Base your age on your birth year
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
By basing your age for the competitions on your birth year, it keeps you in the same age group for the whole season. That prevents awkward transition between regional, national, and international events.
This system of age is fairly standard in bicycling federations (at least in the USA).
Comment
sounds good, then it's also clear in which age group you are if you have your birthday during unicon..
Comment
I generally approve this, however there are more variables to keep in mind, that play with this. This would mean that we have a fixed season. For outdoor activities, this is typically summer time, while indoor competitions can be held all year, which is the first problem. Do indoor and outdoor competitions run in parallel, well not necessary. Second, summer time is different in northern and southern hemisphere. So, summer in northern hemisphere has its peek in mid of the year, while in southern hemisphere its peek is around christmas.
I think these are the main reasons why we have no strategy for this by now.
Don't get me wrong, I support this, I'm just outlining problems we have to face with this.
Comment
During earlier discussions this suggestion once already had a majority of support but due to strange stretching of deadlines never was allowed to become a new proposal.
> outlining problems we have to face with this.
>
There's more events during the year than around 1/1, so would solve more problems than it causes.
In UCI cyclocross season is wintertime, and so for BE/CZ/NL/etc. that means Nov/Dec/Jan/Feb. Same for much European UCI track events.
It's not a big deal since the rule applies to everyone and not just only yourself or only your kid.
For convenience I'm ignoring leap-year offset, but the fact you can have 364 days difference between one and another in the same birthyear is no different than under our current rule.
Comment
I think this is the 3rd time we discuss about that and the last 3 times it finaly ends that we keep it as it is. I see no advantage to change it and I still likwe the fact that a rider compete in an agegroup that is fitting his/her age in reality. In other sports where they use the year, it happens that people already start their family planning in a way to cover most perfect the 364 day advantage which is totaly crazy. Another Argument some years ago was software issues but so far every unicycle competition software I know about is calculating the agegroup by the birthday related to first day of the event so all programm must be changed to calculate by birthyear now. Only in races we have that 20"/24" change for agegroups and it is more based on the physical size of a rider then on the age. Typically a rider who is able to switch on 24" will do it and is free to start in the higher agegroup. There already exist some kilometer of pros and cons about it :) In the end it makes not realy a big difference and so a change provide actually more disadvantages then advatages.
Comment
Scott wrote: By basing your age for the competitions on your birth year, it keeps you in the same age group for the whole season. That prevents awkward transition between regional, national, and international events.
I say: hmmm, it would keep you at the same age, but not necessarily in the same age group. Different events may have different age group limits.
But even if the age group limits would be the same from one event to the other: why it is awkward to be for instance in 13-14 at one event, and at 15-16 in the next event in the same year? As compared to being in 13-14 in one year, and in 15-16 in the next year?
Comment
I think either way it's much of a muchness...meaning that all you are basically doing is changing the cutoff date from January 1st to August 1st (or whatever the date is that Unicon starts). Basically if you have Jan 1st it favors those that have birthdays early in the year and if you have it August 1st it favors those that have birthdays in later part of the year. Saying that, I guess it makes sense to do what most sports follow...is that Jan 1st?
Comment
"I guess it makes sense to do what most sports follow" One of the major things I like in unicycle sport (beside from the sport itself) is that so many things are different from what most sports do and I get often this feedback from people that do some of the "most sports" before. Many sports follow what all do and so you fond especially in proffessional sports mostly the similar structures and similar problems. Let them struggle in sport politics, doping, corruption ... and let us think what is usefull for our sport and what not. But this was just off topic so back to the topic.
It is not about switching from 1. of August to 1. of Janauary, the rules count also on nationals and mostly for all competitions so it is a change from using the real age to use the year you was born to determine the age group. Klaas bring a good point that show how useless it will be to change the system. Depending on the fact that many events use different sets of agegroups and that also often agegroups are merged, the chance to ride always in the same agegroup inner one year is not very high.
Beside this some very view countrys even dont have new year on the 1. of January ;) I see no real advanzage to change it, it make work to change the software and it switch from using real age to using virtual age which is at least a difference in psychologic direction.
Comment
There is one issue, where the current realization is a pain in the ass. That is for freestylers, that change age during a season from 14 to 15. That's the junior/senior age-mark. Depending on age, at the moment, they are given 2 or 3 minutes for their routine. When changing age, is an elimination to their whole (pre-)season preparation, because that is all irrelevant by then, that said it is currently under discussion.
Olaf brought up racing, with 20"/24" switch. I have no idea how this is impacting riders but allowing them to start in higher agegroup sounds very anarchy and doesn't sound very serious but I haven't thought further into it nor more insights about it.
Are there more of these edge cases?
Comment
If for no other reasons, this change would make a freestyler's life so much easier. I am in full support.
There are some people in the US who have summer birthdays that fall in between NAUCC and Unicon. This means that they could have to change a lot about how they compete in the short time in between events.
Edge cases:
10 year old to 11 year old wheel size change. (This is a hard change to make in a short amount of time as racing on a 20" vs. 24" is a big difference).
14 year old to 15 year old in Freestyle. Also could be a problem with Flatland and Street Jr. Expert.
While there aren't a ton of edge cases, the ones that are there are a compelling reason to change it for me. I don't see any negatives to changing it, but see these reasons as positives.
Comment
DISADVANTAGE: The proposed change makes a half year difference in people's 'nominal' age. Their actual age is on average half a year older than their virtual age. This makes results somewhat less comparable between old and new system, which in my opinion is a disadvantage.
DISADVANTAGE: Another type of edge case: Events around December/January, like Unicon in Wellington New Zealand running 27 December to 6 January. I guess that a competitor born on, say, December 31, shouldn't change age group halfway the event. So we take the first day of an event to fix age group for the event? That could mean, though, that someone who's birthday is 3 January, competes as a 10-year-old while he is actually 12 years old.
ADVANTAGE: On the other hand, an additional advantage of the proposed change is that people can plan for their training longer in advance because they know their age group. I'm not sure if the dates for Unicon XVIII are fixed yet, but what I heard is "end July to about 10 August". If someone's birthday is 30 July, they would in the old system still be uncertain about their age at the event. Whereas if birth year is used, those cases are clear.
Comment
But don't you have the freedom of choice right now to compete in the next higher age category if you want? In Flat and Street it is the riders choice, in races also. Are you forced to stay in a lower age category in freestyle?. If yes, I get your argument, if no it would simply exchange the freedom of choice into a forced situation.
Comment
For races it is only that someone can opt to compete in the next higher age group if that age group's limit permit it. I mean: a 10 year old would normally be in 0-10 20" but he can opt for 0-12 24". Note the ZERO to 12, not ELEVEN to 12. Someone of 17 years old is forced to compete in 15-18, and cannot opt for 19-29 (for instance). Or am I wrong?
Comment
Mh Im not sure if it is forbidden vor allowed or just not clear defined. However, in races you fight for the finals and it doesn't matter in what age group you fight for them, in flat/street you can't become champion if you compete in junior category so the good ones go for senior even they are junior. In freestyle it is even more strange as the rider can decide if he want to compete in expert or in age group without any qualification before. From the point of having perfect runs in races for example it would be more useful to sort riders by their race time then by age.
There is a good reason that the age group thing will get its own separate committee soon as we find actually a confusing system without consistency over disciplines. However, this is about how to set the age of a rider and I like that we use the real age until now. It seems that more the different age group systems per discipline make the problem, not the fact how we define how old are you.
Comment
That unclarity is what I meant with "anarchy", this is not very serious.
Comment
Olaf, I actually think that how we define how old people are is the problem, not how it's defined per discipline.
No matter how you do it for freestyle, at some point you have to pick an age to do the split between Junior Expert and Expert. No matter what this age is, if we use the start age at the beginning of the competition then we will have people who will be changing ages during their competition season and then have to change their routine length. If we use the age at the beginning of the year then they will be the same competition age for the whole competition and won't have to change their routines.
I like that our sport has stayed unique in many ways and hasn't conformed. However, I think that this is one instance where other sports have made the right decision and I think that we should do the same.
Comment
> However, in races you fight for the finals and it doesn't matter in what age group you fight for them
We are digressing here, but for most competitors at a Unicon, the finals are not within reach, and competing within age groups (and perhaps win a medal within their age group) is all they can achieve. Therefore I would disagree with composing heats by (expected) race time regardless of age, as opposed to sorting by age group first, and only by race time within age groups.
> There is a good reason that the age group thing will get its own separate committee soon
The "age group thing" is anxious to get started, but waiting for some technicalities to be solved at the side of IUF.
Comment
The 0-12 age group in Track is for younger riders that use 24" wheels. It allows kids to race on 24" starting from whatever age works for them. I don't know if we have any other age groups that work the same as that one.
In answer to Patricia, I will repeat something that someone said earlier about our choice of date to count rider ages from. January 1 works for people in the Northern hemisphere, but kind of sucks for people in the Southern (think Unicon XV). If we were to go by current populations of unicyclists, I'd say the Northern hemisphere wins, but I'm not sure if this is the best approach.
Another approach would be to count from January 1 for competitions in the Northern hemisphere, and maybe from July 1 in the Southern hemisphere. So if Unicon is in Australia some day (I hope), for that competition rider ages would be calculated from July 1. Yes, it would be strange but it would eliminate the problem with a date that's during the riding season.
I know this discussion also connects to time limits for Freestyle. The answer to that is to know in advance what your age will be for all upcoming competitions, and train accordingly. Beyond that, I'll comment in those other threads.
Comment
"Olaf, I actually think that how we define how old people are is the problem, not how it's defined per discipline." I agree but following the arguments we can see that the differences in the disciplines let make the change more sense for one and less for another discipline. Right now we have disciplines with a minimum required set of age groups, with a fixed set of agegroups and with a maximum set of agegroups. Beside this it seems that in some you are free to go for a higher agegroup and some where it is not allowed. The 20"/24" thing is yet another special thing. So yes, the thread is about how we define how old people are but it seems to have different affect per discipline also.
Also I don't realy want to change the track races to be done without age groups and just sorted by time :) It was just meant a s a sample of another way of view on the problem.
I'm very happy that Klaas pick up this "age group thing" after the last rulebook committee and did the workshop about it while unicon to start now the committee just dedicated to this important and complicated stuff and the fact how we define the riders age is for sure a part of that committee also. So good to have already this and some other discussions here that show the existing problems.
Finaly I figured out that the wording itself seems to provide a bit confusion. I look for the translation for the german word "Jahrgang" which means the year you are born and I see that I got "Age Group" as translation for it. If I translate "Altersklasse" which menas how old you are, I got Age Group again. The good in this fact is that we would not have to change the word if we change the rules at least for the english rules :)
I would like to get some opinions if this thing should be done as a proposal and decided before the age group committee has started or if this discussion should just be used in the age group committee as a base for their discussion?
Comment
My opinion is that this discussion should be taken up in the Age Group committee, but we will certainly look at all the arguments brought up here. So thanks for those.
The Age Group committee is waiting for IUF action before it can start (I won't point at specific persons here...)
Comment
From our side it would already run but there is a technical Problem with the Konfiguration of user rights for people that will be active in the rulebook and in the age group committee. Robin is working on a solution but he has also a live beside unicycle Software developing. I would like to thanks him a lot at this place as he works always for the community for free! He did the Unicon registration and results and then Start building this committee aplication (which looks pretty simple while it is very complicated). I guess that he will find a solution very soon and the age group committee can Start its work. It already exist at rulebook.unicycling.org
Beside this I agree to Klaas that this and other age group related discussions started here should be taken up in that committee to geht the attention they need.
Comment
Thanks for the good discussions. I'm not a voting member in the main committee and unfortunately missed the Age Group Workshop at Unicon. I would like to be part of the discussion about age groups. The short story on my end: I think we need to revise the adult age groups for consistency between disciplines and between an events in a particular discipline. There is a bit to do with the awards, but the ability to compare oneself to others their age is something that it difficult under the current system of shifting and combining age groups. Above 20, 10 year spans seem like what is generally normal in other sports: 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, etc.
I have read the comments so far and realize this isn't completely pertinent to basing Age Groups on birth year, but it is somewhat related as it defines Age Groups. I also read the comments above about unicycling being it's own unique entity, and it often is. Some standardization could be helpful though.
Comment
Honestly, I do think this is a discussion for the main rulebook committee and not the age group committee. The idea of the age group committee is to decide how to fairly place riders into age groups. Changing the definition of one's age is different and something that I think we need to decide here.
Comment
Note that the possible change of age definition has a bearing on the issues the Age Group committee will be dealing with, because people's ages are on average changed by half a year. Optimal age groups might be different because of that.
Comment
This is precisely why this proposal should happen before too much work is done in the Age Group committee, in my opinion.
Comment
Actually, I disagree. In the age group committee people will come together and hopefully get a high expertise in the topic, through research and differential diagnostics. Why should we vote on a decision now, that later may be prooved completely inaccurate?
PS: I don't know who created the proposal but with the outline of the current discussion, the rule change is too simple, yet all issues outline here are not adressed. I don't get this.
Comment
> This is precisely why this proposal should happen before too much work is done in the Age Group committee, in my opinion.
Not necessarily. The Age Group committee could adopt this issue as well (after all, it is an Age Group issue) and integrate it with their other work.
If we want this issue of age calculation to be decided outside of the Age Group committee because others want to have their say on it, then I agree with Scott that it should be decided before the Age Group committee starts for real.
I don't think I am for the proposal, though. I see the following disadvantages:
- People's virtual age will not coincide with their real age in about 50% of the cases. In the current system, this happens only in a few % of the cases (people having their birthday day on the second or later day of a multi-day event).
- People'a age will shift by half a year on average, compared to the current system. This makes yar-to-year comparison of results more complicated.
- The intended advantage (unchanged age for the whole season) doesn't work for riders from the Southern Hemisphere, who have their local events around December/January, and their Unicons often around July/August.
- AFAIK, there is extensive literature about sports performance versus age, and the Age Group committee will build on that. I take it that age is defined as, well, just age, not "virtual" age. Gossi will know more about this. So if the IUF adopts virtual age, it makes the work of the Age Group committee more difficult.
Comment
I was sure, we skyped about this topic once and if I remember correctly it was during the last rulebook committee. Because this is a proposal basically brought up every rulebook, we once decided to create a knowledge base to link people to it and let them review the process of what thoughts had been put into, which solutions are possible and which is the accepted solution and why.
After the skype meeting I wrote down an article about Agegroups, which is ~2 years old by now. Please read here: https://github.com/iuf/knowledge-base/wiki/Agegroups
For sure, this should be used here and also by the Agegroup committee, hence should be even extended, because it was like a 5 minute write-up.
Comment
Okay. We will continue this discussion in the age group committee. I'm going to close it here since it's counterproductive. Send an email to rulebook@unicycling.org if you think that it should remain open, but I don't see any purpose for that.