.
Comment
I agree to the principles here. But do we need to state this much detail in the WR Guidelines, even if the Rulebook doesn't (yet?) mention them? I would hope we can refer to IAAF/WA regulations, and state that they are applicable. I have the impression that some of your text is copied from such regulations. Or don't we want to be dependent on IAAF/WA in this way?
Besides, there are some typing errors (or copying errors?) in the text.
Comment
You are absolutely right that much of the text comes from the World Athetics rulebook. Basically, I am of the opinion that it does not belong in this detail in the WRG, but in the Rulebook. However, as I wrote above, this information is unfortunately still missing in the current rulebook and hopefully we can add that in the next Rulebook round... But I think we need a suitable interim solution until then.
I would not like to simply refer to the rulebook of the IAAF/WA, because this may change our rules without us noticing anything. I think it makes more sense, even if the rules are perhaps very similar, to adopt them into our own rulebook and then change them if necessary, if they change at the IAAF/WA and we consider these changes useful.
Comment
See discussion 37. We need to solve this issue of referring to external rules (which also includes the IUF Rulebook) in a general sense.
Comment
Everything on this topic is now integrated in the IUF Rulebook, so we can refer to it.
I would therefore close the discussion here - how exactly the reference should look like, is something I think we can better clarify in a discussion where we have the whole chapter of documentation criteria in mind.