Number of finalists in track

This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.

Comments about this discussion:

Started 22 Jan 10:34

Given that the overall track champion is derived from multiple events it should be clearer how many finalists are recommended/allowed for all of the events:

Section 2.1.4

"The number of finalists will be the same as the number of usable lanes on the track. The same number of finalists applies for finals that don’t use lanes. Finals are composed regardless of age group, but male and female competitors are in separate finals."

Proposed change in meaning:

We should only allow the number of finalists in any of the track events to be the maximum number of finalists than ANY of the events can have. Ie: if we can only run 6 finalists in the 800m due to physical track constraints, then we should only run 6 finalists in ANY of the track events...even if we could run 8 finalists in the 100m.

Comment 26 Feb 07:32

Any comments here?

Comment 02 Mar 03:57

In my opinion the track combined competition (I think you mean 2.17 when you're taking about overall track champion?) is not a reason for having the same number of finalists in all track disciplines. The reason is that only the first five places get points for the ranking - it doesn't matter if there are one, two or three more rides in the final. So if there are eight 100m lanes and only six 400m lanes the distribution of the points will not differ in the case that there were six lanes for 100m and 400m.

It might happen that there are only four 400m lanes and so we have not 5th place in 400m and 800m - but the 5th place gets only 1 point and I'm very sure that in the end this two points have no effect on which rider wins the track combined competition.

Comment 02 Mar 05:00

Jan V is right that only the first five finalists get points. But that doesn't mean that more than five riders in any final doesn't make sense. The rider that ends number six in any final at least had a chance to earn points. And he may end higher in another final and earn points there.

The current rule is not clear where it says that the number of finalists in non-lane events should be the same as the number of usable lanes in lane events. There may be no single number of usable lanes in lane events, since there are often more lanes for 100m than for 400m. So I think we need an updated rule anyway.

Why don't we say that the number of finalists is six for any final. If the number of usable lanes for a specific event is lower than six, then only for that specific event it should be the number of lanes, since a final must be one concurrent run for lane events.

- - - -

By the way, can the system send an alert if a new discussion/proposal is started? I rely on email to check discussions but if seems that new discussions are not signalled, only comments. Perhaps something to implement in the next round (1.5 years from now)?

Comment 02 Mar 05:25

I agree to you. My idea was not that more than five finalists doesn't make sense… I think there should be as many finalists as lanes (and in Germany we often have 8 lanes for any discipline - so I wouldn't agree to six finalists in any final)

In my opinion it's not a problem if the situation occurs that there are less finalists for only a specific event.

Comment 02 Mar 08:33

Let me modify my idea then.

The number of finalists for lane events is the maximum number of usable lanes for that event.
The number of finalists for non-lane events is at least 6, at most the least number of finalists in any lane final.

This can probably be worded cleaner, but a few examples:

Usable lanes for 100m = 8, usable lanes for 400m = 8. Then: 8 100m finalists, 8 400m finalists, 8 slalom finalists.
Usable lanes for 100m = 8, usable lanes for 400m = 6. Then: 8 100m finalists, 6 400m finalists, 6 slalom finalists.
Usable lanes for 100m = 6, usable lanes for 400m = 4. Then: 6 100m finalists, 4 400m finalists, 6 slalom finalists.

Comment 02 Mar 09:04

I like Klaas' solution.

I think forcing 6 finalists no matter the track is not great. A final is more entertaining to watch with more finalists in my opinion.

Also in the 1ft and WW races, DQs are relatively frequent, so if the track allows for 8 finalists then the chance that at least 5 finish is higher, and I prefer this for the overall points.

Comment 02 Mar 10:05

I agree Klaas' following example

>Usable lanes for 100m = 8, usable lanes for 400m = 8. Then: 8 100m finalists, 8 400m finalists, 8 slalom finalists.
Usable lanes for 100m = 8, usable lanes for 400m = 6. Then: 8 100m finalists, 6 400m finalists, 6 slalom finalists.
Usable lanes for 100m = 6, usable lanes for 400m = 4. Then: 6 100m finalists, 4 400m finalists, 6 slalom finalists.<

Because 6 and more finalists could be always competed expect we could use 5 lanes or less.

It might be very important that final races would be held by 6 or more competitors in principle ,because top 5 competitors could get any points for overall champion...

However,it might be OK to be competed 5 more less finalists,if we could use 5 or less lanes at particular events.I think this case shall be defined just as exception.

Comment 02 Mar 10:37

I also agree with Klaas!

And I like Scott's comment about 1ft and WW.. The same is also for Slalom, if 6 or 8 compete the chance is higher that at least 5 have a time...

Comment 02 Mar 11:09

What we are talking about here is two basic things:

Make clearer the intent of existing Section 2.1.4
Deciding whether different Finals events can have different numbers of riders

2.1.4 says "usable lanes" because there have been times when our tracks have had some bad (rough) lanes, and we chose not to use them because they would be a disadvantage to whoever was in them. Our current intent is also that we don't want to run multiple Finals. That would kind of defeat the purpose of such a race, and also make them less exciting to watch. So we don't want to require 8 people to race if there aren't 8 usable lanes.

The hope is that this rule will apply more to smaller competitions, and that large events like Unicon will usually have a nice, 8-lane track. But it could still affect Unicon as well.

What happens to the math if some Finals have more people in them than others? Basically it still works. The same math will be applied to every rider at that meet. What they will lose will be the smallest amounts of point for the races with less lanes. What we would gain would be "widening the gene pool" by having more riders in races that can accommodate them.

I see two possible approaches here:

Klaas' proposal, which is based on the existing rule. Smallest number of lanes determines how many people for each Finals race.
A set number, such as 8, to allow 8 riders for any Finals event unless there aren't enough lanes.

Though both of those choices work for me, I think #2 would make for more interesting Finals. If we choose to go that way, the rule would just state that "The number of finalists will be 8. For Finals with less than 8 usable track lanes, those events will use the largest number of usable lanes available. Finals are composed regardless of age group, but male and female competitors are in separate finals."

That wording may need some adjusting but I think it covers the intent. My intent is to word it in such a way that there is some flexibility to figuring out 8 race lanes, if possible, even if the track doesn't have them. At early unicycle meets I attended, lanes were marked in paved parking lots and we raced on those.

Comment 18 Mar 20:48

"The riders posting the best results in age group competition are entitled to compete in the final."

I had to read this several times before understanding (I think). The first time I read it I thought it meant each age group winner would be in the final. But that wouldn't be fair to riders who had better times but didn't win their age group. So I'm thinking this actually means the (8) riders with the best results regardless of age will be in the final. Correct?

Comment 18 Mar 20:54

"age group competition" means all of the age groups. In contrast to the "expert competition" or "finals". You understand that correctly.

Comment 19 Mar 06:50

Firstly, I think Kenny' rewording is better, to avoid misunderstandings.

Secondly, I think "For Finals with less than 8 usable track lanes, those events will use the largest number of usable lanes available." can be worded better.

"Those events" refers back to finals, but finals are not events but only part of an event.
There is no largest number of usable lanes. There is only a single number of usable lanes.

I suggest to replace that sentence with:

For events that use lanes, if the number of usable lanes for a Final is less than 8, the number of finalists for that event will be the number of usable lanes available.

Comment 19 Mar 13:56

IN revision 2, you have erroneously dropped the sentence "The number of finalists will be 8". This leaves the number undetermined if there are 8 lanes for a lane final.

I suggest a complete rewording still, for the changed section in the second paragraph:

For each final, the number of finalists will be eight, unless for an event that uses lanes, the number of usable lanes is less than eight. In that case the number of finalists equals the number of usable lanes.

The original last sentence (Thus non-heat events...) is now merely stating the obvious, and can be deleted. Also, "non-heat" is strange, perhaps "non-lane" was meant.

Comment 21 Mar 01:41

There is no description of a relay, but is it necessary?

Comment 24 Mar 05:15

I second that, and suggest:

For each final, the number of finalists (finalist teams in case of relay) will be eight, unless for an event that uses lanes, the number of usable lanes is less than eight. In that case the number of finalists equals the number of usable lanes.

Comment 28 Mar 03:54

We have to add in the first line of the new rule:

"........wheelwalk, IUF slalom and slow races...."

It may be only a formal detail because the number of finalists of slow races will be determinated by their time reached, but as the finals are required now, we should include slow races in the first line to avoid misunderstandings.

Comment 28 Mar 06:40

I agree that slow races should be added to this list of events for which a final is held.

Ana, you write that the time reached in slow race determines the number of finalists. But I think you mean that the time reached determines who is selected for the finals, but the number of finalists is not determined by their time. If we include slow races here, it follows that there will be eight finalists. Is that OK?