Defining stillstand rules
This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.Comments about this discussion:
Started
I think, rules for "stillstand" should be defined in the rulebook. On the one hand, to avoid that every convention host has to create new rules, on the other hand, it´s fairer to the competitor to have the knowledges about rules months before the competition. One only can reach his goal, when he knows the rules exactly. In my opinion, based on the experiences of the last two unicons, we should define following points:
The discipline "stillstand" is defined in balancing as long as possible without hopping or turning the tire more than 45 degrees, all while staying on a 10 x 25 cm plank.
Rules:
1. Each participant has 2 tries. Participants can come at any time during the day to do their attempts.
2. Only attempts longer than 20 seconds will be ranked.
3. The title get the participant, who reached the best result over all age groups.
4. No safety gears is required
Comment
From this definition, it's not clear when the time pushes stop on his or her watch. Shoes are required as safety gear.
Comment
I agree with Scott, that shoes are required as safety gear and add the following:
Time starts running when the competitor lets go of the starting post. After time started running, the starting post will be taken away.
Time stops at the moment when the participant rides of the board or dismounts.
Comment
We need to define what the starting post is, where it is placed, is there one or two, etc.
Comment
I had never realised that the current rulebook does not address Stillstand at all (except under Standard Skill). Seeing that a stillstand comp has been part of the last few Unicons and is likely to stay, I fully agree with Ana that we need a section with rules about it.
I would question the following points in her proposal:
> The discipline "stillstand" is defined in balancing as long as possible without hopping or turning
> the tire more than 45 degrees, all while staying on a 10 x 25 cm plank.
I think one can idle to some degree on a 10 x 25 cm plank, which is not the idea of stillstand. I would say 10 x 10 cm is a more appropriate size.
> 1. Each participant has two tries.
This is tricky to enforce because a very short try is hard to detect. Why not give a window of, say, 1 minute, in which the participant may start as many tries as he wants. If he is standing still at the moment the one minute is over, he may of course finish the current attempt. I think something like this was done in Brixen. It works only well in conjunction with electronic timing, otherwise there is too much stopwatch handling to do.
> Participants can come at any time during the day to do their attempts.
I don't think this should be in the rulebook. Let the host decide how the event is structured.
> 2. Only attempts longer than 20 seconds will be ranked.
Why would we include that? We don't set minimum requirements for other disciplines, do we?
> 3. The title get the participant, who reached the best result over all age groups.
Do you mean the title "Stillstand Champion"? Would there still be awards per age group? If both are 'yes' (as I think they should) then this is normal, and the same as for all Track and Field disciplines, so we don't need to specifically mention it.
Safety gear: shoes or none? The current rules state that for Slow Forward no safety gear is required. Why should we require shoes for Standstill?
Time start and stop: I agree with the start as defined by Ana. But perhaps we should not prescribe that the starting post is taken away during the attempt as it may distract (interfere with) the participant. In Unicon 2012, the starting posts were electronically monitored for contact. The participant could grab them again when he lost balance, and it would be detected. Of course, riding off the board or dismounting (or hopping or twisting more than 45 degrees), would all end the current attempt and stop the time measurement.
By the way, I don't think I have watched Stillstand in Montreal, but I thought that the system and rules in Brixen were quite neat.
Comment
Good point Kenny.
Comment
Limiting the minimum to 60 seconds might reduce paperwork. I'm not sure but that is my impression.
Otherwise, I like Klaas's revisions above.
Comment
Well yes, I also believe it would reduce paper work. Perhaps not so much, though, if we still record times under 60 seconds in order to be able to explain someone why he is not ranked.
But hey, paperwork would also be reduced if we maximise time for the 100 m to 16 seconds. Etcetera. However, reducing paperwork is not the goal of a competition, it is to compete against each other and have fair results. If rider A has a stillstand result of 10 seconds and rider B has a result of 3 seconds, it is in my opinion unfair to ignore this difference.
Comment
- "Why would we include that? We don't set minimum requirements for other disciplines, do we?" -- We have a 1m line in Coasting, which has the unofficial name of the "bullsh*t line". Anything that doesn't make it past 1m is bullsh*t. 20 seconds may be a little long for entry level Stillstanders, but not for experts. Are we breaking it down by age or doing Expert only? 20 seconds is fine for an Expert-only group.
- Keep the "post" description simple. In Track, we say "starting post or other support". A post, any stable object or even a human spotter could be used. I would prefer a stable object with a flat area or handle on top. Let go of the handle and the stillstand starts. Moving it away keeps the rider from touching it again by accident. Or if it has sensors on it, it can stay there.
Today's Stillstand competitions are a "refinement" of Slow racing. Objective judging of something that's pretty boring to watch. Kind of like Standard Skill but with only one trick. :-)
Comment
Regarding minimum times, I suggest we use similar text to what is used for high and long jump: "For each age group the minimum length should be adjusted to a useful level such as 150cm for 15+ and 70cm for 0-15. The host can adjust this depending on the level at his competition." However, we wouldn't make the minimum based on age groups. So something like:
"The host can choose to set a minimum time such as 20 seconds in order to simplify the competition."
Comment
I agree with Scott. The host can choose to set a minimum if they want to.
And yes, 60seconds is definitely too high (especially for younger kids), they'd only get demotivated if they compete and are not ranked...
Comment
To define the starting post:
The starting post is placed either on the right or on the left hand side, it depends what the participant prefer. One starting post is enough. There will be used the same starting posts as for track races.
Size of the board:
In Montreal, the board size was 10 x 25 cm and it was obvious, and there is not any possibility to idle, without riding of the board.
Attempts:
I think, we can give 2 attempts, each with a window of 20 seconds, in which the competitor can start as many attempts as he want. More time for starting the attempts will not amplify the possibility to get a better result for riders who have never practiced seriously.
Setting minimum requirements:
In Brixen, the minimum of 20 seconds was required. The idea was that just for fun starters, who have never practiced at all should not be ranked at unicons. Anyway the decision of minimum requirements can be made by the host.
"The title get the participant, who reached the best result over all age groups":
I agree, that there should be age groups. But my idea is that there will not take place finals, because if a riders result is 30 minutes or more, you feel like after riding 10 km and we don´t have finals in 10 km.
Klaas, I want to comment you that the starting post will disturb a rider, after he has started stillstand. At unicon17 it was done in this way and all starters liked it, I agree with John, that moving it away keeps the rider from touching it again by accident.
Comment
25 cm seems too long to me (how much room do you need to stand still?). But I don't do stillstands myself so I give in. And I agree on all other points anyway :-)
Comment
Ana,
A better replacement for #3:
"There is are no finals for the Stillstand competition. The overall results will be determined by the best results per gender."
Comment
Scott,
that´ s a good idea, I agree whit this definition, it´s very clear.
Comment
Before I will create the proposal, I would like to explain you the background of the 2 systems, applied at the the last 2 unicons:
Unicon 16:
there was given a window of 2 minutes, in which the competitor can start as many attempts as he want.
In my opinion, this is a system just for beginners because for example, it offers 24 attempts for participants, who stand about 5 seconds. For competitors who stand longer than 2 minutes this system offers only one attempt.
In Brixen, there were used 2 handles with electronic time measuring. The problem is, that participants can touch the handles accidently while they are doing their stillstand because the handles can not be taken away. Therefore, I prefer the time measuring as it was done in Montreal.
Unicon 17:
Two attempts were given to each rider, that can be done at any time during the time window setted by the host.
I think it´s more professional and fairer because it offers 2 attempts for all participants. There is not any possibility that one competitor has 1 attempt and another has more than 20 attempts.
Therefore I would propose to give 2 attempts, each with a window of 20 seconds, in which the competitor can start as many attempts as he want.
Comment
OK Ana on the proposal, except that in view of your point that 2 minutes offers many attempts for beginners and only one for experts, maybe even 20 seconds is too long. Again, I am not a stillstander, so maybe an expert needs up to 20 seconds to set up and get his initial balance right before he goes into the actual attempt. Otherwise, you might want to shorten it, as a beginner would still have several attempts in 20 seconds.
Kudos to Scott for the rewording of 3. Only now I understand what was meant.
Comment
I agree to Klaas 25cm is too long for still stand. At Unicon16 the platform was 9x15cm. Who participated in both still stand events and can give a comment on this?
To me still stand should be on a circular platform of 10cm diameter. In this way the orientation of the rider doesn't matter at all and idling seems not to be possible to me.
On a 25cm long board at least "micro"-idling is possible for sure.
Comment
Andreas, I got world champion in Stillstand in Brixen and in Montreal too ( the male world champion of unicon 16 and unicon 17 is also the same), therefore I want to comment you that for me peronally there is no difference between both sizes applied. But we have to consider, that there are a lot of (male) competitors who use muni wheels, and its quite difficult for the judges to see when the wheel goes hanging over the board, if the tire produces a touch on the floor o not. Please dont´t make this competition more complicated as necessary.
To your second point, see the arguments of the proposal.
Comment
If it's hard to see if the rider touches the floor, make the wood block taller.
Comment
Andreas, I respect your opinion, but you can be sure that nobody will end on the podium of stillstand who tries to cheat by idling. Muni wheels require certain space to get in position. Once started the attempt, a stillstand competitor doesn´t change his position, it´s clearly to observe.
I think if a stillstand competitor with a muni wheel misses the centre of the circular platform as Andreas suggested there is no chance for this competitor to correct his position, because just a dismount is produced. This discipline consists by standing still and not by finding the center of the platform.
Comment
As to the comment about idling the the proposal: I was not talking about a regular idle in which the cranks oscillate around the vertical position, but about "horizontal" idling (or micro-idling as Andreas called it), which oscillates around the horizontal position.
Why would you need a plaftorm length of 25 cm for still stand? It sounds contradictory. I think a circular platform of 10 cm is a better idea indeed. And I agree to Scott's comment: make the platform higher (maybe 3 cm) to tell if even a bigger tyre touched the ground.
But again, I am not a still stander. Maybe the rider needs some length to set up properly, and to get to the best starting crank position without needing to hop to be on the middle of the board?
Comment
I think that especially the MUni/Trial riders can easily position their wheel on a small platform as this is exactly what they are doing during their trial competitions. If 10cm is too small for fat MUni tires then maybe make it 15cm in diameter. I think 25cm is definitely too much.
Why not making a final to get this competition also interesting for spectators? I am thinking of a battle for example of the best riders. Meaning that e.g. the best 10 riders show their excellent balancing starting again in a direct battle. This gives three rounds for the spectators to watch. Of course each battle only takes until one rider leaves the plattform and the other rider is the winner.
In such a final also the winner can be celebrated by the audience.
Comment
The stillstand competition consists in performing stillstand and not in positioning the tire in the middle of the platform. Therefore, the best way is like it was done in Montreal, providing the riders a plank of 25 cm to get the best starting crank position. It´s necessary, to have a rectangular platform, because a circular platform provides only the whole length of the diameter to participants, who are exactly positioned in the centre of the platform.
At unicon 17 the size of the platform has been published and we had a great and a fair competition.
Finals: see discussion.
Comment
I'm giving in to expertise, and support the rectangular 20 x 10 x 3 cm platform.
I still have some questions about the rules iIn the proposal:
Ad 1. "The host can decide to add a window or up to 20 seconds". Add to what? I think there is ALWAYS a time window to start your attempt? Or is the alternative that you have to start on a count 3-2-1-GO? Would that work for stillstand? I think not.
Ad 2. I think the starting post can be placed "anywhere where the participant prefers". This covers not only left right, but also fore-aft, just the same as in track racing.
Ad 6. I don't understand this rule (or recommendation). What is the link between age groups and times < 20 seconds. In other words, why does having age groups exclude the ignoring of times < 20 seconds, or conversely, why would you need no age groups if you do not rank times < 20 seconds? The explanation under references doesn't help me with this, and also I don't understand why only these age groups "avoids ignoring" the difference between 5 and 19 seconds. If I get you right, you DO want to ignore such differences, not AVOID to ignore them. Perhaps the English language is the problem here, but I don't understand your text.
Comment
Did I write 20 cm for the size of the platform?? I meant to surrender to what Ana as an expert prefers, which I think is/was 25 cm. Well, whatever, I'm not unhappy about 20 cm.
I notice you changed the rule about the position of the support according to my comment.
I still have questions about 1 and 6. I'm not demanding they are changed, but I would appreciate if these points could be answered/adressed in the discussion before we start voting.
Comment
@Klaas:
Ad 1. At Unicon 16, participants had a time window, in which they could start the number of attempts needed. At Unicon 16 the time window was 2 minutes, in the proposal it´s up to 20 seconds, see discussion.
At Unicon 17, the host didn´t add this time window.
Of corse, starting on a count 3-2-1-GO doesn´t make any sense.
Ad 6. In the case that the host decides for the age groups option as described in the proposal, he will not ignore differences between 5 and 19 seconds, because everybody will be ranked. If there are only the 3 age groups, instead of for example 7 age groups, a rider with a result under 20 seconds will not have any possibility to get on the podium.
In Brixen, the difference between 5 and 19 sec. was ignored because the host setted the minimum of 20 sec.
It´s the decision of the host, what of this two options he wants to apply. The idea of both options is that "just for fun riders" should not get on the podium.
Comment
Ad 1: I haven't watched still stand at Unicon 17. If you say there was "no time window added", do you mean that the time started running as soon as the participant let go of the support, and so there was no window to abort your attempt (e.g. because it doesn't feel right) and start again in the same window? In other words, there still was a time window to start your attempt (not a 3-2-1-go) but no extra time to start again within the same attempt? I'm trying to understand what was done, and thus to understand your terminology, before voting on a proposal that uses that terminology.
Ad 6: OK I think I see what you mean. You think that if there are "too many" age groups, then just-for-fun stillstand competitors can still reach the podium because in some age groups there might be too little competition. And you dislike that just-for-fun riders are awareded with a medal. You also think that if there are a maximum of three age groups, then competition will ensure that no < 20 seconds results end up on the podium. If this is your opinion, then maybe the proposal should say straightforward that results shorter than 20 seconds cannot be awarded with a medal (at Unicons only?). Then you can leave the strange juxtaposition of three age groups and < 20 seconds out of the proposal.
Note, however, that I do NOT (yet?) agree to excluding < 20 seconds from awards. I think that whatever are the best three results in any age group, should be awarded with a medal, regardless of the times (and regardless of the number of age groups). If still stand is a serious competition, it should attract enough serious participants so that just-for-fun results are not awarded because the serious participants win. I also don't like to restrict the number of age groups as a way to keep the just-for-fun riders out. That is not the purpose of age groups, in my opinion.
Comment
I agree with Klass on this one, if the purpose is to keep "just for fun" riders off the podium even if they have better times then that is just mean and contrary to a competition.
Comment
There was technical error, but now all discussion comments are visible.
Point 6 has been eliminated, so it´s the decision of the host, what age groups will be offered and if he wants to set a minimum requirement or not.
@Klaas: in Montreal no extra time was given to start once again within the same attempt.
Thank you for your comments and interest in establishing stillstand rules.
Soon I will call for vote again, sorry for the technical error, thank you for your patience and for participating again.