financial penalites for drafting

peter kern

I was thinking the only reason people started to wear a seatbelt in Germany was the introduction of a penalty for not wearing one .

Would that be a good idea for triathlon? (on top of time penalty)
It would help to fund draft marshals, and we could have more of them, which I think is crucial.
Could TI enforce the rule ?
I guess 40 euro would be a fair amount or 100 euro if there is video evidence .
What would be the pros and cons ?

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

Do you want to drive people away from the sport? Financial penalties is not the way to sort the problem. Stronger time penalties and name & shame is the only way to go.

elvis jones

peter kern wrote: »

I was thinking the only reason people started to wear a seatbelt in Germany was the introduction of a penalty for not wearing one .

Would that be a good idea for triathlon? (on top of time penalty)
It would help to fund draft marshals, and we could have more of them, which I think is crucial.
Could TI enforce the rule ?
I guess 40 euro would be a fair amount or 100 euro if there is video evidence .
What would be the pros and cons ?

So if you draft you have to pay more than you paid to enter the race if it is for example a sprint ?

How do you make people pay ? Employ a dept revocery agency or clamp their bikes in transition:rolleyes:

Sorry Peter but i think its a crazy idea.

Oryx

peter kern wrote: »

I was thinking the only reason people started to wear a seatbelt in Germany was the introduction of a penalty for not wearing one .

Would that be a good idea for triathlon? (on top of time penalty)
It would help to fund draft marshals, and we could have more of them, which I think is crucial.
Could TI enforce the rule ?
I guess 40 euro would be a fair amount or 100 euro if there is video evidence .
What would be the pros and cons ?

Only if youre talking about people who make money from triathlon (pros and winners).

For an everyday joe taking part, its complete overkill. People would just move to unafililiated races with no risk of fines.

peter kern

Griffin Scrawny Mouthful wrote: »

Do you want to drive people away from the sport? Financial penalties is not the way to sort the problem. Stronger time penalties and name & shame is the only way to go.

last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.

Oryx

peter kern wrote: »

last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.

In the case of a car, its policed extensively, and those using a car have no choice but to drive. Triathletes have a choice which races to enter, or whether to do them at all.

How would you propose TI administer and collect the fines?

sconhome

peter kern wrote: »

last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.

Driving a car is very often a necessity for people to go about their daily business, so its easy to force compliance.

Racing a triathlon is a matter of choice for many and financial penalties just won't be enforceable. Like, who carries cash or card during a race?

I'd be in favour of motor bike referees carrying cattle prods and just tazing offenders. The subsequent road rash would serve as a reminder that drafting is against the rules & spirit of triathlon. :rolleyes:

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

peter kern wrote: »

last time i checked it did not people drive away from driving a car it just made them use the seatbelt.

There is no comparison between the two. One is the law the other you are trying to impose a fine on something whilst for the large part of competitors is supposed to be fun. As i said it would drive people away from the sport, start a poll on here as i am sure i am not alone on this one.

Radical changes are required but i just cannot see fines being one of those changes.

MrCreosote

How about a financial reward for dobbing in drafters?

Less stick, more carrot.

tunney

I think what Peter is doing is saying that the penalty needs to be draconian.

I disagree with the financial aspect but a drafting penalty should ruin your race. 10-20 minutes for a sprint or olympic. Second offence being a DQ.

Also a drafting penalty in one race (time or DQ) should count as a "first offence" in the next 4-5 races.

Once the punishment exceeds any gain, or could, then it stops.

peter kern

Oryx wrote: »

In the case of a car, its policed extensively, and those using a car have no choice but to drive. Triathletes have a choice which races to enter, or whether to do them at all.

How would you propose TI administer and collect the fines?

could be like you pay 1 day license you just pay online , you get a drafting penalty so you have to pay the fee before you enter the next race no paid fee no race.
Easy to enforce as every person that registers has to swipe in on race day.
admin costs very low but it would give TI more money for draft marshalls. Its a fact draft marshalls cost money and somebody has to pay for them, its all good shouting we need more marshalls if we dodnt come up with ways to pay for them.

and if it drives the people away that draft would that be so bad. I thought thats what we want a clean sport.

peter kern

Also a drafting penalty in one race (time or DQ) should count as a "first offence" in the next 4-5 races.

yes great idea but hard to administer so again some money has to come in to pay for administration.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

Also a drafting penalty in one race (time or DQ) should count as a "first offence" in the next 4-5 races.

yes great idea but hard to administer so again some money has to come in to pay for administration.

can be done programmatically. People are allowed to continue. Results filtered through software that flags "fat aaron got pinged two races ago, pinged again DQ" and then the results are printed.

peter kern

I like it dave.
but again I think we need more marshalls to do this job. 2 marshalls for 350 people is like the proverbial drop on the hot stone.

peter kern

MrCreosote wrote: »

How about a financial reward for dobbing in drafters?

Less stick, more carrot.

Please tell me more how you think that would work.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

I like it dave.
but again I think we need more marshalls to do this job. 2 marshalls for 350 people is like the proverbial drop on the hot stone.

I agree completely. John Cunniffe (very solid guy on the TI council a few years back) had some excellent formulae for calculating maximum numbers given specific course profiles that above which drafting was unavoidable. I venture a guess that this are no longer considered.

What he also had was the idea, and prototype implementation I believe, of static video camera analysis for drafting.

Unfortunately the likes of John are long gone.

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

can be done programmatically. People are allowed to continue. Results filtered through software that flags "fat aaron got pinged two races ago, pinged again DQ" and then the results are printed.

peter kern wrote: »

I like it dave.
but again I think we need more marshalls to do this job. 2 marshalls for 350 people is like the proverbial drop on the hot stone.

To operate this would probably require tagging of TI member numbers with a penalty points type system. How would it operate with 'unlicensed' racers or ODL's?

Back to discussing a tiered approach where relaxed rules in non-sanctioned 'fun' races and strict, strict approach in sanctioned events for 'serious' triathletes ?

tunney

amphkingwest wrote: »

To operate this would probably require tagging of TI member numbers with a penalty points type system. How would it operate with 'unlicensed' racers or ODL's?

Back to discussing a tiered approach where relaxed rules in non-sanctioned 'fun' races and strict, strict approach in sanctioned events for 'serious' triathletes ?

ODL numbers (well strings technically) generated as a hash of the firstname + surname + DOB + phone

Every time you apply for one you get the same one

peter kern

AKW I think drafting is a health and saftey hazerd and applies to all levels regardles of serious or not serious athletes.

BennyMul

silly thought
Could TI not enforce the use of a GPS system for the bike either purchased or rented when getting a lic.
This could track the location of all cyclists on the course and identify if drafting is occurring (with margin for error of course)

sconhome

peter kern wrote: »

AKW I think drafting is a health and saftey hazerd and applies to all levels regardles of serious or not serious athletes.

I do agree with you Peter. Its the solution is the problem.

peter kern

BennyMul wrote: »

silly thought
Could TI not enforce the use of a GPS system for the bike either purchased or rented when getting a lic.
This could track the location of all cyclists on the course and identify if drafting is occurring (with margin for error of course)

how much would that cost? who would pay for it, the honest people or the once that get cought?
is it reliable ?
I think I have seen a device like that a few weeks ago so I think it is possible but again it will need more people to enforce it and somebody has to pay for it and I think it should be the people that infringe the rule not the once that dont. (its an incentive not to draft)

tunney

amphkingwest wrote: »

I do agree with you Peter. Its the solution is the problem.

The solution, and the problem, come from lacking in testicular fortitude.

peter kern wrote: »

how much would that cost? who would pay for it, the honest people or the once that get cought?
is it reliable ?
I think I have seen a device like that a few weeks ago so I think it is possible but again it will need more people to enforce it and somebody has to pay for it and I think it should be the people that infringe the rule not the once that dont. (its an incentive not to draft)

Technically I'm not sure its possible at a non-prohibitive cost.

peter kern

amphkingwest wrote: »

I do agree with you Peter. Its the solution is the problem.

than it might be better to keep the thread focused on the essential,
ie the solution to the problem and not widening the problem. Serious and not serious is a totaly different subject i would think.

So what do you think is the solution and who will pay for it?

peter kern

Dave Ireland as a small nation might be a good place to bring a world wide system in place.
Maybe Itu could give a grant.
We are only 5 days away from threads on the forum what draft festival the worlds were.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

Dave Ireland as a small nation might be a good place to bring a world wide system in place.
Maybe Itu could give a grant.
We are only 5 days away from threads on the forum what draft festival the worlds were.

The problem with GPS as a technology in this application is its accuracy
Typically its around 5m best case.

Thats 50% of the draft zone.

If two athletes were drafting and the GPS receivers were both out by 5m in the same plane then the system would not flag them as drafting.

Likewise it could flag false positives.

I had previously though of range limited RFID style chips enclosed in the ankle bracelets with some sort of proximity detecting chip but that could be bypassed by wrapping the ankle bracelet in tine foil or something.

peter kern

5m is too much i guess 2 m the max tolerance ? So it seems like we are some years away from that. Still Ireland or newzealand would be great countries to test a new sytem when the time is ready.

Then it does boil down to.
Soccer at least 3 referees for 22 player
triathlon usually 2 draft marshals for 350 athletes.

so 1 in 7 for soccer ( in big matches i guess they have 5 so 1 in 4.5)
and roughly 1 to 175 in triathlon for drafting if you include head refery 1 to 115 .My appology i know the numbers i produce are likely incorrect- and i focus on drafting and not crossing a white line by 5 cm- but we get the picture that there is little marshelling on the course in comparasion too other sports.

BennyMul

peter kern wrote: »

than it might be better to keep the thread focused on the essential,
ie the solution to the problem and not widening the problem. Serious and not serious is a totaly different subject i would think.

So what do you think is the solution and who will pay for it?

Regardless of the solution, the members will pay for it either directly or indirectly. there is a cost associated either technology or a number of marshals.

I am mindful of the constraints over the GPS accuracy, and do like the idea of the proximity sensor, if functional would be cheaper and more accurate than GPS, providing they are non-tamper proof.

peter kern

yes it will cost and thats why i would like- as much possible- that the people that infringe pay. And I would say the higher the penalty the more people will think about if they draft and that would mean we need less marshalls, to get fairer races .
And using Daves thinking we could give one infrigement free of charge( ie only a time penalty) for every 6 races or so, Inthis way we also rule out human error for a wrong drafting call- in which case the penalty probably needs to be 100 euro for the 2nd call within 5-7 races and 2oo euro with video evidence.

But the bottom line is somebody will have to pay or we need to go draft legal as the current system has failled.

BTH

tunney wrote: »

I had previously though of range limited RFID style chips enclosed in the ankle bracelets with some sort of proximity detecting chip but that could be bypassed by wrapping the ankle bracelet in tine foil or something.

This, if at all possible (I have no what RIFD is), is the only semi realistic solution. Fines arent going to happen. And presumably if you wrap your chip in foil it'll not be picked up my timing mats either, so policing that shouldn't be particularly difficult.

tunney

BTH wrote: »

This, if at all possible (I have no what RIFD is), is the only semi realistic solution. Fines arent going to happen. And presumably if you wrap your chip in foil it'll not be picked up my timing mats either, so policing that shouldn't be particularly difficult.

To be honest old school tech (ie none) and brutal penalties that are enforced will do it. Its the softness of the penalties and the enforcement that is the problem

(Fully expected to get done in Blacksod regardless of what I do. Last time I b1tched about drafting (2005/2006) I got pinged despite not drafting "to teach a lesson". Oh the joys of a judgement call not being appealble.)

sconhome

tunney wrote: »

Oh the joys of a judgement call not being appealble.

The good news is that you can now appeal, but it will cost you money.

Oryx

amphkingwest wrote: »

The good news is that you can now appeal, but it will cost you money.

You still cant appeal a judgement call.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

What are we talking about here, a 15-20% saving drafting on the bike and fresher legs on the run?

Apply that time to each race distance to calculate what the penalty should be.

Avg time say for a bike split in Sprint, Oly, HIM and IM would be , 35mins, 1:10, 2:50, 6:00. Apply a 20% time penalty to each and that would soon rule out any gains made, 7min, 14min penalties....you get the idea.
If you knew you were going to get a 7min or 14min penalty in a SPR or OLY and be publically named & shamed would it not stop you from doing it again?
Its all about making the penalty bigger than the drafting reward.

peter kern

That is all good and right but i interpret this with that you are saying you can provide this with 2 draft busters for 350 athletes ie the way it is right now.
I would suggest you cant do this with 2 draft marshalls. and money needs to be generated to have more draft marshalls. This is the only reason why I advocate money fines to pay for more draft marshalls.

Griffin Scrawny Mouthful wrote: »

What are we talking about here, a 15-20% saving drafting on the bike and fresher legs on the run?

Apply that time to each race distance to calculate what the penalty should be.

Avg time say for a bike split in Sprint, Oly, HIM and IM would be , 35mins, 1:10, 2:50, 6:00. Apply a 20% time penalty to each and that would soon rule out any gains made, 7min, 14min penalties....you get the idea.
If you knew you were going to get a 7min or 14min penalty in a SPR or OLY and be publically named & shamed would it not stop you from doing it again?
Its all about making the penalty bigger than the drafting reward.

Cork24

elvis jones wrote: »

So if you draft you have to pay more than you paid to enter the race if it is for example a sprint ?

How do you make people pay ? Employ a dept revocery agency or clamp their bikes in transition:rolleyes:

Sorry Peter but i think its a crazy idea.

the TI could do a snatch and grab on people during the run and hold them for ransom

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

peter kern wrote: »

That is all good and right but i interpret this with that you are saying you can provide this with 2 draft busters for 350 athletes ie the way it is right now.
I would suggest you cant do this with 2 draft marshalls. and money needs to be generated to have more draft marshalls. This is the only reason why I advocate money fines to pay for more draft marshalls.

I agree better marshalling is required, perhaps not more but better. Is it not better having 2 switched on marshalls not afraid to pull people up for penalties than 4 marshalls who turn a blind eye? I would be more focusing on the quality rather than the quantity of marshalling.

A recent race i done had drafters in the middle of a cycling club group who were out for a spin!!

peter kern

of course quality is 1 aspect I do totally agree with it
But again even 2 really good ones (and there is some who are rally good ) cant deal with 175 atheltes ( sorry for using my soocer wxample again one referee could not do the job.

Anyway in the private sector i think it works like this. you have a position nobody good wants to do so you need to pay more to make it attractive to take on the position. Not a single person from the drafters thread has said ok I become a draft marshall and this is where we are everybody is compalining but nobody comes up with solutions how to make it better and how it will be paid for.
Only if a draft marshall is being paid well would i want to start to complain about the quality of the job they do as voluntteers we have to be very thanksful to have them at all.
The silence of the people that complain most about drafting on the other thread is interesting. Shoes how easy it is to complain but finding solutions is more difficult.

sconhome

Sorry Peter, but IMO that post is rubbish.

Marshals are trained by TI to do the job that they volunteered themselves for. I'm sick of that age old excuse of 'I don't get paid enough to do a good job'. :mad: :mad:

Look at our Government, paid a fortune and they do a sh1t job!! No link between level of pay and quality of work at all.

I've said it before, give the marshals the tools to do the job ie GoPro cameras on every bike & car marshall that record the evidence. It has to be the easiest thing in the world to outfit them with headsets that voice activated radio numbers back to Race HQ of offenders.

The biggest issue with drafters is that they are fresher on the run. Regardless of where you finish in the pack, a cheater is ahead of you, taking one of your places off you!

Place a team at T2 issue stop/go penalties or DQ and let the offenders appeal the video evidence. Problem solved.

pgibbo

I can see where Peter is coming from. It's the same with Soccer and the GAA to an extent. Everyone complains about the referees but very few will actually step up and become one.....

peter kern

reply to akw
A government is a reflection of the countries people :-)
and i did say private sector did I ?

Seriously of course you are right about quality but still here is the fact unless a draftmarshall constantly goes with the top guys or a bunch camera or no camera ... draft marhsall is there no drafting draft marshall leaves, guess what ....


SO anyway you say draft marshals need to be trained better that also does cost money and take even more time
Do you think you get enough video evidence with 2 draft buster?

How do you make the job more attractive?

do you agree as suggested a draft marshalls should get a bonus for busting somebody (i dodnt like that idea unless there is video evidence but again who would pay for that bonuse )

your post is again about its all so easy,we do a bit of this and that problem solved. Its not and Itu 20 years ago gave up with the elites.
you cant just say ok from today we do a better job when there is no system in place

ie a given draft buster to athlete ratio for a nat series race

make sure marshalls really do understand what they do ( some do some dont but again you cant really tell a voluntter you are not doing a good job) how to use cameras etc

Bottom line is it costs resorces to fight against drafting and you need to come up where you get the resources from or put your name up to become a draft marshal and do the job you do expect them to do for free.

sconhome

If only I was allowed have a motorbike again . . . .

3 races and I promise everyone would be terrified to draft, problem solved.

pgibbo

No offence AKW....but the reality is, you've hardly had time to race this season, let alone offer your services as a draft buster. And all for very good reasons - family, business, etc. These things take precedence over a hobby. Now, if the time was available to you, I'm damn sure you would prefer to be racing than pinging people and getting nothing but abuse. It's human nature. We're selfish and look after our own interests. The majority of people would prefer to race than to give up their time marshaling or refereeing an event. Me included. As far as I'm concerned, if I'm going to be gone away from family for a day at a race, I want to be racing not standing on the sidelines. When I have volunteered, all I kept thinking was "why the fcuk am I not I racing"

I know you think the tools will help but as the Loughrea clip showed, it's open to interpretation. I think more marshals are required with supporting technology. Finding the balance, the people and the buy in from TI is needed. Can that be achieved????? History says otherwise.

I'm not having a dig at you. I'm just highlighting the harsh realities behind getting more people involved, etc

peter kern

amphkingwest wrote: »

If only I was allowed have a motorbike again . . . .

3 races and I promise everyone would be terrified to draft, problem solved.

Briliant election talk , you would be a good politician , promise everything without saying how you realice it;-)
But you identifyed a problem most potential marashlls dont have a motorbike.
So should TI buy some ? and who is going to pay?

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

Anyway in the private sector i think it works like this. you have a position nobody good wants to do so you need to pay more to make it attractive to take on the position. Not a single person from the drafters thread has said ok I become a draft marshall and this is where we are everybody is compalining but nobody comes up with solutions how to make it better and how it will be paid for.
Only if a draft marshall is being paid well would i want to start to complain about the quality of the job they do as voluntteers we have to be very thanksful to have them at all.
The silence of the people that complain most about drafting on the other thread is interesting. Shoes how easy it is to complain but finding solutions is more difficult.

Disagree Peter. I no longer do Race Referee, Technical Delegate or Draft Marshal for any races (or whatever the positions are called now).

Nothing to do with money. I made a difficult decision, which was the correct one, and one I think you were aware of. I never received support for this call and was subjected to years of abuse over it. Finally I realised I was never, and would never, get the backup required to do what needed to be done to do the roles properly (ie sorry your race isn't happening today/yes I did DQ half the field/etc) so I haven't done it in years and will never do it again.

sconhome

peter kern wrote: »

Briliant election talk , you would be a good politician , promise everything without saying how you realice it;-)

Em...

amphkingwest wrote: »

I'd be in favour of motor bike referees carrying cattle prods and just tazing offenders. The subsequent road rash would serve as a reminder that drafting is against the rules & spirit of triathlon.

Draconian but you'd draft once & never again

peter kern wrote: »

But you identifyed a problem most potential marashlls dont have a motorbike. So should TI buy some ? and who is going to pay?

Should TI buy kayaks? Should safety boats charge to pull people out of the water? '€20 and I'll save you'.

Its voluntary, made from volunteers. People put themselves forwards to be a marshal, to train as a coach, to referee, to administrate. TI don't force anyone to be a marshal, people choose to do the task. People with motorbikes or access to motorbikes offer to become marshals.

I'm pretty sure they do get a stipend for expenses just like the photographers who commit to being trained to do the media work.

I offered a tongue in cheek reply to the continual debate about this. The answer is simple, participants have the responsibility to ensure they understand the rules, they have the responsibility to ensure they practise the rules. To play fair.

We won't find an isolated solution to the problem without totally overhauling the structure, culture and administration of triathlon as a whole. I've made my thoughts elsewhere on how this could be approached.

sconhome

@P - I hear you and understand what you're saying.

In general draft marshals are drawn from interested persons who would not normally be racing. Interested parties who train up as an aside to what they normally do. In much the same way you see motorbike clubs supporting cycle races, just to be out on the bikes with some purpose is often enough.

Yes, this year has been attrocious for training and racing. With limited time resources you have to be very selective in what you do. But if I thought by not racing and admining or marshalling a race or two would change our sport for the better I'd gladly do it. I believe it has to be hand in hand, give something back if you can, maybe not today or tomorrow, but at some point.

To answer OP and not draw it our. Financial penalties won't work. They'd be impossible to administrate and would alienate people. Educate them properly first. Then enforce the rules properly.

peter kern

Very good point !!!!!!
and maybe a very important reason Itu gave up on elites and made if draft legal , as it got ugly at the finsih line.

thats what all the people who say to monitor drafting is so easy forget the psycological pressure is high.

SO it was not money in your case but support but again that support would cost money ( should you have been given legal support psyscological support or whatever I dodnt know but its great to hear from one that actually has been part of the other side rather than just talking ( including myself)

tunney wrote: »

Disagree Peter. I no longer do Race Referee, Technical Delegate or Draft Marshal for any races (or whatever the positions are called now).

Nothing to do with money. I made a difficult decision, which was the correct one, and one I think you were aware of. I never received support for this call and was subjected to years of abuse over it. Finally I realised I was never, and would never, get the backup required to do what needed to be done to do the roles properly (ie sorry your race isn't happening today/yes I did DQ half the field/etc) so I haven't done it in years and will never do it again.