Part 2: 50 riders... per gender!? (Closed for comments)
Comments about this discussion:
Started
1.3.2. Combining Age Groups says the following:
„In a competition with more than 50 riders, six riders are needed to complete an age group. In competitions with less than 50 riders, six in each age group are still highly recommended, however three riders are the minimum to complete an age group.“
In germany we often have track and field competitions with more than 50 riders (for example 130-180 rides at all), but only 15-25 male rides. In this case 1.3.2 says, that six rides are needed to complete an age group and the competition host must combine a lot of male age groups. The consequence is (for example) that 12 year old rides have to start together with 18 year old rides.
In my opinion this couldn‘t be the intention of 1.3.2 and so I would prefer to make combining age groups in this regard not only on a per-discipline basis but also on a per-gender basis.
Comment
This rule is in the first part of the rulebook and therefore is valid for all disciplines. As there are different rules in the single parts of each discipline (track at least 5 Age Groups before combining / Road: 4 / Freestyle: 2 / Mountain: 6 / Flat: 3 ....). Some competitions have more disciplines others have less. I think the more disciplines the competition has the competitors there are.
I don't prefere to count per "competition" but per discipline. Maybe it is possible not to mention a fix number of riders in 1.3.2 but a product of number of disciplines x 2 (men/woman) x recommended minimum of age Groups x 6 to fix if it is a small or a large competition (per discipline). I think it is possible the calculate this for each gender too.
Comment
If I'm not totaly wrong there is a complete seperate committee planned to discuss and fix all that inconsistancies in age groups as discussed already while a workshop happend in Montreal while last Unicon. I will ask for an update when this committee will start.
The main Idea was to stop races / competitions where you know before you start that you willend on the podium. We get feedback from many riders (especially younger ones that they like it the first times but then it starts to become strange and boaring for them. It can mean much more for a rider to become 8th place out of 16 then to become 2nd out of 3.
Comment
I'm not sure I understand what exactly the point is that the discussion starter addresses. I understand the current rules such that "age group" means age bracket combined with gender. So if there are more females than males, some age groups might get combined for males whereas for females they might stay uncombined. Indeed, males of 12 and 18 may find themselves in one age group; in my opinion that IS the intention of the current rule.
As to Ingrid's comment: in my opinion, the current rulebook fails to clearly define "competition". Is Unicon a competition? Or is the 100m track race a competition? Or is the 100m track race for males a competition? We should have our definitions clear before we properly discuss these issues.
Regardless, I would agree that if an age group/gender combination for a certain discipline (e.g. 100 m standard male 13-14) would have 3 or less participants, it should be combined with a neighbouring age group of the same gender. Even if it would mean that 12 year olds race against 18 year olds.
Comment
It is unclear in 1.3.2 that the combining of age groups is done by gender. This is the intent. In other words, if there are a large number of females and small number of males, you would end up with more age groups on the female side. This should be cleared up.
Definitions are also unclear. As I was the author of much of the wording in the Rulebook I will offer my understanding of the definition of each:
Competition:
As used in Section 1.3.2 I believe it should be meant as a grouping of competition events, such as Track. Same age groups for all the Track events rather than having a different breakdown for each. But you might have totally different age groups in the Road Racing events. (Competition is a very generic word, and can also be applied to a whole Unicon, or two riders going against each other down the track)
Convention:
The whole thing. Like the entire Unicon, national championship, etc.
Event:
Generally used to apply to a single competition event, such as the 100m race. Usually refers to the whole thing, i.e. all age groups of that race, and the finals, though could also be applied to the finals on their own. Unclear? Yes it is. Before Klaas, I don't think anyone brought up this confusion before, but I understand how it can be a big problem, especially non-native English speakers.
Comment
@ Klaas:
Merging age groups with three or less participants is something different then merging age groups with six or less participants - like the current rule says. I would agree that in most cases (especially for big Events like Unicon, national championships etc.) an age group/gender combination as you mentioned with three or less participants should be combined - it might be something different for very very small local events.
@ John:
Thank you for the definitions, I think we should write down them in the rule book, because as Klaas said it‘s not absolute clear at the moment.
I try, to make clear what I wanted to tell you in my fist post:
Instead of counting the participants per competition to decide whether six or three rides are needed to complete an age group I would prefer to count the participants per gender.
An alternative would be to say three riders are the minimum to complete an age group, but six are highly recommended and it‘s up to the convention host whether he merges age groups with less than six or three riders. So every host could decide what fits to his convention best.
Comment
As to the unclear definitions: oh yes it has been brought up before: two years ago in the Rulebook committee. Initially by Ingrid K if I remember correctly, and I chimed in at the time. Anyway, time to clear it up. I think I will start a separate discussion on this, tomorrow or the day after.
> Merging age groups with three or less participants is something different then merging age groups with six or less participants
In my opinion these are only gradually different, but principally the same.
> - like the current rule says.
The current rule mentions both six (for conventions > 50) and three (for < 50, but six still recommended).
> I would agree that in most cases (especially for big Events like Unicon, national championships etc.) an age group/gender combination as you mentioned with three or less participants should be combined
Agree with whom? I was mentioning three as a general rule, by which I mean "three or less are always combined". For groups > 50, I'm not sure I would lower the minimum of six that the current rule prescribes.
> - it might be something different for very very small local events.
What constitutes a very very small local event? Five or ten riders? They would have a hard time implementing many of the IUF Rulebook rules. For a reasonably sized group < 50, say 15 - 50 riders, a minimum of 3 to 6 per agegroup (combined with gender) is reasonable in my view. So again, I would not change the current rule.
> I try, to make clear what I wanted to tell you in my fist post:
> Instead of counting the participants per competition to decide whether six or three rides are needed to complete an age group I would prefer to count the participants per gender.
I think this is the current rule already, as also John pointed out. So this should not be an issue.
> An alternative would be to say three riders are the minimum to complete an age group, but six are highly recommended and it‘s up to the convention host whether he merges age groups with less than six or three riders. So every host could decide what fits to his convention best.
I agree with the current rule that prescribes six riders per agegroup for big conventions like Unicons. Yes, even if it means that 12-y-o competes with 18-y-o (which I recognise as not a very fair competition, but hey, that's life).
Comment
I agree that it can´t be considered as a problem of the rider that there are no other competitors in his age group. But to avoid that riders know before they start that they will end on the podium, as Olaf pointed out, I suggest thinking about the following:
For national and international championships the IUF could set minimum requirements. For example, for age group 0-10 "100m" 19 or 20 sek.(?). Riders who reach those from the IUF setted requirements will be ranked. Who does not reach these requirements will not be on the podium. These requirements will also be effected for age groups with more than 3 participants. For each discipline and age group realistic minimum requirements will be fixed. For example, if a competitor reaches 10th place but does not reach the minimum required, he will not be ranked.
At regional and local championships it´s the decision of the convention host, if he wants to apply the minimum requirements or not.
Comment
This discussion is about age group determination. Thus, it will be discussion in that committee once it gets started. Thanks for your comments here.